Thirith on 5/2/2007 at 18:21
I agree with your reading of the scenes in A History of Violence, and in a similar thread on a different message board I mentioned the gore in The Fly. As far as I'm concerned, it serves a purpose beyond titillating the audience. That's what I don't get - why some people find sadistic violence in movies titillating. There's contextualised violence (e.g. in AHoV), and there's grotesque cruelty that seems to be an end in itself, designed for the audience to be enjoyed. That's what I'm trying to understand.
doctorfrog on 5/2/2007 at 19:10
I think part of the fear and fascination in gore movies is the realization that the body is meat. Living in this body, I get used to the idea that I'm this contiguous whole, a complete entity, something that transcends the mechanical functions of my parts. I may have the scientific knowledge that I'm a bunch of interdependent cells stuck together, that there are lots of quite vital things inside of me that are very easily damaged, but I never really realize it.
The horror lies in the moment of realization that something inside you that you depend on to survive, something you've never even seen before, is now sitting in your shaking hands as you stagger down the block.
Hrm, that's not a very satisfying analysis. Little help, anyone, who knows what I'm talking about?
OnionBob on 5/2/2007 at 19:22
Quote Posted by doctorfrog
I think part of the fear and fascination in gore movies is the realization that the body is meat. Living in this body, I get used to the idea that I'm this contiguous whole, a complete entity, something that transcends the mechanical functions of my parts. I may have the scientific knowledge that I'm a bunch of interdependent cells stuck together, that there are lots of quite vital things inside of me that are very easily damaged, but I never really
realize it.
The horror lies in the moment of realization that something inside you that you depend on to survive, something you've never even
seen before, is now sitting in your shaking hands as you stagger down the block.
Hrm, that's not a very satisfying analysis. Little help, anyone, who knows what I'm talking about?
I believe there's a school of thought that posits body horror as exploiting a fear of the penetration of bodily boundaries. (I can't name any specific critics offhand because I haven't really looked at this). I presume this is linked to subjectivity like you mentioned, IE a person thinks that he is a solid whole objective being, and being faced with more permeable or ruptured physical boundaries plays on fears of the potential dissolution of the self. I don't know where this kind of theory comes from but it probably comes from Julia Kristeva's work on the abject (see
Powers of Horror).
actually that is very vague :L not very satisfying either, sorry
Vivian on 5/2/2007 at 19:48
Quote Posted by Kolya
stuff
The intended impression wasn't too hard to grasp in either the normo sex scene or the rape-o one, but much as I enjoyed a lot of the film I still think the first one was just uncomfortable. It's just that bit where hes going down on her and he has such a stupid aragorn expression on it just looks like he's biting a large and very plain sandwich. I know he was supposed to be a bit of blank slate because he's ex-violence and living a lie all that schtick, but it really was like watching a pair of golems. Too much of the awkward lobotomy patient look Cronenberg seems to demand from his leads.
It was really nice to see Wagner finally get a film that didn't piss all over his work though, hooray! Now wheres that Dredd film hes been talking about.
Gestalt on 5/2/2007 at 19:56
Horror films are generally intended to stimulate emotions that are seen as unpleasant in other contexts. Fear is obviously one of them, but disgust is usually involved as well, both in moral and physical terms. Gore isn't so much frightening as it is disgusting, and as such provides a way to keep an audience uncomfortable while evoking a more varied range of emotions.
I'd argue that labelling things like Hostel as horror movies is sort of a mischaracterization. It might be more accurate to call them disgust movies or something like that, if the filmmaker's intent is to invoke revulsion more than fear.
Naartjie on 5/2/2007 at 22:53
Quote Posted by OnionBob
I believe there's a school of thought that posits body horror as exploiting a fear of the penetration of bodily boundaries. (I can't name any specific critics offhand because I haven't really looked at this). I presume this is linked to subjectivity like you mentioned, IE a person thinks that he is a solid whole objective being, and being faced with more permeable or ruptured physical boundaries plays on fears of the potential dissolution of the self. I don't know where this kind of theory comes from but it probably comes from Julia Kristeva's work on the abject (see
Powers of Horror).
