Warning: This article contains details of the plot of the movie, and some explicit descriptions.
Last year's The Human Centipede was mad, bad and really quite grotesque. But this year's sequel, imaginatively called The Human Centipede II, has been rejected by the British Board of Film Classification on the basis that it is "sexually violent and potentially obscene". This means that the DVD cannot be legally supplied anywhere in the UK.
The original film was released, uncut, as an 18 last year. This one, however, apparently has "unacceptable material" throughout which cannot be remedied with cuts. The filmmakers have six weeks in which to appeal against the decision.
It's worth noting, before we get all up in arms, that this is a relatively rare decision for the BBFC, who outlined their reasons at some length and stressed that the full Board was in on this one. The full reasoning is below - but if you're of a sensitive disposition even this may be rather unpleasant.
"The first film dealt with a mad doctor who sews together three kidnapped people in order to produce the ‘human centipede’of the title. Although the concept of the film was undoubtedly tasteless and disgusting it was a relatively traditional and conventional horror film and the Board concluded that it was not in breach of our Guidelines at ‘18’. This new work, The Human Centipede II (Full Sequence), tells the story of a man who becomes sexually obsessed with a DVD recording of the first film and who imagines putting the ‘centipede’ idea into practice. Unlike the first film, the sequel presents graphic images of sexual violence, forced defecation, and mutilation, and the viewer is invited to witness events from the perspective of the protagonist. Whereas in the first film the ‘centipede’ idea is presented as a revolting medical experiment, with the focus on whether the victims will be able to escape, this sequel presents the ‘centipede’ idea as the object of the protagonist’s depraved sexual fantasy.
The principal focus of The Human Centipede II (Full Sequence) is the sexual arousal of the central character at both the idea and the spectacle of the total degradation, humiliation, mutilation, torture, and murder of his naked victims. Examples of this include a scene early in the film in which he **********s whilst he watches a DVD of the original Human Centipede film, with sandpaper wrapped around his penis, and a sequence later in the film in which he becomes aroused at the sight of the members of the ‘centipede’ being forced to defecate into one another’s mouths, culminating in sight of the man wrapping barbed wire around his penis and raping the woman at the rear of the ‘centipede’. There is little attempt to portray any of the victims in the film as anything other than objects to be brutalised, degraded and mutilated for the amusement and arousal of the central character, as well as for the pleasure of the audience. There is a strong focus throughout on the link between sexual arousal and sexual violence and a clear association between pain, perversity and sexual pleasure. It is the Board’s conclusion that the explicit presentation of the central character’s obsessive sexually violent fantasies is in breach of its Classification Guidelines and poses a real, as opposed to a fanciful, risk that harm is likely to be caused to potential viewers.
David Cooke, Director of the BBFC said: “It is the Board's carefully considered view that to issue a certificate to this work, even if confined to adults, would be inconsistent with the Board's Guidelines, would risk potential harm within the terms of the VRA, and would be unacceptable to the public.
“The Board also seeks to avoid classifying material that may be in breach of the Obscene Publications Acts 1959 and 1964 (OPA) or any other relevant legislation. The OPA prohibits the publication of works that have a tendency to deprave or corrupt a significant proportion of those likely to see them. In order to avoid classifying potentially obscene material, the Board engages in regular discussions with the relevant enforcement agencies, including the CPS, the police, and the Ministry of Justice. It is the Board’s view that there is a genuine risk that this video work, The Human Centipede II (Full Sequence), may be considered obscene within the terms of the OPA, for the reasons given above."
Basically, I don't really mind if it is banned or if the appeal is successful because I have no incentive to watch it. In my opinion, it's just an attempt at being shocking and gruesome for the sake of hype, attention and money. I mean, reading that article and hearing some of the things they've put into the film are just laughable and ridiculous.
I can fully understand why it has been banned, though I'm not really bothered.
Thoughts?
Thread opened by Infectious (Forum Super Moderator): Thread re-opened after cool down period.
06-06-2011, 08:58 PM
lawrawrrr
I think I just vomited.
This film is gonna be more messed up than the first... I doubt they'll appeal... they'd have to practically reshoot it all ;l
06-06-2011, 09:08 PM
Misawa
No film should ever be banned. If you're 18+ you should be able to see whatever you want. The BBFC are backward and we need a ratings system like the US where films don't need ratings to be distributed.
06-06-2011, 09:23 PM
Recursion
It's like Clockwork Orange, it'll be banned but people will still watch it, not really a huge deal.
06-06-2011, 09:29 PM
Eoin247
It sounds like a discusting film, made me feel kinda sick reading the plot to this movie. But i agree with Misawa. No film should be banned. You should be able to watch whatever you want once your 18.
