What I learned from The Human Centipede (spoilers)

I'm so chuffed to live in a liberal democracy!

YAY for Great Britain!

I'm not actually fussed either way about this. On one hand I worry about increasingly violent films with dubious moral standpoints but on the other hand I abhor total censorship. In a way this is going to encourage a lot more people, especially those who could be influenced by the material, to seek out and watch the film. Still, they've got to do what they think is right and it seems to be a relatively responsible decision rather than a knee-jerk reaction. Phew, thank god I put this inside spoiler tags.
 
NickClapper said:
I'm so chuffed to live in a liberal democracy!

YAY for Great Britain!

I'm not actually fussed either way about this. On one hand I worry about increasingly violent films with dubious moral standpoints but on the other hand I abhor total censorship. In a way this is going to encourage a lot more people, especially those who could be influenced by the material, to seek out and watch the film. Still, they've got to do what they think is right and it seems to be a relatively responsible decision rather than a knee-jerk reaction. Phew, thank god I put this inside spoiler tags.
Click to expand...

That was basically my first reaction, but I completely agree with your spoiler-tagged reconsideration. In fairness, I think the BBFC do a much better job than the MPAA at rating films (see The King's Speech). It's a difficult line to tread and I think the introduction of an unrated category would be much better than outright censorship (albeit of what looks to be another tediously awful horror-porn flick).
 
No way! Banned outright? Wow! I certainly didn’t expect that.

Personally, I do feel that the BBFC does do a good job with protecting the vulnerable against this kind of thing, but it does annoy me that I, being of a sound mind and a totally reasonable, rational person, can’t be allowed to make this decision for myself. That said, I will make this decision myself and I’ll probably import it (presuming an uncut version is released somewhere in the world). But then, there’s nothing stopping anybody from doing the same. I don’t condone piracy, but it’s also an option.

As far as an unrated classification goes, I don’t quite understand this. In the US, who controls it? Is there some regulation as to who can buy unrated movies? I assume the sale of them to children would be illegal? If anything, I think the BBFC would be better off re-introducing the X rating, with an age restriction of perhaps 25, but I don’t think this would offer any addition protection to those that the BBFC is trying to protect.
 
Censorship always annoys me. Don't get me started on all the UK "extreme porn" bans ;) But then again, I live in a country that sort of takes things like "freedom of speech" for granted. All the things that get lumped into the "think of the children" type legislation do nothing but treat the adults like children. I'd say it's the parents' job, but I'm in a glass house on this one. As a kid, I watched all sorts of things that I shouldn't have, and my parents weren't exactly attentive and open to discussions. But I turned out okay, right? Right? ....sigh.

On the other hand, I'm more interested in seeing the new film now (I hadn't read anything about the plot before). From the description, it seems less like the exploitation film they describe it as and more as painting a picture of the viewer, a la Funny Games. I'm all for meta-concepts and films that delve (in this case maybe PLUNGE) beyond the superficial meaning. I am willing to grant that given the clunkiness of the first, perhaps this doesn't come across as well as it could (though if I got what they're going for from a description of the movie....), but I'm certainly more interested in giving it a viewing.
 
Never seen this film, although ive heard it's terrible. If you watched it for pure gore/sick scenes then i suggest you take a look at "A Serbian Film", ive seen it and i found it extremely sickening and grim. Although the cinematography wasn't too bad.
 
rayw said:
LMAO
http://www.the-numbers.com/movie/Human-Centipede-2-Full-Sequence
I woulda thought with the DVD sales on The First Sequence that this woulda opened in more theaters and sold better seats, but... eh? Guess not. :lol:
Click to expand...
I think that's because the only selling point of this film is how gory and disturbed it is, and that's how it's marketed. I wouldn't pay to go to the cinema if I know I'm just putting myself at risk of feeling uncomfortable for a couple of hours, and I'm sure other people would generally have the same opinion. Just get it on DVD or download it.

I went to see one of the 'Saw' films, but I think when you recognise the actors and the production company then you feel a bit safer.
 
Well, looked at from another angle, they did 4x the gross of the first in the opening weekend. Good on them! I'll probably wait for the dvd myself.
 
Hi, Harpsicord -
Yeah, I'm wondering if I could get my hands on any hard data about the distinctly different marketing approaches for theater viewers vs. home audience DVD/BR viewers.
Surely there it's been done and surely there is a difference.

There are plenty of indie films which have nothing to contribute to the planet other than a miserable sux2Bme-fest.
For 2010:
- City Island
- Cyrus
- Greenberg
- Mother and Child
- Solitary Man

I believe THC I & THC II possibly fall into the same dramatic miserable sux2Bme-fest under the horror genre umbrella, much akin to the Hostel & Saw franchises.
 
SPOILERS


One dumb thing about the movie I immediately picked up on was the ending. There seems to be a plot hole. We are lead to believe the girl is left alone, but the cops most likely would have called for back up, before going back into the house, in which case, back up would have arrived shortly, one would assume. You wonder why they were taking a little long, but they were very likely called. Unless the cops were so stupid not to call them, yet they actually cared to risk their lives, out of their own suspicions. Is the audience suppose to figure out that back up was called, or were we suppose to figure out that the cops did not call them for some reason?
 
Last edited:
I think the audience is supposed to only acknowledge that as it ends it's a bunged up situation - and - draw no further inference.

Likely, the director/writer Tom Six just didn't give too much care to such details and it all shows in the outrageous public demand for his product.

Garbage in. Garbage out.
 
There is nil public demand, in exponential inverse to my sarcasm. ;)









Feutus Lapdance -
That's effing hilarious!
 
Last edited:
dingdong.png
 
Finally just watched both of them. Really not so bad. I like the first better. But there's something to be said for doing something quite a bit differently with the second film...stylistically, at least.

And I very much agree with you, Mike, about Dieter Laser as the Doctor. "I don't like people." Hah! Yes.

I couldn't help thinking that the second one was rather Lynchian. Just more gory and over-the-top. And, using Lawrence R. Harvey was, I was thinking, I'm not sure how to put this smartly and accurately and sensitively, like a throw back to freak show entertainment. Right? Is that fair? How do you all feel about that?

Oh my Lord. I have to say the UK's practice of banning films is a big, black mark against it. And I (we) complain about the MPAA. Oy Vey. I would find it unacceptable. ;)
 
richy said:
And I very much agree with you, Mike, about Dieter Laser as the Doctor. "I don't like people." Hah! Yes.
Click to expand...

A classic character. :lol:


I found the first movie kind of tame, but I never bothered seeing part 2, as I heard it was a lot more hardcore; going for the gore factor, including a baby killing. I'm sensitive about that kind of thing, but seeing that you liked it, I'm curious.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top