Because it needs to be said

[It's Damn Real!]

I was with you until this. This is silly. Desensitization doesn't necessarily mean you will never feel emotions over a certain kind of situation. Like, I can easily tell the difference between say, someone getting killed in one of those internet gore videos, and someone getting killed in a movie, because I'm heavily desensitized to that kind of thing.

I can watch Saw all day long, eating whatever the fuck they serve at theaters that's not popcorn, but you'll never see me watching a legitimate video of someone committing suicide, getting shot, etc.

Yes, you're right, but desensitization does take you down the path to the point you could conceivably never feel emotions (or empathy) over a certain situation. It's brainwashing, albeit self-inflicted. If you watch a man paint a red circle for 20 years, your reactions to seeing red circles painted will be unmeasurable. That's undeniable. The same goes for gore. It's why soldiers tend to be capable of stomaching gruesome battle and the sight of post-battle without vomiting, or why surgeons don't pass out after opening a man's chest for bypass surgery. The difference is, surgeons do this to save people's lives. Horror fans do it to push their own threshold of entertainment.

Edit: I couple of posts down, you mirrored my point. Which is weird, because you recognize the difference between real and fake/implied violence, yet you still hate the idea that someone would "champion" these ideas on a forum. I don't get it.

What's not to get? I'm not referring to what I'll call "light violence" for the sake of this argument, like you see depicted in professional wrestling or action films. I know it's a grey area, but that kind of implied violence is cartoonish and intentionally so because it's not meant to be mistaken as real in any sense of the word. Yes, the line is blurred, intentionally no less, which is somewhat hypocritical on my part, but the line is still visible and determinable IMO, which separates it from implied overt or ultra violence, who's sole existence and purpose is to instill shock, to stir controversy and to blue the lines of your ability not to question whether or not what you just witnessed actually happened or not.

They're just not the same.

 

[IrishCanadian25]

After reading through the 'Most Gruesome Film' thread, not only am I appalled that anyone would champion a "film" for it's depicting the most disturbing or disgusting scene, but the fact some of you go out of your way to watch this kind of shit might actually be more disturbing than any of the actual scenes in these "films".

What the fuck is wrong with you? Why would you willingly want to see someone rape another human being, acted out or not? Why would you want to see animals get tortured and killed? Why would you want to watch decapitations, dismemberments, skinnings and depictions of brutality, torture and murder of any kind? This type of behavior is the type of thing societies (at least healthy ones) look to expunge, not glorify. This is why the death penalty exists, and why we have laws based on common moral codes of conduct.

I'm sorry if any of you are the type who watches this filth and are taking offense to this, but I would seriously question the morality and the mental state of anyone who even moderately finds this type of thing entertaining, or isn't utterly disgusted by the fact it even exists, let alone that anyone wants to watch it, be I out of some sick personal craving, morbid curiosity (which is something I'll never understand, obviously) or whatever the reason.

My stomach is turning having just read some of the vague reports a few of you posted in that thread. Had I actually witnessed any of it in person, I undoubtedly would have puked.

Thoroughly disgusted and shaken,
IDR

Dear God I couldn't agree more!

Gore-fests are popular and I know that the topic of goriest film would get a lot of action and hits in the Zonies, but I have not seen more than 2 or 3 of the films on that list, and I never will. I did a thread awhile back stating that certain things (rape, animal torture) should never appear in cinema and passed off as "art" when all the film makers are trying to do is get shock value.

Good for you, IDR.

 

[Mighty NorCal]

Ive never seen any of the films listed

 

[It's Damn Real!]

Ive never seen any of the films listed

The only two on the list I "saw" were Natural Born Killers and Hostel, and both were plenty disturbing enough that I can't even comprehend the idea of watching something more brutal than either of them. Both those films made it to theaters, so I can only imagine (not by choice) the depictions in films that were actually banned by countries like some of the others listed.

NBK actually has some cinematic value IMO, but the overt gore is still too much for me to stomach to the point I'd watch the unrated version of it.

Hostel was one of the biggest mistakes of my life. I avoid modern horror movies, and most horror in general, specifically because I have no desire to watch people get dismembered, but I literally gagged and spit up and refused to finish the rest of Hostel (friends put it on in college), so I left and spent the rest of the night trying to shake those images out of my head.

