BBFC strikes again: Grotesque banned

[Markgway]

The whole point was that people are different. You may feel disgusted watching something like Groteque, but the guy next door is laughing all along.

Laughing at explicit torture and the degredation of women? You think that's normal? I would worry about someone like that. Sure, people are different. Some people torture animals or abuse children. It's not like being different because you like musicals and someone else likes westerns. The difference we're talking about here is extreme abnormal behaviour. To take pleasure out of torture and misogyny is extremely abnormal which ever way you cut it. I'm not saying that's you, HungFist, but it seems to be that in order to appear balanced (to each their own) you're defending the indefensible.

[Markgway]

The BBFC are just a censor board, they have no legal jurisdiction!

It's up to The Police to enforce the law if they find someone has broken it. There's no BBFC censorbusters team raiding stores. All they can do is inform the proper authorities.

Well in Grotesque's case I'll give you the main reason people will now want to watch it: Because the BBFC banned it! Notoriety is reason enough for many curious filmgoers.

They never learn do they... Forbidden fruit is always the tastiest to some.

Some UK stores/e-tailers get round this loophole by acting as a personal import service

Right. That's how companies like the now defunct Loaded 24/7 worked.

I know I'm reiterating what Hung has already said here, but in fairness Mark you are making a subjective statement based on what you yourself find scary. I personally aggree that torture porn has no scare factor but it doesn't mean Mrs. Blogs down the road from me won't be frightened by the same content. For a lot of people the mere threat or act of violence is terrifying in itself, which is at least something these torture porn films can manage to tap into if done well.

OK. I accept that. Fear of violence is entirely logical. But I don't honestly believe these viewers fear the violence and torture but actually revel in it (and at worst have a sneaking admiration for it). I can't say that's the case for every viewer. But I strongly believe it to be true.

Torture Porn was first used to describe the glut of new wave exploitation films that came with the success of films like Hostel, so I present Hostel as an example of torture porn that does show that kind of morality. To say there is no morality in any torture porn films is to suggest that you've seen and know every torture porn film out there - you may have an idea about their content and execution, but you don't know until you've watched the film.

Again that's fair. In fact I haven't seen Hostel because I knew what it was and have thus avoided. Martyrs I stumbled upon thinking it was just a violent thriller. It sounds like Grotesque has even less story and character than that. Can you elaborate on the morality in Hostel? Lest I've misjudged this film on reputation. And have you seen any others that care about morality or at least telling a good story. I don't want to tar the wrong films with a dirty brush.

A good example is the recent palava over Antichrist with that Daily Mail critic who called for it to be banned without actually watching the film!

Yes, even the Mail's film critic Chris Tookey (who has called for films to be cut and banned, but after seeing them) thought that calling for a ban on a film you haven't seen was absurd. Banning is not the answer.

[Shingster]

Laughing at explicit torture and the degredation of women? You think that's normal? I would worry about someone like that.

Most fans of hardcore torture porn that I've met do not find pleasure in watching people suffer, they understand the illusion and treat it purely as a dramatisation and merely like seeing how creatively and realistically a filmmaker can express extreme violence. It's just basic Grand Guignol to them.

[Shingster]

The BBFC are just a censor board, they have no legal jurisdiction!

It's up to The Police to enforce the law if they find someone has broken it. There's no BBFC censorbusters team raiding stores. All they can do is inform the proper authorities.

The police do enforce the law, just not the one you and Brad are talking about because it doesn't exist. The police will arrest a merchant who sells Grotesque, they will not arrest you for owning the film or ordering it from a foreign merchant. Usuually the worst that will happen is that customs will seize the product, deem it offensive/inappropriate/illegal material and destroy the package and inform you why they seized it. The worst of worsts is that customs or a local council gets particularly irked by what you're doing and take you to court - and then it gets laughed out of court. I remember this happening a few years back to a guy who was sent to court for purchasing Last House on the Left (i think it was) back when it too was a banned film.

[Markgway]

Most fans of hardcore torture porn that I've met do not find pleasure in watching people suffer, they understand the illusion and treat it purely as a dramatisation and merely like seeing how creatively and realistically a filmmaker can express extreme violence. It's just basic Grand Guignol to them.

With the exception of documentaries I never watch films that I don't expect to take some kind of pleasure from. OK, so they're not psychopaths... But I find it incongruous that anyone would choose to sit thru these films without getting some kind of pleasure out of what they're seeing. The exception might be if you're doing research of some kind. Splatter films aren't new... but with torture porn they've taken a very dark turn toward the pleasure of sadism. This isn't about the spectacle or the technical or the creative... it's about the thrill of seeing someone inflicting pain on another human being. That's why they exist.

