Human Centipede 2

When considering anything "extreme," phrases like "The absolute most___" or "The absolute best/worst____" are often thrown about without much consideration.  Before a person ever utters the words: this was the "most," "best," or "worst," I would suggest pausing a moment and considering if there is any weight to what they are saying. 

After watching HC2, which is a movie that is undeniably "extreme," I decided to compare it to my personal list of "most," "worst," and "best," of the last decade to see how it stacks up:

Most terrifying: Insidious
Most disturbing: The Road
Most disgusting: Jackass 3D
Best horror movie: Pan's Labyrinth
Worst movie period: Adam Sandler's Click

HC2 absolutely doesn't really fit into any of those categories for me, which I think is significant, especially when considering the movie is being labeled by many critics as "The worst movie of the year," which it absolutely isn't. 

A few months ago (before I'd decided whether or not I should watch HC2) my friend rented some romantic comedy called "Friends with Benefits."  I watched about 20 minutes of it, and this movie was so devoid of ambition, and so agonizingly mediocre I quickly decided I'd much rather see a movie where someone gets raped with barbed wire than a movie like that one.

It is absolutely not fair or accurate to describe HC2 as the "worst" movie of the year.  A movie with ambition, regardless of the result, should never be compared to movies with no drive, no artistry, and no desire to be anything but a quick and disposable cash-grab.

So Is HC2 the "most" of anything?  Yes.  It is the "most" tasteless and excessive movie I have ever seen in my life.   (I'm not going to try to moralize that one way or another.  It is what it is.)

I've read a lot of reviews for HC2 already, and so I decided that if I wrote one, that mine should try to focus on things that haven't been said already.  Some reviewers say the movie is a jab at horror movie fans, others say it was a jab at people who think horror movies cause violence, and others say it is a big "Fuck You!" to everyone who complained about the first Human Centipede so much.

So was it any of those things? I don't know what is in writer/director Tom Six's head, and I'm not going to try to guess.  All that matters is the experience of the viewer. 

The movie is very difficult to watch.  I cringed nearly throughout.  I yelled, I howled, at points I even convulsed, but throughout the entire ordeal I also laughed really hard.  As disgusting as this movie was, it is filled with some very dark, and very funny humor.  If it wasn't for this strand of obscene comedy running throughout the film I would not have been able to make it all the way through, and the experience would have left me feeling awful about myself. (I am guessing if you find yourself watching HC2 you are either in on the joke, or you have had the tragic misfortune of renting this movie on accident.)

I personally don't even know if I can say I liked The Human Centipede 2.  I will never watch it again.  I will never recommend it...The best thing I can really say about it is that I am now very excited about The Human Centipede 3; and that is about the highest praise I think I could ever give a movie like The Human Centipede 2.

2011 Review

I love making "best of" and "worst of lists" and I love comparing them with the lists of others, so here is my best of/worst of movie list for 2011. 

Best of 2011:

1. Insidious- This is the scariest movie I have seen in theaters since The Blair Witch project, and the scariest movie I have seen since renting movies like Hellraiser 1 & 2, and the Texas Chainsaw Massacre.  I feel like whatever shortcomings this movie has, have to be overshadowed by how scary it is.  I think the hardest thing in the world is to scare people who have already seen hundreds of horror movies.  Every scare in this movie is well constructed and well thought out.  The film hits you with two huge jump scares and then leaves on the edge of your seat for the the duration. 

 There was almost a mechanical quality to the way most of the scares are set up.  Spots where jump scares are usually placed are only false alarms, and often followed immediately by the real scare, like a boxer throwing a feint and then following it up with a hay-maker.  A woman lulls you into a trance by telling a dreamlike story and then you are snapped back by getting a jump-scare of a terrifying demon behind the protagonist's head.  Some scenes go nowhere at all, leaving the audience completely guessing as to when the next huge scare will be. 

I've never seen another movie with legitimate scares so technically crafted. 

