Quote:
Originally posted by PR3SSUR3
You'll realise there is not a simple sliding-scale of "extemity" in film, but it is a whole lot of fun trying to outdo your last viewing "pleasure" with the latest notorious discovery.
Films are affecting in different ways - one could find the graphic necropheliac elements of Nekromantik or Aftermath unwatchably disgusting, yet cruise through the casual torture of The Flower the Flesh & The Blood (the effects in which are not bad at all, simply dated now that the film is nearly 20 years old and there are so much more outrageous CAT 3 titles around).
What are you looking for? Are the raw knife-murders in The New York Ripper jarring enough for you - or are they somehow less "extreme" than the assorted disembowelings in Cannibal Holocaust? How about the real animal killings in that film, and how does it compare to the rabbit farm-footage in Nekromantik or Coppola's ox-slaughter in Apocalypse Now? Rats set on fire in your Men Behind the Sun?
Personally I find the whole of Nightmares in a Damaged Brain far more disturbing than most other movies - it's the tone a film makes when it sets up shop inside your head that is unnerving and leaves a lasting impression. The Blair Witch Project is also a very troubling film, but for different reasons.
So far as August Underground and Mordum are concerned, they are at once shocking on the surface... but cracks begin to show as the actors inevitably begin to try too hard as the movies go on, and the knowledge that the filmmakers are so blatantly trying to fool the viewer is ultimately patronising - in a WWF kinda way.
|
PR3SSUR3,
I do of course realise that there is no sliding scale. I further realise that "extremity" is subjective: what one viewer may find disturbing, another won't.
I'm sure I'm the same as a lot of people and am not trying to be "tough" by watching the extremes of cinema. I am a gorehound and am also curious. In the UK, so much is censored and we're told what we can and can't do. I don't want to be dictated to; I want to watch whatever I like. I want to make informed decisions and formulate opinions post-viewing.
I certainly don't want to see any "snuff" and although I think
Cannibal Holocaust is a very good film, the animal mutilation scenes disturb me. They disturb me because they are just wrong and that's not the kind of disturbance that I'm looking for. I'm looking for scenes in a film which disturb me because they're well constructed and don't rely on reality. A good example would be the fire extinguisher scene in
Irreversible: believable, because it involved two men and no monsters; disturbing because it looked so real, without actually being real.
I'd be interested to learn more of the HK Cat3 titles to which you refer as being outrageous, if you wouldn't mind indulging me. I'll also seek out the other titles which you mention and which I've not yet acquired.
I'm awaiting the arrival of most of the titles which I originally referred to. Once I've viewed them I'll be able to formulate a similarly educated opinion to yours about them. My original enquiry was partly to help me decide which film to watch first. As I've said myself, the whole "extreme" thing is subjective and opinions vary but I wondered if there was a generally held concensus on any one film being the "worst".
I too found
The Blair Witch Project unnerving, even with the knowledge that it wasn't "real". To date, the only film to have truly scared me is
The Woman in Black. Given that I'm not easily frightened, I figure disturbed would be an alternative state for me to seek. I want to "feel" films; to be affected by them. Any film which connects at such a level has to be well-made and not just full of unpleasantness.
Thank you for your informed comments. I'll continue to harvest titles, track them down, watch them and draw a personal conclusion as to which title disturbs me the most.