 

[Mighty NorCal]

I feel like if people come away speaking of the extremely graphic content above all else, it is unlikely the film is worth my time

 

[IrishCanadian25]

I had flashes of the images from Hostel for weeks, and it made me uncomfortable. I forget which scene now - but I was playing racquetball once and one of the scenes "just popped in there." It took me totally off my game because it depressed and bothered me. After a while, I didn't consider it entertainment.

I still haven't seen Hostel 2, though I did make a poor choice once by deciding to watch a scene from it, and it was just as bad, if not worse. I couldn't fathom watching stuff like Irreversable, Anti-Christ, etc. I had too vivid an imagination and just reading the Wikipedia entries on those films made my skin crawl.

 

[IrishCanadian25]

I feel like if people come away speaking of the extremely graphic content above all else, it is unlikely the film is worth my time

This is a very good point. It become gore for the sake of shock value, yet somehow people consider it "art."

 

[Serious Mozzarella]

Yes, you're right, but desensitization does take you down the path to the point you could conceivably never feel emotions (or empathy) over a certain situation. It's brainwashing, albeit self-inflicted. If you watch a man paint a red circle for 20 years, your reactions to seeing red circles painted will be unmeasurable. That's undeniable. The same goes for gore. It's why soldiers tend to be capable of stomaching gruesome battle and the sight of post-battle without vomiting, or why surgeons don't pass out after opening a man's chest for bypass surgery. The difference is, surgeons do this to save people's lives. Horror fans do it to push their own threshold of entertainment.

That's a slippery slope describing an extreme situation. If someone is watching enough gore to essentially be reduced to the type of sociopathy that you could expect from a vegetable, then there's a much bigger problem to explore.

What's not to get? I'm not referring to what I'll call "light violence" for the sake of this argument, like you see depicted in professional wrestling or action films. I know it's a grey area, but that kind of implied violence is cartoonish and intentionally so because it's not meant to be mistaken as real in any sense of the word. Yes, the line is blurred, intentionally no less, which is somewhat hypocritical on my part, but the line is still visible and determinable IMO, which separates it from implied overt or ultra violence, who's sole existence and purpose is to instill shock, to stir controversy and to blue the lines of your ability not to question whether or not what you just witnessed actually happened or not.

They're just not the same.

But the lines aren't even blurred when it comes to films and TV. Every film you have ever seen specifically says, "All characters appearing in this work are fictitious. Any resemblance to real persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental." So the violence you happen to agree with when it comes to professional wrestling is probably more hypocritical than you originally thought.

I mean, I don't understand the problem unless you're making the argument that people watching gore movies makes them want to go out and perform said violent acts. And we all know this isn't true.

 

[It's Damn Real!]

This is a very good point. It become gore for the sake of shock value, yet somehow people consider it "art."

I just don't understand why it's a necessity. I already stated in the Game of Thrones thread that implied violence is just as effective, if not more so than literal gore. Movies like Se7en were full of implied violence and after-the-fact depictions of torturous scenes, and IMO it worked to convey a better emotional response to the atrocities John Doe was committing than having to actually sit through that shit might have.

 

[Mighty NorCal]

This is a very good point. It become gore for the sake of shock value, yet somehow people consider it "art."

Same thing as spot monkeys and people who blade all the time. The content is fairly unecessary when part of anything that is half worth your time

 

[Mighty NorCal]

I just don't understand why it's a necessity. I already stated in the Game of Thrones thread that implied violence is just as effective, if not more so than literal gore. Movies like Se7en were full of implied violence and after-the-fact depictions of torturous scenes, and IMO it worked to convey a better emotional response to the atrocities John Doe was committing than having to actually sit through that shit might have.

Exactly, it isnt. Generally things like that are used to compensate for overall quality.

 

[It's Damn Real!]

That's a slippery slope describing an extreme situation. If someone is watching enough gore to essentially be reduced to the type of sociopathy that you could expect from a vegetable, then there's a much bigger problem to explore.

My point exactly. Not all sociopaths go on murderous rampages, nor do they need to in order to need help.

But the lines aren't even blurred when it comes to films and TV. Every film you have ever seen specifically says, "All characters appearing in this work are fictitious. Any resemblance to real persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental." So the violence you happen to agree with when it comes to professional wrestling is probably more hypocritical than you originally thought.

I mean, I don't understand the problem unless you're making the argument that people watching gore movies makes them want to go out and perform said violent acts. And we all know this isn't true.

No, every film released by a production house in the United States that's shown on screen in theaters says that, but I'm not really discussing those (necessarily). They're still disturbing, but far less than a number of the others being discussed in that thread that depict real scenes of animal torture/killing, as well as implied ultra violence.