[Markgway]

The police do enforce the law, just not the one you and Brad are talking about because it doesn't exist. The police will arrest a merchant who sells Grotesque, they will not arrest you for owning the film or ordering it from a foreign merchant.

I never said they would. You're mistaking me for Brad, I think. I know that the worst that can happen to a buyer is that their material is confiscated. Used to happen regularly. Customs would seize upon anything that looked like a video nasty. I usually bought bootlegs from within the UK so avoided this problem.

[Shingster]

The exception might be if you're doing research of some kind. Splatter films aren't new... but with torture porn they've taken a very dark turn toward the pleasure of sadism.

The important distinction here I believe is that it is the pleasure of the dramatisation of sadism. This isn't Max Hardcore we're talking about here, it's a film made by a filmmaker/dramatist with a specific goal and a specific audience in mind. In my opinion the relationship between niche, subggenre fan and director is more complex than you're allowing for with a general statement like that.

[Shingster]

Can you elaborate on the morality in Hostel? Lest I've misjudged this film on reputation.

I doubt you've misjudged it too much, it doesn't have any originality or a tremendous amount of subtext. I will have to spoil the end though:

The film is about an underground human trafficking ring where wealthy lunatics (high power yuppies mostly) can pay to torture/murder a person of their describing in whatever method they see fit. It ends with one of the abducted "victims" breaking free and turning on the guy who abducted him into the ring, murdering him with the same extremity and glee that the rich sadists expressed earlier in the film. An obvious nod to I Spit on Your Grave (one of the true prototypical torture porn films with a point).

[HungFist]

Also keep in mind Hostel is a horror comedy. There's plenty of humour, both dark and not so dark. And a bit of self irony too; Takashi Miike makes a cameo as one of the customers of the torture facility. It's very much a genre film made by a genre geek to other genre lovers. It may have started a trend (well, I suppose Saw was the one that started the trend) but it didn't invent anything new. Torture porn genre has been out there and very much alive for a long time, but it was only recently when it was discovered by mainstream audiences and give the name "torture porn".

I loved Hostel. It was roller coaster experience of horror and laughs. One moment your laughing and the next second you're so shocked the laugh gets stuck in your throat. But it also has a very strong "movie feel", partly because it's such a pure genre film, so you (=I) never relate it to reality too much.

Laughing at explicit torture and the degredation of women? You think that's normal? I would worry about someone like that. Sure, people are different. Some people torture animals or abuse children. It's not like being different because you like musicals and someone else likes westerns. The difference we're talking about here is extreme abnormal behaviour. To take pleasure out of torture and misogyny is extremely abnormal which ever way you cut it. I'm not saying that's you, HungFist, but it seems to be that in order to appear balanced (to each their own) you're defending the indefensible.

This is what you're not understanding. You are taking movies far, far more seriously than some people.

You could just as well say The Roadrunner, or even Donald Duck are some of the sickest shit out there. They're feasting with animal sufferings.

But hey, Donald Duck is just a cartoon. It's not real.

But hey, Grotesque is just fictional film. It's not real.

There's no real difference between Donald Duck and Grotesque. Or Guinea Pig and Monthy Python's goriest comedy bits. Not in some people's eyes. They are all equally unreal. Some people can't see it. Some people can see it.

This was an extreme example of course, but I gave it because you're in the opposite extreme. A lot of people are somewhere in between. Like Shin and I already said, most people who watch torture porn watch it because they find it a gripping horror experience. It's almost more than they can take, but they want to challenge themselves and experience the hardest fictional horror out there.

Hell, just the poster for Guinea Pig 2 scared me so much I never dared to watch the film (when I was younger and had more interest in finding out what all the fuss was about)

[romerojpg]

Deep stuff, I wonder if the films even worth all this talking at all

[grim_tales]

Yeah but with Looney Tunes, Tom and Jerry etc, the violence is so literally cartoonish and unrealistic - Tom gets squashed, shot, bashed etc and then he's OK again. The injuries in Looney Tunes etc are hardly dwelt on or shown in a realistic way. I wouldn't say Looney Tunes are sick, the BBFC classify most of them a U!

[Markgway]

The important distinction here I believe is that it is the pleasure of the dramatisation of sadism. This isn't Max Hardcore we're talking about here, it's a film made by a filmmaker/dramatist with a specific goal and a specific audience in mind. In my opinion the relationship between niche, subggenre fan and director is more complex than you're allowing for with a general statement like that.

