Yellow CAUTION tape--it's a suggestion. There's nothing except one's assumption that there's something hazardous on the other side of the thin, plastic barrier preventing a person from yanking it loose and proceeding through at will. We're conditioned to obey the suggestion of the tape because it's there for our own good. Sometimes we tear the tape and walk down the recommended-against steps and discover a spiffy shortcut that shaves minutes off our daily commute. Other times, we put our foot on a rickety step and take a tumble for the worse, hopefully not resulting in a brain injury that leaves us with a deeply embarrassing mental condition that makes us spew foul language during conference calls.
Pretty much the entire world of films that I enjoy is cordoned off with CAUTION tape, to the point where I've pondered adding a TRIGGER WARNING to the top of each review I write. "CAUTION: This review contains frank conversations about rape, mutilation, dreadful haircuts, and disco." But I'm not nearly that responsible, and honestly I believe that all human beings are, at this point, using a browser with a "Close" function and a computer fully equipped with an "Off" switch.
I'll confess--I don't find myself reaching for the "Off" switch very frequently, but there are a few films that I've very deliberately avoided. As I've mentioned before, I don't believe that genre film enjoyment turns on an axis of ENDURANCE, and while over-the-top offensive material and splatstick can be fun in their own right, there are some titles that go directly to my Pit Of Ignore. Not because I believe that these movies are "bad" or that they "go too far"--language that bothers me because it's the language of censorship--but because I know that watching these movies would be like growing a pair of testicles simply for the purpose of being kicked in them, just so I know what it feels like.
I like elements of fantasy and surrealism in my movies--I can deal with quite a bit of graphic and shocking imagery if it's within this context. In looking at other lists of disturbing films, I was struck by the fact that "El Topo" made it onto several of them. While there are certainly over-the-top elements in this movie (OK, the WHOLE MOVIE is over the top--that's a fair point), I'm too enchanted by its magical weirdness to be upset by the contents. When the entire purpose of a movie's existence is to show depictions of horrible real-life situations or to assault the viewer with nauseating material in a naturalistic-if-grotesque setting, that's generally when I lose interest. I'm just not particularly interested in being HARDCORE for the sake of being HARDCORE.
Pretend that you're asking yourself "Gee, Tenebrous--what titles DO disturb you?" so I can act like I'm humoring you by listing a few of them below. I will punctuate this post with images of adorable pets and amusing stuff as a sort of the "spoonful of sugar" technique to help the medicine of general unpleasantness go down. You're welcome. Doubly thank me for specifically finding image-free reviews of the movies below. *mwah*
1) "Cannibal Holocaust." The great-granddaddy of found footage horror movies, this exploration of savagery and man's inhumanity to man is a gore-filled odyssey through the Amazon Rainforest told through film shot by a missing American documentary crew. I really enjoy reading about this movie because it elicits such impassioned responses from viewers. It also sounds like one of the worst things I could assault my eyeballs with--a graphically violent movie driven by cruelty and a true meanness of spirit. I've never had anyone tell me that it doesn't earn its reputation as one of the most soberingly hideous things ever committed to film. I'll take your collective word for it, folks!
2) "Nekromantik 2." Just in case Jörg Buttgereit's jaw-dropping "Nekromantik" didn't scar me enough, allow me to RETURN to the corpse-fucking concept, this time with a female lead. I'm sure this is a work of twisted genius and all that, but I could barely handle its predecessor, let alone watch something with superior FX technology and production values. I will confess I adore its sometimes-used title "Nekromantik 2: Return of the Loving Dead."
3) "Grace." Awesome. Let me invest 85 minutes I will never get back watching a movie that reinforces my conclusion that contemporary American culture has flipped its collective wig with Baby Madness. I'm sure that to a person who... you know... experiences any kind of normative reproductive urges, this story has resonance, and the movie has been VERY well-received by other horror fans. I have no doubt that it's quite well-made and that other people will enjoy it (as much as anyone can be said to "enjoy" a movie about an undead, bloodthirsty infant), but I'm decidedly NOT part of this film's target audience.
