|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
76.99.186.92
In Reply to: RE: How do you feel about "Psycho?" "The Shining?" There is a place, to my posted by tinear on March 09, 2010 at 21:50:15
I don't know if you see any difference between the horror films and sadistic crap, but I do. In my view Haneke is crap.
I indirectly asked you before, let me ask again - would you read more than a few paragraphs of "120 Days of Sodom"? After all, we all have some dark sides... don't we?
Do you draw the line somewhere? Anywhere? After all, there is a story on anything.
But we are talking about an art form here. And in many case the more direct it is, the less art is there.
Follow Ups:
on screen, it was psychological. There were fewer deaths than in "Psycho!"
Now, your turn to answer my question. Of the ones I listed, which do you feel are not artistically defensible? The Polanski ones? Hitchcock?
"Cache," btw, has (again) psychological violence more than explicit, which is Haneke's modus.
I really can't think now of any movie where the sadistic violence was needed for anything other than shock effect. As I get older I have less and less desire to see horror, but that is me, I am not forcing this on anyone. If someone wants to see horror, let's be it. However, creating horror and showing sadistic acts is most definitely not the same thing. Some of my most horrific experiences came from the scenes with no blood, no violence - like the open door shot in M.
Using gratuitous depiction of acts of violence (and they are ALL gratuitous), is simply pandering to the lowest common denominator, to idiots whose low intellectual development prevents them from understanding any more subtle language.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: