Customer Discussions > horror discussion forum

Human Centipede 2 banned in UK


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 51-75 of 201 posts in this discussion
Posted on 25 Jun 2011 15:02:11 BDT
nick says:
well even this site has censorship......just tried to write a few lines about the discussions on here and they refused to put it on......thats the state of the uk today...no freedom of speech...i guess amazon is in line with the bbfc.....

In reply to an earlier post on 25 Jun 2011 19:27:16 BDT
[Deleted by the author on 3 Apr 2012 10:50:10 BDT]

In reply to an earlier post on 25 Jun 2011 19:59:47 BDT
S. Lanigan says:
So child sex is ok if they`re only acting? That`s a dangerous path!

Posted on 25 Jun 2011 20:32:37 BDT
JONESY says:
S Lanigan,
It tells me that a lot of people are jaded with normal horror fare. Where does the horror industry go from here? ( Trying to get a proper answer from you on this post now)

In reply to an earlier post on 25 Jun 2011 20:38:14 BDT
[Deleted by the author on 28 Jun 2011 22:59:04 BDT]

In reply to an earlier post on 26 Jun 2011 15:18:35 BDT
S. Lanigan says:
I take it this post is referring to your post on the "waffle" board...but on that one you ask "A LOT OF PEOPLE SEEM TO THINK EXTREME HORROR IS NOT HORRIFIC ANY MORE. WHAT DO THE HORROR FILM MAKERS DO NOW?" (your upper case)
So what are you talking about - normal horror or extreme horror?

In reply to an earlier post on 26 Jun 2011 15:31:34 BDT
S. Lanigan says:
"Child sex is a lesser crime than murder so if it's portrayed in a mainstream film and not for sexual gratification then fine by me."
Lee, that`s such an innocent and naive remark, that I think it`s best if we leave it there. You win.

In reply to an earlier post on 26 Jun 2011 21:05:04 BDT
Neill says:
No, Lee hasn't won, he has proven his naivety.

Lee, it's a good thing that you know very little about the dark side of this world. However, it exists.

What you don't understand is that simulation and real graphic imagery serve the same purpose. I don't agree that child rape is a lesser crime than murder. Both are equally despicable, both should result in the offender spending the rest of it's life in prison.

I was referring to both the real stuff and the simulated stuff. For most people, depiction of child sex would be abhorrent and sickening. To a paedophile it may be no different to soft porn. The illegal stuff is covered by the Obscene publications act, the simulated stuff is covered by the BBFC.

When I was younger, I used to oppose censorship but now, I think the BBFC are spot on most of the time....they are much more liberal now and at least recognise artistic value of some material which might be extreme. I agree with the cuts to "A Serbian Film"....but they did still allow it a certificate. They've refused "Human Centipede 2" a certificate because of sadistic sexual violence which can't be cut out.....therefore it must be worse than "A Serbian Film".....therefore I agree with their decision. If it's so bad that it breaches the obscene publications act, I would support their decision to make possession of it illegal.

Interestingly, Horror is suffering the same problem as porn - pushing further to the more graphic extremes and in doing so, losing the power and the allure of the material. Both Horror and porn need to look back to their roots to see how to progress.

Posted on 26 Jun 2011 22:17:19 BDT
S. Lanigan says:
neal - thanks for bringing some sense to this board. As for your last comment, you are dead on; horror (or rather, the torture porn it has become) has gone as far as it can go. I feel there is a whole generation who have missed out on the creeping sense of dread that a good horror film can bring. Instead, it has just become a case of "how much viscera can you stomach?" (`scuse the pun) I find it sad when I see reviews from young people on IMDB mocking a well-crafted film like "The Orphanage" simply because there isn`t enough slashing and hacking in it. Oh well, perhaps it`s my age.
One more thing - I find it laughingly hypocritical that, on a forum with posters that are overwhemingly against censorship, many people are negatively using the "do you think this adds to the discussion" button, which is ostensibly a censorship tool in itself! Neal, these "liberals" will end up ensuring our comments are hidden...doh!

Posted on 26 Jun 2011 22:28:40 BDT
Shazzerman says:
Yes, sense of claustrophobic dread has completely disappeared from horror. The original "Texas Chain Saw" had it. "Day of the Dead" was the last one I can remember that brought something really dark to the genre - and that was in 1985!

In reply to an earlier post on 26 Jun 2011 22:35:47 BDT
S. Lanigan says:
Shazzer - exactly! TCM wasn`t nearly as graphic as today`s films, but had a far higher fear factor.

Posted on 26 Jun 2011 23:03:44 BDT
Lee,I presume you are not familiar with the whole 70s "roughie" school of porn if you are harking back to a more innocent time in that genre. Some of the foulest films on earth flickered endlessly in flea pit cinemas during that decade that make the recent shock and awe horror/torture porn films of today seem pretty tame.

Can I recommend the recent film Life and Death of a Porno Gang for those who believe there is no merit in the current crop of extreme films. Like "A Serbian Film"(which I've not seen) the film uses the back drop of ethnic unrest/civil war to portray a truly f**ked period in history and the fall out from that conflict. In it's use of sex as liberation, it very much echoes the work of some early pornographers who saw the genre as a true medium for total artistic expression. However being made today with liberal idealism laying dead in the gutter, the film also examines the darker aspects of freedom in the shift of tone from liberation through sex to survival through death and money. What struck me most about this film is the humanity on display for both the murders and their willing victims. The scene where a soldier agrees to die on film so that his family can be financially secure is both moving and shocking as he lists the horrors he has committed and that by dying it may be the one good thing he has ever done. The film also shows the effect that seeking to go beyond all limits has on the individual both as person and artist.

I feel pretty sure with a few minor cuts to the bestiality, animal slaughter and the "golden shower" scene this could be released in this country. It's a rewarding film, that although shocking, never feels it is seeking outrage rather it is a film made of outrage. Oh, it's really funny in places too!

S. Lanigan, I wouldn't flatter yourself or insult other people over the use of the "do you think..." button being used on your posts, there are morons on this forum that do it to selected posters threads no matter what is said and an awful lot of use of the button on the first posts of threads. Go figure.

In reply to an earlier post on 27 Jun 2011 04:01:57 BDT
[Deleted by the author on 3 Apr 2012 10:49:40 BDT]

In reply to an earlier post on 27 Jun 2011 17:03:41 BDT
nick says:
Lee, try and get hold of the un-cut version which I have and then you will see the fuss is justified...But I do recommend the un-cut version but only if you're a gore hound and like graphic stuff like me

Posted on 28 Jun 2011 21:22:23 BDT
Last edited by the author on 28 Jun 2011 21:36:20 BDT
Neill says:
Nick's right about the uncut screener version of "A Serbian Film".

I don't think that it is a metaphor for the war and the sociological situation in Serbia though. I think it was a deliberate attempt to provoke the worst part of any human mind and to "brainwash" or imprint it's audience with a number of different perversions.

One of the scenes cut down was Milos receiving oral from the woman in the abandoned orphanage. In the uncut it flits to and from the screens which Milos can see which has footage of the teenage girl sucking a lollypop. This is an imprinting method. The idea behind the scene is that the crazy director is trying to imprint Milos and push him to sex without any moral boundary...the "free-f**k".
This would be the total sub-human sexual desire of the "id".

But the director of "A Serbian Film" is doing exactly that to the viewer. It's a dangerous thing to be doing.

The BBFC insisted on about 4 minutes of cuts which removes ALL of the imprint footage.

I wouldn't class it as a must see film. But it is very well made.

Horror directors now are abysmal at creating Horror. Firstly, they don't have dark enough minds to create a dark atmosphere. Second they ignore basic human psychology and response to sound frequency/type. Thirdly, they fail to look maturely at film history and draw from all the things they have seen and heard in older films.

I could make a 15 certificate film that isn't at all graphic but would penetrate your mind and would give people nightmares for some time afterwards. I wouldn't do that, nor could I afford to. For an 18 audience, yes, but I'd be blamed for putting a few in psychiatric hospitals....maybe a few wet cinema seats too. Pirates of the Caribbean is more graphic than some 70s horror films which were X rated.

I've watched a lot of really graphic horror....and have seen some truly graphic footage of people being murdered for whatever political or criminal reason. These things really don't belong in the realm of "entertainment". I think gore films are mostly dull and boring anyway. It's not a genre, it's horror gone wrong. What you can draw from them is the essence, the part which concerns even the most hardened gore fans.