2.  Hobo with a Shotgun-  This movie is both sleazy and fun.  There is no balance however.  When it is sleazy it makes you feel disgusting, and when it is fun it is just awesome to watch.  Drake, his two sons, and "The Plague" are the best movie villains of the year.  Rutger Hauer gives a very impressive performance for a movie most people wouldn't even consider worth making.   Fans of this movie seem to say this tops Grindhouse.  I think that is pushing it.

3.  Valhalla Rising-  This year seemed to be a big coming out party for director Nicolas Refn.  Unfortunately I didn't have the cash to see "Drive" in theaters.  Valhalla Rising  is a fascinating film that sucks you in and leaves you wondering what you saw for weeks afterward.  A movie about faith and a descent into madness.  Overall very impressive.  My biggest complaint were the ungodly awful blood splatters added in post-production.

4. Tucker and Dale vs. Evil- a horror comedy with a lot of heart.  The funniest movie I've seen in recent memory.

5. Attack the Block- fantastic characters with depth, great creature design, humor, and a fun story.  This is a movie that people are going to talk about for years to come.

6.  Troll Hunter- amazing creature design, fantastic special effects, clever writing, and great humor.  The pace seems to drag a bit as you never really get a sense of where the movie is going until the final confrontation with the giant troll.  The bumbling government official suddenly becomes a serious threat to the film crew at the end of the movie which is an annoying plot-hole.  Overall very good.

7.   Rise of the Planet of the Apes- By the end of this movie I wanted the apes to kill every person on the planet!  Very solid and exciting.  I would have been happier if they had delivered some more violence and some actual gore.

8.  The Last Circus- The most original movie I have seen all year.  The pacing is problematic, as again, you have no idea where the movie is going.  What was the purpose of the story?  What was the point?  I have no fucking clue; I just sat back and enjoyed the parade of ridiculousness. 

9.  Final Destination 5- This might be becoming my favorite horror franchise.  These movies are just a lot of fun. Wooden one-dimensional characters eviscerated for our viewing pleasure.   There is a lot of talk about the opening scene, but for me the biggest highlight was the scene with the gymnast. 

10.  Stake Land- The best vampire movie I have seen since 30 Days of Night.  Similar to "The Road" but thankfully not as dark or depressing.  The highlight of the movie is where vampires are used as weapons by being tossed out of helicopters.  Pretty brutal!

Honorable mention:

Fast Five- Are franchises allowed to get better as they go on?  The first two movies are probably not even worth watching.  The series picks up with Tokyo Drift, and now this installment which is probably the best of the bunch.  This is a movie that has all the makings of a complete disaster.  Nearly every character from the entire series is brought back and given a role and it somehow works masterfully.  How is that freaking possible?  This movie should have been shit and it wasn't.  Consider me seriously impressed.  My only complaint? No Michelle Rodriguez!  Boo!

Super 8- A fun movie that makes me wish I had a girlfriend when I was in middle school.  The kids are the best parts of this movie.  The worst part were the overwrought emotions.  Spielberg's way of trying to force the audience into a particular emotion is almost insulting.

I Saw the Devil- I didn't necessarily enjoy this movie.  It is a purposeless revenge film with disgusting and over the top violence.  The secondary characters are little more than cardboard cutouts and some of the scenes are lifted directly from American movies.  For instance dogs tearing at human body parts is a harrowing image, but in this instance lifted directly from Watchmen.  In Watchmen it is used to imply something horrid without actually showing it.  In this movie it it is just a horrid image.  However the cat and mouse game between the killer and the policeman is intriguing.  The stabbing in the taxi cab is probably the single best scene in any movie I have seen all year. 

Worst of 2011:

1. Snow Beast- a movie about Yeti that is more about people talking about their feelings than it is about people getting killed by snow beasts.  When people get killed they are usually scratched lightly on the cheek and then fall over dead.  Horrible pacing, terrible characters, and non-existent special effects. The topper?  You can see the line in the back of the Yeti costume where it zips up.  Shameful.  