4) "Requiem for a Dream." I am convinced that this descent into the horribleness of drug addiction is exquisitely well-crafted. I am also convinced that Real Actual Life is full enough of horribleness that I can skip this film. I don't like the idea of having to emotionally recover from watching the harrowing destruction of make-believe strangers.
5) Anything with the words "August Underground" in its title. This trilogy, put out by the folks at ToeTag Pictures, is the very distillation of Endurance Cinema--to the point where filmmaker Fred Vogel was detained in a Canadian jail while crossing the border so authorities could further investigate whether or not they wanted to allow his films into the country. I feel kind of guilty putting this on the list, because it's a little like saying "I don't enjoy watching porn that doesn't cater to my sexual orientation"--these movies were created specifically to be prurient, and by golly do they sound successful. Just check out the description of "August Underground's Mordum" at IGN in their Top 10 Sickest Movies list. That's an itch even *I* am unlikely to scratch. YIKES.
21 comments:
I can see your point in avoiding certain titles that are punishing to sit through... Cannibal Holocaust is a notorious film with this sort of reputation, although as a piece of film history it has proven to be of some significance. But Requiem For A Dream? I think you're cheating yourself out of an extremely well made film that is entertaining on its own merits and even has (dare I say it?) traces of black comedy to offset the bleak subject matter. Come by Greenpoint and we'll pop in the blu-ray to help you get over this aversion...
I watched Cannibal Holocaust as a kid. It was actually super popular in Puerto Rico and they even had trading cards and collectible albums for the kids. I actually had more problems with the way the doomed "film makers" treated the Indigenous people than with the grossly realistic violence. It's an emotionally exhausting flick and totally relentless. The general consensus was that it was said.
I had the displeasure of catching parts of Nekromantik 1 and Nekromantik 2. The first was absolutely gratuitous and nauseating -- to the point of me running out of the dressing room where one of the Chicago Club dancers (who got fired later that week) was watching and loving it. I remember Storm (who actually laughs at splatter), myself (who draws cannibal porn and watched CH as a kid) and Rochelle (who wasn't phased by anything,) saw a scene while unnamed dancer was doing her set. Rochelle screamed, "Oh my GOD what the hell is that?" Storm gaped at the screen and stated, "Is that corpse porn?" I shuddered and ran. It was really THAT bad for me.
Nekromantik 2 was WAY worse in terms of visuals. The special effects weren't just convincing, they were physically painful to watch. I nearly vomited when my friend Stebby showed me a music video with the "best" parts. Too much, and I didn't get the impression that there was any sort of redeeming value at all.
Having been a drug addict, I am afraid to watch Requiem for a Dream. I have a paranoia that I will end up having a PTSD attack, just like I did when I watched the first 15 minutes of 12 Monkeys. I just don't fancy watching cinema that causes me to end up in the emergency room of the psychiatric ward.
I am not familiar with your last selection, but I'll be sure to avoid it.
Agree with previous commenter. I can see why you may not want to watch the others(a few like Cannibal Holocaust I have avoided for the same reasons). But Requiem for a Dream is really a master piece. It's harrowing and disturbing, but it is also a very, very well crafted piece of cinema.
don't feel bad Kate, I too have avoided the 5 you listed as well. i like to think i'm a well rounded movie watcher most of the time but sometimes just by a movie's rep or by what i've read about it i figure "nah. i can probably live my whole life without ever seeing that one." it doesn't have to be because it's an endurance contest to get through either. things like Steel Magnolias, Marley & Me and Prizzi's Honor i've avoided because who likes being sad?
and double thanks.
August Underground...ugh. Just, ugh....
This was once said about John Waters, but it more aptly applies here: "(these) films demonstrate how few of our remaining taboos are really worth violating in the first place."