Gore fans are normally afraid of their own fear and draw comfort from the silliness of gore films and it gives them the ego boost that they are powerful because they have the stomach to watch it.

Count Zarroff, I accept your comments about "The Life And Death Of A Porno Gang" but you can't make an intelligent comment about "A Serbian Film" if you haven't seen it. You've made an inaccurate comparison. Also the only artistic expression anybody tried to achieve through porn was nihilistic retaliation at a primarily religious society...and that's as deep as it got.

The BBFC would only cut graphic scenes of Bestiality, animal slaughter and golden shower would probably be left in - animal torture would be cut. Note: "The Life And Death Of A Porno Gang" is available here, on Amazon.

Lee, you should consider seeking psychiatric help. Forced entry would probably qualify as illegal under the Obscene publications Act. The enthusiasm you demonstrate for graphic violent rape porn means you're either trolling or you belong in prison on the VP wing

Posted on 28 Jun 2011 22:56:46 BDT
[Deleted by the author on 3 Apr 2012 10:49:52 BDT]

In reply to an earlier post on 29 Jun 2011 00:16:07 BDT
Neill says:
Lee, this is what one of your posts said:

"I just googled and read a review for a film called Forced Entry.Sounds great.Horror and hardcore porn,a perfect match."

How else do you expect that to be read?

OK, porn exists for the sole purpose of providing visual sexual stimulus, combine that with very realistic torture and in the context of a series of brutal rape scenes....and of course, little or no story....and you say "Sounds great.Horror and hardcore porn,a perfect match."

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0124596/usercomments

It's clearly not akin to I spit on your grave. That was my first google result.

That kind of stuff is not entertainment, art, ground-breaking or any such thing, it's vileness made for people to get off to and feed the fantasies of someone who will one day probably go on to attack some innocent woman.

I've encountered a number of multiple murderers, rapists and paedophiles in a past job and I don't find any of the material which feeds these people's fantasies acceptable in any way. Everything you've said is not based around real world experience. Your words are the words of a post-modern "adult" sulking because he can't have everything he wants. Well, you can't have everything you want.

Lets just clear some things up:

No, you are not allowed unlicensed firearms and a number of other weapons, extreme sadistic-porn, class A, B, C drugs etc.

Why?

Because you are unable to responsibly restrict the effect and usage of these things You will f*** yourself up and other people too.

You can argue all you like but you're wrong. You've made a series of disturbing statements which you have time to consider more deeply before typing.

Over censorship? Worry about the doctored news and inability to vote for a political party which has any difference to the main three...who all stand for essentially the same vague idea.

Censorship has to exist. It'd be great if it didn't have to but it does. I've heard paedophiles saying that it's just censorship to not allow them to have child porn.

S.Lanigan wasn't playing trump cards. He(or she) was just making well thought out points. My point is that censorship is all but irrelevant to any of us. It solely restricts general release of inappropriate material. You were just trying to score points...the way people do on the internet. It's more important to you to win the argument than make sense.

You made a very good case for censorship by trying to make a case against it, Lee.

In reply to an earlier post on 29 Jun 2011 01:04:50 BDT
[Deleted by the author on 3 Apr 2012 10:51:18 BDT]

Posted on 29 Jun 2011 12:42:30 BDT
Neill says:
I don't deem them unsuitable for everybody to watch but they shouldn't be on general release.

If I watch a film I'll watch it for it's cinematic merit. So I didn't bother with human centipede as it seems to have no cinematic value whatsoever. I've seen Irreversible, A Serbian Film and Martyrs out of the newer extreme films.

The problem is your attitude to this kind of material. You seem to have an unhealthy attitude to it. You can delete posts all you want but you've exposed something about your nature in what you've said.

You should actually read some of those reviews on IMDB. Just about anybody with a brain describes it as sick and appalling. The immature psycho wannabees give it good marks. One of the comparisons is that there is little to complain about "I spit on your grave" when a film like "Forced Entry" exists

Sometimes i'll watch real footage of a killing for research. You learn a lot from that kind of stuff about human beings capacity to be evil. If you're writing something and you don't draw it from real references, it won't ring true to the people who read it.