2.  Colin- A nearly unwatchable zombie movie, and as far as zombie movies go that is really saying something.  So boring I almost turned it off.

3.   Rubber- Pretentious and boring.  The movie begins with a car lightly knocking over chairs for no reason, and goes straight downhill from that low-point. 

4. Chawz- I don't understand Korean movies.  I don't understand the tone or the humor in them.  This "giant animal gone mad" movie starts of strong and descends into a garbled mess.  Why do Asian film-makers seem hell-bent on shoehorning in a 4th and 5th act into their movie that has nothing to do with the rest of the plot?

5. Black Death- This movie seems to promise some supernatural shenanigans but delivers none of it.  All that stuff you thought was supernatural was all a red-herring.  I hated that; the red-herrings were more of a cock-tease to me than a clever plot twist.  If I have a choice between a movie about the supernatural and an atheistic world-view I'll take the supernatural every time.  The worst part of the movie is the epilogue where the protagonist instantly switches from a meager monk into a blood thirsty inquisitor.  It changes the entire tone of the movie without serving any purpose whatsoever.   On the plus-side Sean Bean delivers a strong performance.  I think he deserves better parts than the one this movie affords him.

Supply and Demand

I found out today that movie ticket prices have gone up another fifty cents since the last time I went to a movie this last summer.  Movie ticket prices are increasing faster than the price of gasoline, and unlike gasoline, the world isn't running out of movies.

 I love going to the theater to watch movies.  It's one of my favorite things in the world to do.  The whole experience, aside from price, is fantastic.  Even going to watch a lame movie in the theater can still be a lot of fun...

When I finished high school, about 14 years ago, I was going to watch upwards of around three movies in the theater a week.  I went to see so many movies in theaters I saw movies multiple times, and so many that I even went and to watch movies I didn't care about at all.  In some cases I went to watch movies I didn't even want to see out of boredom; simply because I loved watching movies in the theater.   

This year I went and saw four movies in theaters total...only four movies!  It's not for lack of desire either.  I really wanted to go see movies like Drive, Paranormal Activity 3, X-Men, and so on but I just can't afford it anymore.

Since 2008 nearly every industry in America has had to restructure completely while some still hold on to their same poor business models.  However I feel Hollywood will have to restructure eventually.  I'm reading more and more articles about how ticket revenue is down year after year.  Is anyone honestly surprised?

If you want to see a 3D movie your pockets are gouged even further, by requiring movie goers to pay an additional $3 for the exact same pair of 3D glasses over and over.  The theater even provides patrons with a "recycle" bin for these glasses, so the exact same glasses can be sold over and over again.  

Where is the financial incentive to see a movie in theaters?  Movie fans can either spend $10.50 (a piece) in theaters, or simply wait 4-6 months to rent the exact same movie for $1.25 from Redbox and have a whole group of people watch for the same price.   On top of that the quality of home theater systems are starting to rival the theater going experience with giant HD televisions, blu-ray, and surround sound.

Not only is the theater going experience incredibly over-priced, but is also a terrible value compared to it's competition. 

The bottom line is that the system will be forced to restructure eventually.  Unfortunately it will probably come in the form of slashed budgets to movies.  Projects like an Akira trilogy, a series of The Stand or Dark Tower movies are already being shelved.  More and more great movie ideas will ultimately be shelved, in large part to the ridiculous cost of going to see a movie. 

If Hollywood was smart they'd slash ticket prices instead of movie budgets.  Then maybe people could actually afford to go watch them.

How Far is too Far?

I think an interesting question for horror movie fans to consider is: just exactly how far is too far?  The line for what is acceptable in a movie keeps moving further and further toward the extreme end of the spectrum.  A movie like Rob Zombie's Halloween 2 would have probably been banned 15 or 20 years ago.  Now people barely bat an eyelash.  But as extreme as that movie is, H2 doesn't hold a candle to the extreme end of the really nasty titles that have been coming out.