Hard to argue against your position as all those films aren't something you pop in the DVD player in the hopes of being entertained (if you do, something is seriously wrong with you).
However, there is a lot more going on w/ Grace than just our society's nutsoid baby producing craze. I think it paints a much larger pictue of how people are incredibly disillusioned with their own self-centeredness (from the mother of Grace, to the grandmother, to the mid-wife, each character is completely whacked out of their cabezas). Give it a shot, I think you will be pleasantly surprised.
TK:
While I am a defender of Cannibal Holocaust and think that RfaD is a good movie (and recommend that everyone see the uber-gnarly training film "Army Medicine in Vietnam"), I'm hip to what you're talking about: there's only so much a person can take, no matter if "everybody" says the movie in question is a must-see. (I'm thinking of the in-current-release Precious now--it just sounds SO grim!)
I've done my time in the cinematic trenches of raw emotions and stomach-turning horror (as have you), and sometimes I'd rather watch The Adventures of Milo & Otis (which, come to think of it, has its share of trauma-inducing moments--oh well, can't escape it).
Thanks,
Ivan
Quote from a friend after we watched Requiem in high school: "Can we watch The Lion King now?"
I agree with Planet of Terror on the Grace issue- the movie barely depicts the fact that Grace is an undead zombie baby- rather the transformation of the mother was more fascinating and actually more powerful. Maybe someday you will secretly watch it? Heheh
I don't blame you one bit. The only one on the list that I haven't seen is Grace and I'm not in a hurry to see it. I really wouldn't recommend any of these films, though Cannibal Holocaust is one of my favorites, because they're just not for everybody. I figure people who want to watch them will find them on their own. The August Underground series even tested me and I have no desire to ever see them again.
so where's the peer pressure to see any of these films? that's the only reason why anyone would have to see stuff they really don't want to. the new horror film- the film you're too put off of, too "scared" to watch. that's not entertainment. it seems some filmmakers have an axe to grind, they want to hurt people- fuck 'em.
Of the five I've seen Cannibal Holocaust and Requiem for a Dream. The latter is certainly one of the bleakest films I've ever seen and may be more of an affront to the spirit than CH is to the stomach. I'll defend both films but CH especially is a film not everybody needs to see. Of the others I've heard of the Nekromantik films but not of the others. I've steered clear of both Nekromantiks, claiming lack of interest, but that lack of interest probably is a conscious decision on my part. Again, if we concede that not everything needs to be made for the general audience (however you define that) than it follows that many if not most films aren't for everyone. We can promote our various discoveries (Goodbye Uncle Tom, anyone?) but it's no offense if people decline the invitation.
I'm here to represent the core in hardcore. I've seen all the movies you listed (except Grace which is in the q) and I'll tell you why you should see all of them.
Cannibal Holocaust - Because its the best of the cannibal genre (I highly doubt we are ever going to see Hollypoop put out a PG-13 cannibal film)
Nekromantik 2 - Hey, you've already been scarred once..go for the double espresso. The ending in this one is an atomic bomb better than Part 1.
Requiem - Like everybody else said, its an actually awesome Aronofsky flick.
August Underground - I've seen all 3 and actually I can't justify anybody seeing this. Though I met Fred Vogel at a Chiller and he was awesome. It's really pseudo snuff but the closest thing to it that's ever been produced.
If you go and see the AU trilogy you might as well go down the path of Nic Cage in 8mm.
.....on second thought, just avoid all of these flicks and watch alien smurfs in outer space
RFAD is an amzing film imo, but i agree with Grace. It was well made, but did nothing for me, it was almost like a "horror" themed Lifetime movie. A friend has the August Underground dvd's, seen a piece here & there, but from what i've seen, i don't believe i'd enjoy it.
