[QUOTE=Bosstrain]
Of course, on another level, I don’t care as much about people being tortured in real life as I do animals, an animal doesn’t understand, but a person does, so it doesn’t seem as bad.
[/QUOTE]
A person being tortured seems less bad than an animal being tortured, because the person understands it and the animal doesn’t? I think you have that all backwards.
[QUOTE=Bosstrain]
I know what it feels like to be tortured, physically and psychologically, and I also know what it’s like to be the torturer.
[/QUOTE]
You do? I don’t want to pry, but…you’re the one who brought it up, and that’s a pretty dramatic statement to make. What do you mean?
Okay, maybe I was slightly dramatic and didn’t explain entirely when I said I’ve been a torturer…
To save face and not freak anyone out, I’ve only tortured animals :o. No longer, of course, especially after I got what I dished out, which goes back to me saying that once it’s happened to you, you never ever do it again nor wish to see it or have it happen to anyone. I’m ashamed of some of the things I used to do and have tried to make it right (or at least make myself feel better for doing it, which only goes so far).
Argent Towers, there are some very cruel people in this world, let’s just say, if you knew what I knew, you’d never look at your neighbors in the same way again. I, for one, do not give my trust blindly anymore, if someone says they’re your friend, give them a knife and turn around. If you don’t have to later pull that knife out of your back, then that person may very well be your friend…(metaphorically of course, but some people this could be literal :D).
I don’t have any particular beef with these movies, or the people who watch them. I don’t really get it, but then I don’t understand why people like AC/DC, and I manage that ok.
Personally I don’t watch them because they gross me out, or scare me, or make me cry. I have a few friends who like them, so I’ve seen a few. And, weirdly I guess, I thought The Human Centipede sounded hysterically bad and sought it out, so I’ve seen it too. (In my opinion it wasn’t scary at all, not was it even very gross. It was mostly stupid).
Mostly when I see that stuff, I get too involved and empathetic with the victim and I can’t take it. But then, I get really immersed in stuff easily.
I do think there should be a name for these type of movies, since they do have a different “feel” than most other horror films, but I think “torture porn” poisons the well.
I vaguely liked the way the storylines in the Saw series were intertwined. The storylines themselves, however, were contrived and gratuitous.
Plus I was always hoping the character being “gamed” would recognize some of the more obvious ways to defeat the ridiculously Rube Goldbergian traps. I mean, geez, the place is always littered with debris - pick up a discarded length of lead pipe and put it good use, doofus.
IMHO what’s called “torture porn” is just horror movies, or a subgenre of same. I think the term is an ingenious way that horror fans have of differentiating their stuff from Hostel, Saw, etc., which are tremendously unpopular with most folks. “What WE like is horror … that’s just torture porn! Our stuff may be scary but it’s not NASTY like that bad ol’ torture porn!”
Not buying it for a minute. The point of “Wolf Creek” and “Hostel 2” are both pretty much the same.
I have no interest in seeing the likes of either Saw or 24, but I think the latter is unambiguously worse. Yeah, Saw has a lot of gore, but it’s made perfectly clear that the person responsible for the gore is a villain. In something like 24, though, when a despicable villain is lauded as a hero, it twists peoples’ expectations, and contributes to an attitude that torture is acceptable in real life. All of those hypotheticals you hear about “what if you had to torture someone to save millions of lives?” are pure fictions, and can’t be anything but pure fictions, but entertainment like 24 deludes people otherwise, which is part of what leads to real torture in the real world.
I like horror movies and I watch quite a lot of them. I’ve watched several of the Saw series (which is a lot tamer and more mainstream than people here seem to believe… the original “Funny Games”, without a single drop of blood on camera, was a trillion times more twisted) and several other instances of the “Victims are captured and somehow hurt before being eventually killed” genre. The “I spit on your grave” remake. “The collector”, that was a particularly gruesome one.
And here’s the thing: it’s not titillation. I don’t watch zombie movies because I get a jolt of watching people getting their brains eaten. It’s the same adrenaline shot of watching people in danger every action - horror movie has ever produced.
Common misconception. Outside Spielberg-ish kiddie oriented flicks like “Independence Day”, in horror movies the pet always gets it. Every single time. I know because I love my pets and it cheeses me out when that happens.