06-06-2011, 09:36 PM
Misawa
Quote:
Originally Posted by Recursion
It's like Clockwork Orange, it'll be banned but people will still watch it, not really a huge deal.
Essentially no one saw A Clockwork Orange in the UK when it was banned. It wasn't like today when an uncut bootleg will end up on the internet.
06-06-2011, 09:45 PM
Judas
i agree films shouldn't be banned ever, at the end of the day it is art that someone has put time into and i'm sure the viewer would know what they are in for if they are buying a copy. but in this particular instance, i don't really give a ****
06-06-2011, 10:04 PM
Inseriousity.
I don't really care for the same reason. I won't watch it, those who want to watch it will go out of their way to try and get it so no harm done. Personally, I think it sounds like a disgusting film but to each their own.
06-06-2011, 10:20 PM
peteyt
As a horror fan I still haven't seen the original but this sounds a bit WTF.
Some films shock but have a story and then some films just want to shock. I prefer classic stuff which actually has a story.
06-06-2011, 10:24 PM
Jay.
sandpaper and barbed wire. THE **.
06-06-2011, 11:03 PM
GommeInc
I wouldn't watch it but I can see the point behind banning it if the Obscene Publications Act has come into play here. It's not a film to be enjoyed, more a film to be sick during. 18 is the limit they can go to, if a film goes beyond the guidelines of an 18 then it's definitely not good for viewers :P
06-06-2011, 11:43 PM
Judas
Quote:
Originally Posted by peteyt
As a horror fan I still haven't seen the original but this sounds a bit WTF.
Some films shock but have a story and then some films just want to shock. I prefer classic stuff which actually has a story.
oh, of course. but the human centipede is just about trying to be as obscene, disgusting and shocking as possible. that's why i feel like it isn't worth my time or money lol
06-06-2011, 11:51 PM
Neversoft
I have mixed opinions on the BBFC. I can understand why they cut some things, but others I just have to sit and ponder. They cut five seconds from The Good, The Bad, The Weird because it showed a horse falling over.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Recursion
It's like Clockwork Orange, it'll be banned but people will still watch it, not really a huge deal.
Kubrick withdrew A Clockwork Orange himself. It wasn't widely seen in the UK until after his death.
07-06-2011, 12:10 AM
peteyt
Quote:
Originally Posted by Judas.
oh, of course. but the human centipede is just about trying to be as obscene, disgusting and shocking as possible. that's why i feel like it isn't worth my time or money lol
Thus why I'm not keen on it. I always compare today's horror to the original Halloween no blood yet still loved by many today
07-06-2011, 12:53 AM
GirlNextDoor15
This film is really disgusting. However, it should not be banned because it's not likely that the people will not watch it although it is banned. They can still watch it on websites or in short, internet.
07-06-2011, 01:28 AM
peteyt
The problem is that some films benefit from having their films banned with lots of people trying to get hold of it. Although sometimes it can backfire as they end up downloading it.
It was different before the digital era of today obviously. For example Cannibal Holocaust, which was deemed a video nasty and I believe still can't be legally bought fully uncut, definitely benefited. The director had to actually go to court with his actors to prove they where still alive. But this I believe just made more people want to see the film.
A film I've never seen called Snuff tried to use this to their advantage. The film was originally called Slaughter and a distributor actually added a new scene to the end of the film and then changed the name, the new scene showing the apparent film crew for Slaughter killing a women. When the film was released the new distributor actually hired people to protest outside the cinema as a way to entice people to come and see it and people actually ended up protesting for real.
Sounds interesting but the film itself does sound and apparently is crap.
07-06-2011, 09:02 AM
Judas
Quote:
Originally Posted by peteyt
Thus why I'm not keen on it. I always compare today's horror to the original Halloween no blood yet still loved by many today
yeah loads of gore etc does nothing for me personally.
07-06-2011, 09:14 AM
RockyHorror
They couldn't of planned it better, being banned in such a notable country will only propel people to find a way to watch it.
07-06-2011, 01:00 PM
peteyt
It just makes me laugh how people think over the top gore makes a film
07-06-2011, 03:33 PM
Misawa
Quote:
Originally Posted by RockyHorror
They couldn't of planned it better, being banned in such a notable country will only propel people to find a way to watch it.
It's no publicity stunt. Being censored in a country is not what a film-maker wants.
07-06-2011, 03:47 PM
Judas
i still can't even get my head round this foolishness...
******* with sand paper?
really?
oh, it gets better. apparently this is art.
Quote:
Thank you BBFC for putting spoilers of my movie on your website and thank you for banning my film in this exceptional way. Apparently I made an horrific horror-film, but shouldn't a good horror film be horrific? My dear people it is a ******* MOVIE."
