Writing/coreographing a torture scene

[OhWhatProvidence]

I'm a bit stuck about this... I have a scene in a webseries I'm writing (production starting in April) and one scene calls for one of the Big Bad Villains to get captured and tortured/killed by the anti-heroes (I swear it's a lot less cliche than it sounds) and sent off to his wife. I can't decide if, given the nature of the webseries (the characters react/interact directly with the audience) I should have the anti-heroes (the Scraps) post the video on their channel too, so that the audience can see it, or if I should just leave it implied with Patricia saying something like "I can't...I can't believe they would do something like that to my husband."

I'm kind of wanting it to actually be shown, because the Scraps are that kind of group that would do something like that, but then again the 'terror of the unknown'. If I do show it what I have in mind is a series of (100~ if I can) still photographs of the torture (since it would leave at least a bit more to the imagination that way, a picture of an arm and then a cut on the arm and then another cut on the arm, and so on). Then agan, given that this is going to be Shane's one and only appearance on video (so far he's been a major presence but only on phone calls/texts or in the chat room) I want him to go out wiht a bang, and I want the Scraps to show just how angry this man makes them. (as opposed to an earlier victim who got off with a few bruises at most)

But! The main snag: i have no clue how to write/choreograph a torture scene at all. I know that the Scraps aren't likely to have a lot of methods at their disposal, some knives, some hammers maybe... But I can't get it to click in my head how the scene would actually play out. I know they would want to do some poetic justice to Shane with their torture (psychic driving, sensory deprivation, ECT) but they wouldn't necessarily have access to those methods. (nor would I, from a BTS perspective, unless I could find some electrodes and keep the machine itself offscreen?)

Another snag being, well-- I don't have a very strong stomach for gore. I can do makeup, and I can see still photos of it, but I can't really plan it very well because then i have to imagine it happening and that freaks me out. I know that's a really stupid obstacle but it's there. I'm considering maybe hiring someone else to write that one scene for me since it's got me so stuck.

 

[Filman]

And how would you justify the torture in this scene?

 

[kova.lee]

Personally, I come from a school of thought that says that it's better and usually more effective to imply something like torture rather than show it straight out. Show the tools for the torture (have like a hammer, knife, electrodes, etc) laid out on a table, show someone picking up a tool, and then have the guy off screen screaming. If there's a spectator, have them wince or look away. You get everything you asked in this case - you don't have to deal with gore, you get your torture scene without having to write it, and it probably ends up ten times more effective than if you show it on screen b/c the viewer is filling in all the blanks themselves - and you'd be amazed at how an audience fills in their own blanks.

As an example, I'm reminded of a scene from Season 2 of Buffy the Vampire Slayer where Angel is torturing Giles. There is a scene where Angel's hand is offscreen and all he says to Giles is "Now, let me know when it starts to hurt." We have no idea what he's doing but the suddenly tightened look on Giles's face tells the entire story; he's going through an ordeal and it ain't pretty.

 

[HardWorkinFilmSlave]

And how would you justify the torture in this scene?

^ Filman has a point. If you show all of it happening the anti-heroes don't seem like heroes anymore. I would do a montage of short clips showing the torture and a few pictures and stills that highlight what they are doing to him. It's implied, but you're also showing them something that visually & mentally makes them feel it.

 

[harmonica44]

Well in movies like Taken and Casino Royale, they show it all continuously, in sequence. But they don't show the graphic parts close up, such as actually seeing Bond get hit between the legs. Just keep the camera mostly on the face of the victim, and that will do well, at least I think.

 

[Quarry]

Since they have hammers you can show that they put nails all over his body and then his eyes, killing him. It's exactly the way you want it: Shocking (for the wife), not too much blood and pretty much a good way to torture someone. And you can only show the first two nails put in him and then, after showing someone else for a scene, just imply that they'll put in his eye, without showing it. Then, zooming out, you show that this was in a screen and his wife is watching, while her hair hides the screen. While hiding the screen, the screams suddenly stop and you show his corpse with a nail in it's eye and then, the reaction of the wife. I don't think it's too extreme.

 

[AudioPostExpert]

... you get your torture scene without having to write it, and it probably ends up ten times more effective than if you show it on screen b/c the viewer is filling in all the blanks themselves - and you'd be amazed at how an audience fills in their own blanks.

Even better, rather than the audience filling in all the blanks themselves, is for the filmmaker to manipulate how the audience fills in the blanks. This is what sound design is for and has been a tried and trusted filmmaking tool for many decades. H44 already mentioned the Bond dangly bits scene but there are literally countless others, think of arguably the most famous scene of this type of all, the shower scene from Psycho. Of course, this approach still requires some imaginative writing!

G