We've seen some incredibly graphic moives scrape the surface of mainstream horror in recent years like: The Human Centipede 2 and A Serbian Film; both blowing past the boundaries of what is considered acceptable, even for jaded gore fans.  Also this year also brings the Criterion blur-ray release of Salo, a film with content still quite shocking even though it is nearly 40 years old (I had nightmares just from reading the plot synopsis from wikipedia).

I think one of the reasons horror movies have become even more extreme is that is getting harder and harder to shock audiences.  Horror movies rely on pure shock to disgust and frighten the audience, however with the advent of the internet granting us real-life horrors that people document with their own home video cameras is simply something that most fictional movies can not compete with.  Honestly, what is gross after seeing 2 girls 1 cup?  That video is as as disgusting as anything I have ever seen, yet it is an internet "meme" and even an archetype for the awful things you can view online with just a quick Google search. 

That may be one answer "why" these movies are getting more extreme, but there still remains the important question: "Why do we watch?"  This is a question I'm not even sure I have a good answer for.  I myself am curious about watching movies like Salo, Human Centipede 2, and Cannibal Holocaust.  (No thanks at A Serbian film, I draw a firm line at child rape).  But what is it about them?

I think there is just something about looking into the darkest parts of the human mind.  Movies like these allow us to look at the filthiest parts of ourselves while still allowing us the safe abstraction of knowing they are nonfiction.  I would compare it to trying to stare into the sun... if we gazed directly, and for too long we might go blind. In this case we might literally go mad if we spend too much time with these thoughts and in these spaces.  Some unhinged people, somewhat like the killer in Human Centipede 2, may wallow in that sort of depravity.  However, I think for most healthy people, it is simply just trying to take a peak without losing ourselves.

I don't think I'd want to spend much time there personally.  I love to write, and am fairly convinced I could write a script with acts as disgusting as those in these movies I've mentioned.  However, I have absolutely no desire to turn my creative gaze toward the darkest and most vile recesses of my own mind.  It's just not a space I want to dwell in, for any reason whatsoever.

Are these films justifiable, and are they art?  With the new release of Salo I find it interesting that both Salo and A Serbian Film are justified in the same way:  both are political allegories, and both are beautifully shot.  I feel like these justifications are simply excuses.  There is nothing else positive you can say about them, so that is all there is...  However, to play devil's advocate, I think it may be fair to say the supporters find merit in the existence of these films, even though it is almost impossible to articulate just what it is, and there is also absolutely nothing traditionally artistic about them. 

And again I think these movies exist so we can catch a glimpse of something genuinely human.  And while there may be no "line" to cross anymore when it comes to what you can put in a movie, or what people will watch anymore, I will never call these types of movies "art."  As far as I am concerned these types of movies are not art, they are pornography.

And that is not to say I am above ever looking at them, because I am not.  It is just that they serve no purpose, other than to gawk at human depravity.  There is no lesson to be learned or story to be told.  There is only the exploitation of the most disgusting aspects of ourselves.

Apocalypse and Crucifixion mirror images?

It seems like religious archetypes get inverted or reflected to create new meanings. I wonder if the "apocalypse" in Revelation is a mirror image of crucifixion?

The apocalypse seems to be a culmination of prophesied events that leads to "shit hits the fan" types of moments and disasters, evil is defeated, followed by a resurrection of the physical world.

This could work as a mirror of crucifixion because of #1 fulfilled prophecy, #2 physical trauma and humiliation, #3 death is defeated #4 transformation of the physical body to the revelation of the spiritual form.

I was thinking of this because (if I remember correctly, haven't read the text in a while) that satan impregnates a woman which gives birth to "the beast," which seems an obvious inversion of the immaculate conception of Christ.  These events seem to have their on symmetry; one reflecting the other.