By seeing some of the beheading footage, largely from Arab countries, it teaches you the truth about other cultures that they would either hide from you or mainstream TV will not show. It's the most condemning aspect of "Islamic" cultures to see a 12 year old decapitating a tied up adult male victim while saying Allah hu'akbar ( I believe that's the right way of writing it in English).

I will never watch any film like forced entry, and I don't thinkanybody (especially you) should be able to gain access to such material. I don't really watch porn....it doesn't do anything for me, certainly not the twisted stuff. But the newer boundaries on BDSM stuff mean that films have to include a surreal bit at the end to demonstrate that the participants are consenting. That in itself is worthy of a comedy sketch Python style.

The only reason I joined in this conversation was because those who are in the right were outnumbered by those of you who were making ignorant, innaccurate statements.

As you didn't get it the first few times, I'll say it yet again:

WATCH WHATEVER YOU WANT. BUT DON'T EXPECT THE EXTREME STUFF TO BE ON YOUR TV OR CERTIFIED FOR RELEASE ON DVD. EXPECT IT TO BE CUT FOR THE MAINSTREAM.

IF YOU WATCH THE ILLEGAL STUFF, EXPECT TO BE ARRESTED AND PUT IN PRISON AMONGST THE SEX OFFENDERS, SO YOU BETTER BE AWARE OF THE LEGAL STATUS OF WHATEVER YOU ARE GETTING OFF TO.

What I don't like is seeing a bunch of ill-informed people badgering those who have quite politely presented good informed opinion which is what was happening so I joined the discussion.

I would welcome the input from anybody from the BBFC or police for accurate input about the dividing line between legal and illegal horror or porn but so we can get our facts straight. Have a read of this:

http://www.bbfc.co.uk/newsreleases/2011/06/bbfc-rejects-the-human-centipede-ii-full-sequence/

What I see on the internet time and time again is ill-informed chinese whispers spreading inaccurate information while other people try to straighten it out and inform people of the truth. And no, I'll never back down to you.......because you're wrong.

I won't need to delete any of my posts but you have. So you have censored the discussion to save face.

Posted on 29 Jun 2011 13:38:46 BDT
Dr Evil says:
I actually thought that the first film was quite tongue-in-cheek and more of a horror comedy than a full-on torture p0rn horror.

I was looking forward to seeing the sequel until I read the description on Wikipedia -

"The film centres on an antagonist called Martin (Laurence Harvey), who becomes sexually obsessed with a DVD recording of the film within the film, The Human Centipede (First Sequence). In the DVD, a surgeon kidnaps three people and surgically connects them mouth-to-anu5. Martin ma5turbates as he watches the film, with sandpaper wrapped around his peni5. He subsequently creates his own twelve-person "human centipede" and gains sexual gratification from the pain, humiliation and suffering of his victims. He is shown to become sexually aroused whenever a member of his centipede is forced to defecate into the mouth of the victim behind them. Martin rape5 the woman at the rear of the centipede, with barbed wire wrapped around his peni5"

Now this just sounds like they are going for the most sick idea they can think of - trying for shocks rather than entertainment.

I definitely won't be watching this now and (although I don't normally agree with most of their classifications) I am glad the BBFC has banned this in the UK.

Posted on 29 Jun 2011 14:05:20 BDT
Mr Shh. says:
"I definitely won't be watching this now and (although I don't normally agree with most of their classifications) I am glad the BBFC has banned this in the UK."

KM, banning it won't stop the people that really want to see it from watching it. To me the problem is that some parents don't take the certificate into account when choosing what to let them watch. A friend of mine let his 8 year old son watch Crank 2. I definately don't think that he needed to see those types of themes of sex and violence.
Unfortunately, people that want to be irresponsible will do so anyway.

Adults, however, should be able to watch whatever they choose within the boundaries of the law (no snuff films etc).