Of course, if such things were real everyone involved would be in jail. But in the context of a fictional work I think it's genuinely perverted to enjoy torture porn (certainly this most extreme kind, which it appears Grotesque is). I'm not saying it makes the viewers evil, that would be grossly unfair. But it's a very unhealthy pursuit to say the least. Also I think to call these filmmakers dramatists is exceptionally kind given that these films have little to no drama in them. Maybe recreationists would be more apt?

[Markgway]

Also keep in mind Hostel is a horror comedy. There's plenty of humour, both dark and not so dark.

I'm not sure if that makes it better or worse? I don't imagine Hostel is as extreme as some of the stuff coming from Asia and Europe but I could be way off on that.

This is what you're not understanding. You are taking movies far, far more seriously than some people.

More the effect of said movies.

But hey, Donald Duck is just a cartoon. It's not real.
But hey, Grotesque is just fictional film. It's not real.

But Grotesque is intended to appear real. In no way can a cartoon of animals that walk and talk and use sticks of TNT to blow each other up ever be confused with reality. The comparison is totally absurd.

Like Shin and I already said, most people who watch torture porn watch it because they find it a gripping horror experience. It's almost more than they can take, but they want to challenge themselves and experience the hardest fictional horror out there.

I guess I just don't fit into that demographic.

[grim_tales]

That's what I said, the violence in Looney Tunes, Tom and Jerry etc is not intended to be real, its a CARTOON. Its obviously a cartoon. With Grotesque you may repeat to yourself "Its only a movie, its only a movie" but it apparently LOOKS real and is done in a non comedic way.

[HungFist]

That's what I said, the violence in Looney Tunes, Tom and Jerry etc is not intended to be real, its a CARTOON. Its obviously a cartoon. With Grotesque you may repeat to yourself "Its only a movie, its only a movie" but it apparently LOOKS real and is done in a non comedic way.

Yes, but it's entirely up to the viewer. That's what I've been trying to explain all along. To some people there isn't the slightest connection to reality in Grotesque. "It's only a movie, only a movie, only a movie..."

[grim_tales]

True, different people react differently. Not all are the same.

[Shingster]

Of course, if such things were real everyone involved would be in jail. But in the context of a fictional work I think it's genuinely perverted to enjoy torture porn (certainly this most extreme kind, which it appears Grotesque is). I'm not saying it makes the viewers evil, that would be grossly unfair. But it's a very unhealthy pursuit to say the least. Also I think to call these filmmakers dramatists is exceptionally kind given that these films have little to no drama in them. Maybe recreationists would be more apt?

I get the impression from this post that what you consider torture porn is actually the extreme evisceration torture films like Guinea Pig, Red Room and what not? Torture Porn is actually a mainstream term conjured up to put a name to the post-Saw exploitation new-wave, so yeah most torture porn films do have a narrative and some form of dramatic context - no matter how crudely executed they are. There really aren't that many films like Guinea Pig out there which have no context and are purely recreations of sadism. Many hard core fans consider only these type of films to be true "torture porn" and I'd agree, but you're probably talking about less than 30 films here (more likely less than 20!).

I've not seen Grotesque, it sounds on paper like a sort of modern successor to the likes of Guinea Pig, but I find it hard to believe that a relatively mainstream director like Kôji Shiraishi would make a straight-out, no-context, styless torture film. I'd expect it to at least have a very artificially stylish approach to the gore and violence which immediately sets a context of its own and reduces the effect of the acts themselves.

I've actually seen the first two Guinea Pig films and although it's the 2nd film that is easily the most notorious and extreme in its depiction of violence, the first film is by far the most sadistic as it's just 2 guys abusing a woman in a chair for 40mins. It was one of the most intensely boring film watching experiences of my life. The 2nd film on the other hand is obviously fake and has a macabre "how did they do that?" appeal to it. It's mostly fuckin' dull though!

[Markgway]

There will be degrees of severity within torture porn sub-genre.

I suppose at one end you would have Hostel and Saw (which at a push I can understand are just very horrific horror movies) and then at the other the unspeakable likes of Guinea Pig - indefensible trash that exists solely to pander to an audience who would probably like to torture someone but don't have the guts (no pun intended). I'm guessing - I'm not expert - that a film like Martyrs falls in between those two stools: Some attempt at professional style and cinematic content, but no plot or character.