Of the films you listed, I've only seen CH, Nekro 1 and 2 and Requiem. None of these are good first date movies (unless you're named Travis) and I can't recommend either Nekro, but CH and Requiem were both excellent films for their genre. Requiem was definitely bleak, but it was so well made and the acting top notch (Ellen Burstyn should win a lifetime achievement Oscar on this performance alone) that I think you are cheating yourself by not seeing this (I can see I'm not alone in this position). As for CH, I think its notoriety is somewhat overblown, particularly in an age when you can go on the internet to see a real life video of some sick bastard named Khalid Sheik Muhammed decapitating Daniel Pearl or a young Iranian woman being gunned down in the street by a fascist thug. I guess if you expose yourself to the grim reality that makes up our world today, whatever the folks operating in the cinematic dream machine can concoct pales in comparison. Of course, I guess you can make the same argument that why watch something so downbeat, so grim as CH or Requiem when you are bombarded by it constantly in the real world. In sum, I guess it is a hard call and we all have to consider our own yellow warning tape. That being said, I found Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer so realistic, so downbeat and so grim that I will never force myself to sit through it again, even though I freely admit that it was a very well crafted film with excellent performances by Michael Rooker and Tim Towles.
I definitely find there's a lot of movies that I don't want to see not necessarily because I think I'll never see them, but because they're just not where I'm at, and maybe never will be. I know that when I try to pull the "litmus horror" test and force myself to watch something like this, which might not even be unsettling/extreme/graphic, I never really appreciate it -- in my head, I kinda *want* it to suck, and I'll find ways of making it not live up to my expectations -- if a film has something about it which makes me that uncomfortable before I even watch it, that's usually the only thing I can pay attention to while viewing it, and if it doesn't top the concept I have in my head I think of it as a failure, no matter how interesting it is. That said, if I wait and watch it some other time, often after seeing another film the director made which makes me curious to go back, I find I can give it a less biased viewing.
I've mentioned before how my tastes in horror go a lot more towards uncanny baroque narcotic phantasmagoira than grim meathook reality, and while I'm not opposed to the later it's not really why I watch movies (horror or otherwise). Likewise, a lot of things which didn't shock me when I was a gorehound teenager definitely upset me now because I have context I didn't have then -- I recently had a hard time with Martyrs, not because it was excessively gory or extreme, but because of (and I'll be deliberately vague about this) the general idea of systemic abuse, and particularly the hospitalesque scene towards the end (which was a strong and unexpected reminder of some recent events) was just something I wasn't ready for. It doesn't make it a bad film at all, and I imagine for a lot of viewers none of this would be a problem, but if I had to do it all over again I woulda chose some lesbian vampires instead.
(word verification: imicroce, or that dude who only sings "Time In A Bottle" at open mic night)
Wow--I wasn't expecting such an interesting and varied response! Many thanks to everyone for chiming in. I think wiec? comes closest to where I'm coming from; some content and the way its presented is just plain sad/upsetting/gross and I'm just not interested in Going There. There's surely a part of me that feels like I'm less well-rounded in my cinema experiences as a result, but I also won't have headspace taken up with this *particular* flavor of unpleasant-to-me stuff.
It's not that I'm condemning the films or their viewers in any fashion--I'm REALLY glad that there's such a variety of media out there that everyone can be moved by something that affects them. It just seems like, with horror/genre entertainment specifically, there's a sort of "peer pressure" (thanks, Prof. Grewbeard, for aptly nailing that down!) that happens that sorta makes me scratch my head. I mean, I find the black humor aspects in a lot of films that would appall a lot of audiences--that doesn't make me "cool" or even particularly "perceptive;" it just means I'm calibrated differently as a viewer. It's a source of interest to me what pings one person as opposed to another in the horror-movie-watching world!
DB, I thought this was particularly interesting:
"I wait and watch it some other time, often after seeing another film the director made which makes me curious to go back, I find I can give it a less biased viewing"
I've had this happen to me. Specifically, I avoided "Last House on the Left" for .... golly ... over a decade, until Wes Craven's "The Hills Have Eyes" made me curious to check it out. I was willing to overlook my apprehension about the graphic rape sequence in order to take a look at the film. And lo and behold, it's a pretty fascinating cultural document.