Quote:
It is all fictional. Not real. It is all make-belief. It is art. Give people their own choice to watch it or not. If people can't handle or like my movies they just don't watch them. If people like my movies they have to be able to see it any time, anywhere also in the UK.
I agree with him to a certain extent, but did he really think he could put that kind of thing in his movie and it would be a smooth ride?
07-06-2011, 03:58 PM
Misawa
Like he said: it's a movie.
I've met Tom Six and he's a nice guy. No film, no matter what, deserves to be censored.
07-06-2011, 04:02 PM
Judas
Quote:
Originally Posted by Misawa
Like he said: it's a movie.
I've met Tom Six and he's a nice guy. No film, no matter what, deserves to be censored.
and i agree. but really, what did he expect... the way he acts so surprised lmao.
i guess this is what happens when you promise to make "the sickest movie of all time" :rolleyes:
07-06-2011, 04:07 PM
Misawa
You set out to make the movie you want to make. I'm not sure what he was expecting, but the first was passed uncut if that's any indication.
07-06-2011, 04:13 PM
AgnesIO
Quote:
Originally Posted by Misawa
Essentially no one saw A Clockwork Orange in the UK when it was banned. It wasn't like today when an uncut bootleg will end up on the internet.
can you not just torrent it?
07-06-2011, 04:15 PM
Judas
no, he set out to make a movie that will disgust and shock because things like that get hype and attention.
i'm sorry but the BBFC have guidelines that i'm sure he is aware of. whether we agree with the guidelines or not (i personally don't), he still chose to make a movie that breaches those guidelines so he has no right to act surprised or pissed off that it has been banned, because that's what happens. why would they make an exception for him?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marketing
can you not just torrent it?
yes you will be able to do that anyway so everyone will see it regardless lol
07-06-2011, 04:25 PM
Misawa
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marketing
can you not just torrent it?
I've no intention of doing that. I never have and never will for any film.
However, the censorship will result in those who can't see it using the internet to illegally download it, unless Six compromises and makes cuts. That's just bad business.
Six shot the film in London but he didn't make it to meet guidelines. Why would he shoot a film in a way that ensured the BBFC would approve? He's got the US market to consider where he can release a film unrated if he so chooses.
As you said, his film will shock and repulse people. We're talking about a genre called 'horror' here. If it horrifies people he has done his job. Horror movies aren't all about suspense, tension and masterful scares. Whether people like it or not, ridiculous amounts of anatomically-correct gore and violence are very much a part of the genre and are one of the market's biggest selling points. Do you know how many times distributors have asked to put my words (when describing the violent content) on the front cover of DVDs? I've even had one that merely said "Very bloody" and it was for a film that I detested.
07-06-2011, 04:27 PM
peteyt
I need to watch the first one before I can say much which I intend to do soon. But if the second film is just gore gore gore without a story then I'm not surprised.
07-06-2011, 04:29 PM
AgnesIO
Quote:
Originally Posted by Misawa
I've no intention of doing that. I never have and never will for any film.
However, the censorship will result in those who can't see it using the internet to illegally download it, unless Six compromises and makes cuts. That's just bad business.
Six shot the film in London but he didn't make it to meet guidelines. Why would he shoot a film in a way that ensured the BBFC would approve? He's got the US market to consider where he can release a film unrated if he so chooses.
As you said, his film will shock and repulse people. We're talking about a genre called 'horror' here. If it horrifies people he has done his job. Horror movies aren't all about suspense, tension and masterful scares. Whether people like it or not, ridiculous amounts of anatomically-correct gore and violence are very much a part of the genre and are one of the market's biggest selling points. Do you know how many times distributors have asked to put my words (when describing the violent content) on the front cover of DVDs? I've even had one that merely said "Very bloody" and it was for a film that I detested.
If you can't buy it in your country, unless you buy it in a different country, then torrenting it is what you have to do..
07-06-2011, 04:33 PM
Misawa
I will just import it. It may be illegal to possess but as long as I'm paying.
07-06-2011, 04:37 PM
peteyt
Quote:
Originally Posted by Misawa
I've no intention of doing that. I never have and never will for any film.
However, the censorship will result in those who can't see it using the internet to illegally download it, unless Six compromises and makes cuts. That's just bad business.
Six shot the film in London but he didn't make it to meet guidelines. Why would he shoot a film in a way that ensured the BBFC would approve? He's got the US market to consider where he can release a film unrated if he so chooses.
As you said, his film will shock and repulse people. We're talking about a genre called 'horror' here. If it horrifies people he has done his job. Horror movies aren't all about suspense, tension and masterful scares. Whether people like it or not, ridiculous amounts of anatomically-correct gore and violence are very much a part of the genre and are one of the market's biggest selling points. Do you know how many times distributors have asked to put my words (when describing the violent content) on the front cover of DVDs? I've even had one that merely said "Very bloody" and it was for a film that I detested.