Same here. I wonder if this is the key to understanding people who like torture porn. Do they lack the ability to empathize with the victim? Do they find themselves identifying with the tormentor?
You are looking at this the wrong way: is people watching a soap opera where the main character suffers horribly and constantly due to all the amnesia, conspiracies and secret twin siblings enjoying the character’s suffering and identifying with the villains?
Well obviously, I enjoy torture porn because it’s too risky for me to keep tapes of myself torturing and killing various people and animals. It’s extremely important for us psychopaths to maintain a facade of normalcy in order to get away with destroying people’s minds, bodies, and spirits. :rolleyes:
Here’s hoping that certain members here didn’t add bed-wetting and arson to their torture of animals, as those are considered common warning signs of dangerous psychopathy…
Seriously, I think that the extreme, prolonged torture scenes are being used more because it’s damned difficult to make anyone uneasy with a horror movie, and while atmosphere and tension are, in my opinion, far superior to create a feeling of dread in a viewer, extreme violence chooses the Dark Side as a means to shock and disgust the viewer. The goal of making the viewer uneasy is achieved, but it’s kind of like using “jump scares”; it’s a quick and easy route to a reaction. That being said, I have enjoyed some movies that some would consider torture porn but to me seem to actually have a point to the violence, such as the French film Martyrs. Even the original Saw had a point, of sorts; learn to appreciate life fully, don’t take it for granted because so much can be taken away so arbitrarily. Then there are films like Scrapbook, which seem to exist solely for the sake of trying to outdo every other film in depictions of torture. So I would consider Scrapbook to be “true” torture porn, if anything.
You are stretching a bit here. **Silence of the Lambs **had no images of the person actually being tortured, nor did Seven. You saw the aftermath and the viewers imagination filled in the blanks. And while there is a lot of violence within these films, they weren’t about the violence. They were about something else, and the violence was a backdrop.
Neither of these were even in the horror genre. Dramatic, suspenseful, disturbing, youbetcha, but horror? Not really.
And Frenzy…well, that one just blew.
Again, I make no real moral judgments about the TP films. It’s just not what I prefer. They are very much like porn in that no one cares what is happening between what it is supposed to deliver. A good amount of the target audience would prefer to fast forward between the not-so-violent segments, or use them to visit the bathroom or concession stands. Torture porn is the slasher flick taken to a gory extreme I do not really want to see.
I am not at all opposed to violence on screen or porn for porn’s sake. But I don’t like my porn violent, and there is some porn that is just too icky for me to watch.
I don’t know about that. I really don’t think that is common at all. At least not in the torture porn type films, which is what this thread is about. I know there’s Funny Games (which I hated. Pretentious piece of shit movie) but I can’t think of any others at the moment.
I have no problem with the term “torture porn” by the way. The **Hostel **movies, the **Saw **franchise, etc. Sure, there’s a suspense plot, usually with a twist at the end, but the reason those films exist is to see people killed in bizarre Rube Goldberg type devices. It’s the same as with the “slasher” genre. Yeah, there are some good ones, but primarily those are about watching some serial killer cutting down a group of youths. It’s just another sub-genre of the horror film.
I think A Serbian Film however might *literally *be torture porn.
I don’t remember any animals in the original FG, but I do remember a horrifying scene with a cat in “The Collector”, and a countless death toll of pets in any other horror movie. For instance, I watched the first episode of “American Horror” and the family there had a small dog. You just know the poor bugger isn’t breathing for more than one or two episodes.
Those who think torture porn is evil: many people maintain that sexual porn reduces the incidence of RL rape and violence toward women, at least, there is some indication that in societies where porn is prevalent, rape and violence toward women seems to be lesser, according to some studies. (Cite.)
So, isn’t it possible that access to torture porn might decrease actual torture? Or do you think a different mechanism might be involved? Or do you doubt the porn/rape studies?
The article cited in my previous post also cites studies of the effect of violent movies on violent crime:
Hmmm. Intriguing. Come to think of it, I’d rather rob you than sit through Wallace & Gromit. But then, there are a LOT of things I’d rather do than sit through Wallace & Gromit.