[monzo44]

Hi,

I couldn't call myself a fan of these type of films, although I've seen relatively few. I was just wondering where you all stand with regard to Pasolini's Salo? I know it's championed by the art set but is it anymore than a glorified torture movie. The references to Fascism are there if you look for them but they aren't in your face, so it's maybe not the important film that some make it out to be for some of it's viewers but is for others!!

monzo

[HungFist]

indefensible trash that exists solely to pander to an audience who would probably like to torture someone but don't have the guts (no pun intended).

For fucks sake, Mark. Are you intentionally acting like a 5 year old? I don't mean this by any offence and I don't have anything against you and your personal taste in movies, but now you're saying some the stupidest shit I've ever heard. Or then you're just joking and I fell for it.

Considering you're a fan of martial arts films, we can assume you dream of beating people to death but you just don't have the guts to do it, so you prefer to watch movies where people are beaten to death. Ah, right. You only watch films where evil people are beaten to death. Evil druglords, and their employees who just took the job because they need to make money to feed their children. Yeah, lets kick them in the head so many times they die and their children will starve to death. That's fun. That's great entertainment. That's what I'm like.

See how fucking stupid that is?

Peace, man.

[Markgway]

For fucks sake, Mark. Are you intentionally acting like a 5 year old? I don't mean this by any offence

and I don't have anything against you and your personal taste in movies

I can now sleep at night.

but now you're saying some the stupidest shit I've ever heard.

I want Brad's title.

Considering you're a fan of martial arts films, we can assume you dream of beating people to death but you just don't have the guts to do it, so you prefer to watch movies where people are beaten to death.

Yep. I would love to be able to beat bad guys to death. I mean, who doesn't want to grab some rapist motherfucker and snap their neck like Seagal with PMS? Violent films make me feel better when the good guys win and justice prevails. Not that EVERY film can be like that.

Evil druglords, and their employees who just took the job because they need to make money to feed their children.

Bwahahahahahaha. And you think I'm saying stupid shit? What is this: Austin Powers? Pity the poor henchman! You sell drugs you deserve to get fucked up. End of. I don't care about the starving brats of scumbags. Do them a favour and take them into care.... or are YOU winding ME up??

See how fucking stupid that is?

Nope. You've just argued my point better than I did. Cheers!

[Markgway]

Hi,

I couldn't call myself a fan of these type of films, although I've seen relatively few. I was just wondering where you all stand with regard to Pasolini's Salo? I know it's championed by the art set but is it anymore than a glorified torture movie. The references to Fascism are there if you look for them but they aren't in your face, so it's maybe not the important film that some make it out to be for some of it's viewers but is for others!!

monzo

Sorry, I cannot comment on this movie as I know very little about it. If it's making a political point then maybe it doesn't fall into the torture porn sub-genre?

[HungFist]

Where the hell did I get the idea I could win this argument...

I want Brad's title.

You shall also be awarded "The Most Stubborn Person on the Planet" -title

[Markgway]

You shall also be awarded "The Most Stubborn Person on the Planet" -title

Thanks. It'll go on my bookshelf alongside my World's Heaviest Penis award.

[monzo44]

Hi,

I couldn't call myself a fan of these type of films, although I've seen relatively few. I was just wondering where you all stand with regard to Pasolini's Salo? I know it's championed by the art set but is it anymore than a glorified torture movie. The references to Fascism are there if you look for them but they aren't in your face, so it's maybe not the important film that some make it out to be for some of it's viewers but is for others!!

monzo

Sorry, I cannot comment on this movie as I know very little about it. If it's making a political point then maybe it doesn't fall into the torture porn sub-genre?

Hi,

The film was Pier Paolo Pasolini's last before his murder (Some hold that he angered the wrong people with Salo and paid the ultimate price!) and concerns itself with a small town in Itally in which four fascist libertines round up 9 teenages boys and girls and subject them to 120 days of physical, mental and sexual torture. It's meant as an attack on the Italian Fascist government. There's some very strong stuff for it's time and considdering that the film is held aloft by critics as one of the most important ever made I'm just curious what those who see no value in torture movies make of it.

Likewise Ken Russell's film The Devils revolves around the purging and torture of a cardinal falsely accused of witchcraft. That film caused major outcry on it's release.

I think that we live in a world now where abduction and torture are sanctioned by the powers that control the free world and that might be part of the reason for the increase in these type of films. Maybe the film makers are trying to make a point?!? Maybr they're just trying to cash in. Who knows?

monzo