And that is the problem with today's horror. Directors just tend to have murder after murder, torture after torture etc. I miss the films that actually had some meaning, a purpose other than just wanting to make people vomit.
07-06-2011, 04:38 PM
Judas
Quote:
Originally Posted by Misawa
Six shot the film in London but he didn't make it to meet guidelines. Why would he shoot a film in a way that ensured the BBFC would approve? He's got the US market to consider where he can release a film unrated if he so chooses.
As you said, his film will shock and repulse people. We're talking about a genre called 'horror' here. If it horrifies people he has done his job. Horror movies aren't all about suspense, tension and masterful scares. Whether people like it or not, ridiculous amounts of anatomically-correct gore and violence are very much a part of the genre and are one of the market's biggest selling points. Do you know how many times distributors have asked to put my words (when describing the violent content) on the front cover of DVDs? I've even had one that merely said "Very bloody" and it was for a film that I detested.
i didn't suggest he made it to meet guidelines. i don't care what market he's looking at, but he KNOWS the guidelines given by the BBFC, so why is he throwing a hissy fit when he has breached them? if he only made the film with the US market in mind, then why would he be angry at the BBFC?
and yes i am aware of the concept of a horror movie, i just said i don't like gore, didn't say it shouldn't exist lol, it's just my opinion.
but my point still stands that if he wanted a UK release so bad, then he should've played by the rules. and if he just wanted to make the movie he wanted, then he wouldn't be so wound up about this.
07-06-2011, 04:48 PM
Misawa
Quote:
Originally Posted by peteyt
And that is the problem with today's horror. Directors just tend to have murder after murder, torture after torture etc. I miss the films that actually had some meaning, a purpose other than just wanting to make people vomit.
I have no problem with gore movies. They are what they are and aren't exactly new to the genre.
07-06-2011, 08:55 PM
peteyt
Quote:
Originally Posted by Misawa
I have no problem with gore movies. They are what they are and aren't exactly new to the genre.
But appear to lack a script. Too many directors are going down the same route of complete gore, no actual purpose, style, script. It's just gore, gore, gore.
The problem is new horror directors don't want to make an actual film, they just want to make a sickfest. They don't care about anything but topping the last film. Is it just a coincidence that Serbian Film was like the most cut film in 20 years and then this happens, as if the director is like I can be even sicker.
07-06-2011, 09:46 PM
Janet Snakehole
sounds so disgusting but because of that, I know it's a must see...
07-06-2011, 11:44 PM
paddy140
WOWWWWW I am reallly looking forward to this :D
08-06-2011, 01:37 AM
Stephen
All the rapists are gonna be wrapping barbed wire around their ***** now
I'd watch it for a laugh
I mean the film not the rapists
08-06-2011, 02:18 AM
-:Undertaker:-
..and we find out yet again that the nanny state knows what is best for you! but besides, who are the BBFC? do we want them? when did we appoint them? do they know whats best for me? I will most likely watch regardless because now we have this fantastic tool which is very hard to regulate called the internet. In terms of movies, i'll watch because I like the shock and horror value of movies such as this which is basically what the horror genre is after all.
08-06-2011, 02:41 AM
Moh
The fact it's banned makes me want to rebel and watch it.
08-06-2011, 02:47 AM
peteyt
Quote:
Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-
..and we find out yet again that the nanny state knows what is best for you! but besides, who are the BBFC? do we want them? when did we appoint them? do they know whats best for me? I will most likely watch regardless because now we have this fantastic tool which is very hard to regulate called the internet. In terms of movies, i'll watch because I like the shock and horror value of movies such as this which is basically what the horror genre is after all.
The problem is horror can be so much more, about creating surreal and tense environments, often beauty within a nightmare.
Yeah horror is to scare, but can do a lot more than scaring. Today's modern directors just seem to think all horror fans want is blood and guts and cut the rest out. To me its pointless, degrading and just a waste of time to watch, but that's just my opinion.
Just saw this however. A website claiming that it isn't up against the BBFC. Not sure if this is true though http://www.filmshaft.com/exclusive-h...c-as-reported/
I'm not saying this film should be banned, no film should be, but I think the director knew what he was doing. Horror used to be about creativity, now its simply about creating the next sickest film. Someone else is going to do something even sicker after this film, with no real script or real point, just so it can become the top of sickness, someone else after that and so on. And in the meantime what horror meant to me slowly dies.
Thread opened by Infectious (Forum Super Moderator): Thread re-opened after cool down period.