What's not to understand? I thought I made my point perfectly clear by now — there is something wrong, mentally, with anyone who finds ultra violence entertaining. There is something wrong, mentally, with anyone who finds rape, decapitation, dismemberment, skinning, animal torture, and any and all other recorded acts of brutality entertaining. Period.

This is the type of behavior healthy societies try to extinguish from their ranks, not champion, which is why so many of those "films" were banned in multiple countries. Just from reading up on Cannibal Holocaust, the director was brought up on murder charges because they were so convinced that his film not only depicted real animals being abused, tortured and killed, but that the human scenes were real themselves. Only after he produced the original actors were they even dropped. Why would anyone want to see something that law enforcement officials actually believed was so real they were prepared to charge the director with murder? Why? What part of your brain says "Oh, this has gotta be fantastic to witness!"?

 

[justinsayne]

The whole "bad shit happens, and watching these films helps desensitize me to it" argument is just weak, yeah bad shit happens, the world is not all happy sunshine fun time and shit, but why on earth when I'm looking for an escape for all the horriable depressing shit going gn in the world today would I watch something filled with mindless gore, rape, torture, etc. something that is just going to remind me of all the horriable shit in the world? I want something that is going to take my mind off that something that will make me laugh or something where the hero comes out on top, something where I'm going to leave happy and full of hope, not something that is going to leave me feeling miserable and depressed. That said if someone else enjoys that kind of shit and finds is entertaining the so be it, as long as it doesn't lead to then killing puppies and raping children or anything I have no issue with them.

 

[The Doctor]

Different strokes for different folks. Some people like disturbing films, others don't. Can you really explain what entertains you? I love the anime Hellsing, my brother hates it because it's too violent for him. I hate horror films, others swear by them. Some people like rap music, I prefer Meat Loaf. Tastes differ, man.

 

[It's Damn Real!]

Different strokes for different folks. Some people like disturbing films, others don't. Can you really explain what entertains you? I love the anime Hellsing, my brother hates it because it's too violent for him. I hate horror films, others swear by them. Some people like rap music, I prefer Meat Loaf. Tastes differ, man.

If this is what you think the point of this thread is, you missed it entirely.

I suggest you go re-read everything I wrote. I'm not debating the fact that people like different things. There is no point in having such an aimless discussion as that. Of course people like different things.

I'm debating that people should enjoy watching recorded human dismemberment and depictions of barbarity, implied or not.

Please keep this on topic.

 

[Mighty NorCal]

Different strokes for different folks. Some people like disturbing films, others don't. Can you really explain what entertains you? I love the anime Hellsing, my brother hates it because it's too violent for him. I hate horror films, others swear by them. Some people like rap music, I prefer Meat Loaf. Tastes differ, man.

Doc, do you even posess the physical capability to say someone is wrong, and that what they do or like is fucking stupid?

Raping babies. Is wrong, and people who do it should fuck off and die. Yea?

 

[It's Damn Real!]

Doc, do you even posess the physical capability to say someone is wrong, and that what they do or like is fucking stupid?

Raping babies. Is wrong, and people who do it should fuck off and die. Yea?

I struggled with the idea of writing that people who champion ultra violence and acts of barbarism and torture should be shot for fear of being hit with Hitler's quote about healthy societies stopping at nothing to cleanse themselves of evil.

 

[The Doctor]

Well yeah, raping babies is wrong, but watching a fictional film full of violence doesn't make you insane. That's just stupid.

Well, unless you had issues already.

 

[It's Damn Real!]

Well shit dude, it's the exact same thing. Just because you don't enjoy or are entertained by acts of violence doesn't mean no one else should be. Just because someone is entertained by violence, it doesn't mean that they're insane. That's just stupid.

Again. Different strokes. Different folks.

Yes, it does, because acts of violence where that violence is overt and devoid of all humanity are wrong. Period.

What's stupid is the idea that it's OK for this type of thing to be acceptable in a modern society simply because you think it's the right of someone who enjoys it to view this type of thing.

So my neighbor likes watching snuff films where 6-year old girls are raped and then have their throats cut — it's OK for him to watch that, implied or not?

I'm sorry, Doc, but you are dead wrong on this.

 

[Mighty NorCal]

Well yeah, raping babies is wrong, but watching a fictional film full of violence doesn't make you insane. That's just stupid.

Well, unless you had issues already.

Direct me to were I claimed it makes people crazy?

 

[IrishCanadian25]

Great points the last 2 posts by IDR and NorCal. I want to bring up Texas Chainsaw Massacre. The original.

It's frequently discussed as one of the scariest films in movie history, but never as one of the goriest. Listen to the title - CHAINSAW MASSACRE. Oh, and Texas, which is a gory word in itself. But how much gore is there, really? Tobe Hooper was so masterful in that film because he allowed the audience the freedom to use their imagination, which often times is far scarier.

What were the goriest parts of that movie? The psyhco cuts his own hand and smears blood on a truck. The heronie is placed with her head over a bucket as a 110 year old man struggles to hold a mallet. The leatherfaced psycho falls and the chainsaw cuts his leg. Am I missing anything? It's not gore - its fear.

 

[It's Damn Real!]

Well yeah, raping babies is wrong, but watching a fictional film full of violence doesn't make you insane. That's just stupid.

Well, unless you had issues already.

Again, you fail to understand the point.

No one said it makes you insane. READ what I wrote. I'm not going to type the same things twice. If you continue to blatantly ignore what I am saying, I'm not going to bother wasting my time responding to your responses here.

I said it is inhuman to enjoy these things. I said there is something wrong, mentally, with anyone who enjoys these things. That is not the same as saying they are "insane". Insanity is a generalized term that's too often used to describe people who are "crazy". I'm not so obtuse as to generalize anyone who enjoys sociopathic content as just "crazy", but I wouldn't disagree that they themselves are in a sense sociopathic for enjoying it.

 

[Serious Mozzarella]

My point exactly. Not all sociopaths go on murderous rampages, nor do they need to in order to need help.

I think the point that I'm trying to say is that watching a movie doesn't make you a sociopath. At all. By your logic or mine.

What's not to understand? I thought I made my point perfectly clear by now — there is something wrong, mentally, with anyone who finds ultra violence entertaining. There is something wrong, mentally, with anyone who finds rape, decapitation, dismemberment, skinning, animal torture, and any and all other recorded acts of brutality entertaining. Period.

Except... you're wrong. And you've missed the mark by about a mile.

People enjoy movies that can get a reaction out of them, whether it makes them laugh, cry, make them anxious. Shocking and grossing them out is absolutely no different. They know it's fake, and they can appreciate when something (fictitious) can have the same effect. That doesn't mean they have mental problems. The fact that these movies even have an effect in fact proves that they don't have mental problems.

The trainwreck effect also comes into play here.

This is the type of behavior healthy societies try to extinguish from their ranks, not champion, which is why so many of those "films" were banned in multiple countries. Just from reading up on Cannibal Holocaust, the director was brought up on murder charges because they were so convinced that his film not only depicted real animals being abused, tortured and killed, but that the human scenes were real themselves. Only after he produced the original actors were they even dropped. Why would anyone want to see something that law enforcement officials actually believed was so real they were prepared to charge the director with murder? Why? What part of your brain says "Oh, this has gotta be fantastic to witness!"?

A hugely ignorant, most likely politically based arrest and hearing doesn't really give your argument any water. Anybody reading that would be like, "Seriously? That court was fucking stupid," rather than actually believing that someone tried to release a snuff film.

It's silly to even bring it up. There's no reason why anyone should have believed that they were watching a snuff film.

 

[Serious Mozzarella]

So my neighbor likes watching snuff films where 6-year old girls are raped and then have their throats cut — it's OK for him to watch that, implied or not?

Did you just compare violent movies with snuff-rape-child porn?

 

[Mighty NorCal]

Great points the last 2 posts by IDR and NorCal. I want to bring up Texas Chainsaw Massacre. The original.

It's frequently discussed as one of the scariest films in movie history, but never as one of the goriest. Listen to the title - CHAINSAW MASSACRE. Oh, and Texas, which is a gory word in itself. But how much gore is there, really? Tobe Hooper was so masterful in that film because he allowed the audience the freedom to use their imagination, which often times is far scarier.

What were the goriest parts of that movie? The psyhco cuts his own hand and smears blood on a truck. The heronie is placed with her head over a bucket as a 110 year old man struggles to hold a mallet. The leatherfaced psycho falls and the chainsaw cuts his leg. Am I missing anything? It's not gore - its fear.

Chuckie was outrageously scary when it came out, hardly a drop of blood spilled.


I dont think anyone has ever called this shit scary, moreso disturbing.