In reply to an earlier post on 29 Jun 2011 15:50:07 BDT
Lee says:
Neal.No use talking about artistic merit.I'm sure most of us watch films other than horrors.HC2 could be the worst film ever made,totally irrelevant.As is the sick illegal material you keep bringing up.
Sounds as though you've engaged with some nasty types in your professional capacity,so maybe it's you,not me,who doesn't live in the real world.You've been corrupted!!!
The huge majority can make the distinction between fantasy and reality.And no use saying "what about the minority" or we'll end up arguing the case for banning alcohol.
You seem to think you have me pretty well pegged but I'm quite squeamish.I can't watch the likes of Casualty.The missus used to work in hospital theatres and her tales of operation and amputations make me quite nauseous.Not a job I could do.
Thought I'd dip my toe in the waters of extreme horror as I've been exclusively watching Hammer and Amicus films for a while and fancied a change.My fave is The Haunting, I expect that one meets with your approval for artistic merit.
If A Serbian Film is as extreme as it gets then I can't really see what the fuss is about.Granted I haven't seen the extra four minutes but I sure as Hell want to.A fine film though IMO and deserves to be seen as the director intended.Incidentally,there's a Q&A session with the director on the dvd.The film was shown to a uk lawyer who said there was no content that breached uk obscenity laws.
For me the last poster,Mr Shh,sums it up nicely with his last sentence.
That's my last word on the matter.I'm starting to bore myself.

In reply to an earlier post on 29 Jun 2011 16:14:23 BDT
Dr Evil says:
@Mr Shh

You are right, banning it will probably help the popularity of the film rather than stop people from seeing it. Hopefully it will deter some from having the opportunity from seeing it though.

Just reading the description though (that I posted before), I cannot understand why anybody in their right mind would ever want to see this. I've seen a lot of nasty films in the past but this one sounds particularly sick.

It's a shame the writers have gone down this route as the first one was a deliberate cheesy b-movie that is pretty funny (you don't actually see anything gory in it either).

In reply to an earlier post on 29 Jun 2011 16:37:25 BDT
nick says:
well you said what i was thinking....:people should watch what they want.but didnt quiet understand what you meant by :IF YOU WATCH THE ILLEGAL STUFF, EXPECT TO BE ARRESTED AND PUT IN PRISON AMONGST THE SEX OFFENDERS, SO YOU BETTER BE AWARE OF THE LEGAL STATUS OF WHATEVER YOU ARE GETTING OFF TO.
.....all my movies are uncut including a serbian film,grotesque etc....there has been no one sent to prison for owning illegal movies yet...and going back to the era of the video nasties,there was only 1 person who was prosecuted.....i rest things there...as you say,its your opinion,which i respect but do not agree with

Posted on 29 Jun 2011 20:10:07 BDT
Neill says:
Nick, I worked as a custody officer for 5 years and have locked up countless people for owning illegal material. "there has been no one sent to prison for owning illegal movies yet." Every paedophile who's gone to prison for owning indecent images/ footage has gone to prison for that reason.

The point you guys are missing is that extreme movies are now becoming so extreme as to cross over in to the realm of the obscene publications. I suggest you read the information on the following link and get to grips with understanding that some of your film collection may well be illegal and viewed no differently illegal porn by the courts.

This isn't opinion, this is the law, read them carefully without thinking you're in the right:

http://www.inbrief.co.uk/offences/extreme-pornography.htm

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/d_to_g/extreme_pornography/#a03

Lee, don't try to turn this round at me. You stated that you see nothing wrong with portrayals of child sex in films but not child porn. And you said "I just googled and read a review for a film called Forced Entry.Sounds great.Horror and hardcore porn,a perfect match." You've expressed your true nature perfectly and deleting the posts doesn't change it. You obviously have something wrong with you if you get off to films like that. It's called paraphilia, google it. The things you've said and deleted mostly are enough to get you watched and DNA tested if appropriate.

Personally I've never seen any illegal porn. The footage I've seen of executions has always been from a terrorist/military, criminal/gang or lynch mob context. Most have appeared on Al Jazeera or Mexican news channels as they were filmed for publicity/reputation of the organisations.

But the good thing to emerge out of this conversation is somebody saying they will choose not to watch HC2.

I suspect HC2 will be the first mainstream film that people in the UK get jailed for owning.
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the horror discussion forum (813 discussions)

 

This discussion

Discussion in:  horror discussion forum
Participants:  55
Total posts:  201
Initial post:  7 Jun 2011
Latest post:  27 Mar 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 6 customers

Search Customer Discussions