I may have similar a-ha moments with the movies on this list. Who knows?! But for now, I'm giving myself a free pass.
Over the years I've seen a bunch of these kinds of flicks: the NEKROMANTIKs on bootlegs when Film Threat was touting Buttgereit as the next big thing. The FX were so ridiculous I wasn't really disturbed, more like intrigued by odd scenes like a Goth chick in black sunglasses lounging in a bathtub of blood. I thought REQUIEM was pretty fantastic and loved the outrageous climax; the editing is unparalleled. CANNIBAL HOLOCAUST is pretty hilarious in its ineptitude - the filmmakers are all repeatedly said to be "professionals" but they mug and contort and give the finger to the camera, and try to catch each other naked and/or having sex. The score is haunting and effective, oddly enough. The AUGUST UNDERGROUND movies sound extremely unappealing. HENRY is still one of my favorite movies because it still manages to be about *people* in a way exploitation movies usually aren't. That said, I'm avoiding IRREVERSIBLE. Graphic 10-minute rape? No thanks; I had enough with I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE. And I still have never seen MAN BITES DOG.
I can't blame anyone for avoiding 'Cannibal Holocaust,' even though I regard it pretty highly. (That statement really needs a lot of qualification that I don't have the energy to give right now.)
The one I would hope you change your mind on is 'Requiem' - that film has A LOT more to offer than the emotional ringer. Please don't cheat yourself. The good in that movie far outweighs the harshness - it not only employs an impressive array of visual tricks, they are (for once) entirely in service to the narrative, and Ellen Burstyn's performance is one of her very best. Watch with a good sound system, though. Overall, it's one of the standout movies of the last decade.
"it seems some filmmakers have an axe to grind, they want to hurt people- fuck 'em."
This comment is uncomfortably close to insulting. I have to point out that nobody can actually be "hurt" by watching a movie - and I'm pretty sure the filmmakers in question know this.
Will, several folks have told me that "Irreversible" is on their Do Not Want lists. For me, depicting the graphic sexual abuse of women in cinema is hardly a brave directorial choice. "Kinatay," which made a splash at Cannes, is in a similar bucket for me--the real time death and dismemberment of a sex worker isn't something that's going to make me sit up and say "SHIT! I really ought to be kinder to my fellow man" or "golly I learned a lot about the cynical nature of man's relationship with religion outta this." I won't condemn those who DO opt to watch such things, but I'm with you, friend--it's a big world of filmage out there, and I prefer a less *assaultive* approach.
As to "Man Bites Dog"--I saw that playing in the background at a party I attended and it disturbed me in no small measure. FYI to all party-throwers: "Man Bites Dog" is easily in the top 5 worst picks for party background noise EVER.
No need to qualify, Gryphon! I've read some really interesting pieces of criticism on CH, and I can see why it's a vital piece of exploitation movie history. Its value as a boundary-pusher is not to be underestimated. It just ain't my bag :) As to "Requiem," I may reconsider at some less emotionally-raw date. It seems like a lot of folks hold the movie in very high esteem, and I'm in no way making light of that!
Again, cruising the back catalogue...
Here is one I wish I had avoided, and I fully plan to take a hit on this... Trainspotting. Ultimately there was nothing to enjoy about it. Just a sick, sad romp with junkies - or at least that is all that stuck.
Wanted to watch but quit; Prozac Nation. I admit it, topless Christina Ricci was the impetus, but I thought it would be a quirky almost-comedy, but once she really started going off her nut I had to stop it.
I guess realistic human frailty and cruelty are worse than anything.
Oh, and add any of the "Mondo" animal slaughter films. I'm a vegetarian, dammit! :-D
Post a Comment