actually that is very vague :L not very satisfying either, sorry
On the contrary, it's both satisfying and inspiring: I just finished a module at uni in medieval history which was on a very similar theme to this, namely that blood and bodily fluids held a special anxious fascination for medieval people because its appearance was usually in conjunction with the penetration or compromise of the integral physical body. This in part explains why women were given such a raw deal throughout the Middle Ages, because the celibate male scholar types who wrote treatises about biology and sexuality simply couldn't comprehend the idea of a [female] body which experienced menstruation or leaked breastmilk, and whose bodies, during sex, were penetrated, as being anything other than frightening and dangerous. No need to say what they thought of men who allowed their bodies to be sexually penetrated either. And if you look at
female writers in the medieval period (there are few) writing about sexuality and matters of spirituality, the fact that womens' bodies leaked either blood or milk is seen as the total opposite, and is celebrated as being something positive that allowed women closer contact to God.
:D
doctorfrog on 5/2/2007 at 23:44
I seem to also remember lepers as having an almost holy aura about them in medieval or enlightenment England. This was related to them being at death's door, having bodies that showed evidence of death, yet they were still alive, aware, (somewhat) functioning. The rotten flesh was falling away from an impermeable, immortal soul. They were at an intermediate step between life and death, caught in the middle of the doorway. The body rots, but the spirit still inhabits it. It's the belief in the incorruptable soul inside that turns the disease into something at least a little less terrifying. Modern skepticism and disbelief in the soul, and the idea that consciousness is tied to the body, invert this, turning the reaction into horrified realization. (I still think the horror depends on the myth we tell ourselves without saying, that there is more to us than a collection of parts, something that turns out to be dead wrong in gore movies. Perhaps gore movies wouldn't bother Buddhists as much.)
I can't be sure, since it is a side note in a class focused more on comedy and farce, but this would also be a good source for modern day zombie horror. 'Cept zombies don't have souls... hrm.
Scots Taffer on 5/2/2007 at 23:58
I had a similar reaction to Thirith regarding Saw III when I watched the (
http://www.ttlg.com/forums/showthread.php?t=72420) Ichi The Killer trailer a couple of years back. I still feel the same regarding that movie, Japanese culture or not, it is utterly unnecessary and there are far more insidious and ingenious ways of freaking out the human mind than an overload of realistic or disturbing viscera. Cases in point: Jacob's Ladder (it does contain gore, but used in sparing, effective bursts), Ringu, Fire Walk With Me, and others.
That course sounds
really interesting, Naartjie.
Vasquez on 6/2/2007 at 08:01
I think extreme violence has the same fascination as other forbidden things, and it plays with the taboo of human body. Watching it sliced up like a slab of meat causes the train wreck effect - you want to look away, but at the same time you really want to watch. Beyond the initial, visual disgust I believe it also pokes straight into the subconscious and stirs us really, really deep in ways that maybe can't even be described in everyday language.
Extreme violence also has elements of fantasy, because it's so over the top. In that way I personally find it almost easier to watch than action-movie "boss fights", where two guys beat the crap out of each other (and in reality would both be long dead :rolleyes: )
I also think that to Joe Average, 14 years, the basic action films might be more harmful, because it's much, much easier to take that He's wrong and I'm right, so I'll teach him a bit with my fists -attitude to real world than sawing bits off other people...
We are different in other ways, too, so I assume there are people who genuinely enjoy that deep kick they get from gory horror, and others who don't have that need at all.
However, I think the "healthy" way to watch that stuff is empathic, sort of imagining yourself as the victim. What worries me are the people who exitedly cheer the killer, "Yeah! Cut him to pieces! Pull out his insides and skin him!"
Gestalt on 6/2/2007 at 08:54
Quote Posted by "Scots_Taffer"
I still feel the same regarding that movie, Japanese culture or not, it is utterly unnecessary and there are far more insidious and ingenious ways of freaking out the human mind than an overload of realistic or disturbing viscera.
I don't think
efficiency or whatever is a good argument here, since it's pretty obvious that the guy behind Ichi the Killer wanted to make a very different movie than Jacob's Ladder. They're both theoretically in the same genre, but that doesn't mean they're intended to have the same effect on the audience. You can't reduce the inclusion of grotesque over-the-top violence to a failed attempt to produce the more subtle kind of horror seen in Jacob's Ladder, the whole point seems to be throwing subtlety and any sense of restraint or good taste to the side.