So I guess I wonder if there will ever be a time of reckoning for all of humanity followed by a lasting peace, or is this just another description of the transformation that each believer has to undergo?

I would personally like to think there will be a time where the physical realm is justified. This seems intuitively necessary.  The physical world does not have to be justified, however it seems to me that the suffering that we experience in this world would be more understandable if the physical universe is eventually "fixed."

If there is I guess I don't see much reason for waiting around to do it. Is God waiting for a culmination of specific events, or waiting for us to transform ourselves before He steps in and finishes the job?

If there is no resurrection of the physical universe, how might that play out? Perpetuating indefinitely or eventual extinction? Both seem plausible.  We're already planning on colonizing other planets and galaxies, however the universe may eventually collapse upon itself again or as Stephen Hawking suspects, eventually spread so far apart that stars will no longer be able to warm the planets. 

Neither one of these seems especially satisfactory considering that if our species continues it means indefinite suffering for the living.  If our universe dies than it simply means a complete abandonment of the physical plane. 

A complete abandonment of the physical world would certainly provide an end to suffering, however it doesn't fix much of what is broken, and ultimately I think think the symbolic act of resurrecting the physical world is important for our peace of mind. 

Occupy Yourself

Occupy Wall Street is pretty big in the news lately, although the protests sound like they are winding down.  I can't say I ever expected them to accomplish much by camping and playing drums but I do fully support the sentiment. 

We're at a point where we can't change government through voting, and we seem to be helpless slaves to our banking system and Wall Street.  I really wouldn't mind seeing some sort of revolution.  We really do need something to change.

But the bottom line is our government and our country is so corrupt that I don't think there is anything we can do on a large scale.  Government may be corrupt, but it can't be corrupt without a country of easily corruptible people.  The most glaring weakness of any democracy is that of it's own citizens. 

 I read this article about OWS recently and I fully agree with the author:  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dylan-ratigan/this-thanksgiving-occupy-_b_1110246.html

 If you want anything to change at all you have to change yourself.  That is all you can do.

 While considering the subject of revolution tonight I remembered that all throughout the gospels people wanted Christ to be a violent revolutionary, and one to overthrow his own corrupt government.  However Christ always refused.  Vast sweeping changes to corrupt systems  were not his thing.  He chose to change the world through self-sacrifice; by literally changing himself through the transformation of crucifixion; by forsaking his corrupt physical form and revealing his true spiritual form.

Widespread changes to broken systems was never a desire for Christ.  Why should we even entertain the thought of it now?  The world we live in is too far gone and too corrupt.

 Like Christ says: "Whoever has come to know the world has discovered a carcass, and whoever has discovered a carcass, of that person the world is not worthy."

Science vs. Religion in Modern Mythology

My dad asked me today to order him a book called "War of the Worldviews: Science vs. Spirituality."  This, I'm sure is an interesting book, and I'm a bit jealous that I haven't had the opportunity to write at least one chapter for a book like that.

It's an interesting subject, and one that has popped up for me several times recently.  To summarize my view, I believe science is wonderful, but ultimately inadequate to whole understand the world we live in.  After all, no one hears a beautiful song, watches a sunrise, or hugs their child, and understands these experiences scientifically, or logically.  These are experiences that have to be understood intuitively and emotionally.

If you look at it in the terms of "one versus the other" it seems science and faith have always had a tenuous relationship.  Science and religion have struggled against each other for hundreds of years, and this is a fight that acts itself out in a myriad of ways.  I was considering this never ending struggle and how it plays out specifically in modern mythology

For instance, Frankenstein, a myth about as old as modern science, depicts a scientist that tries to create life and is capable of only creating an abomination.  In this myth science is the enemy of natural creation. 

In Planet of the Apes Dr. Zaius hides archeological evidence to protect his religion; skewering Christians who refuse to believe in evolution.  

These are two stories that I think really crystallize each side of the fight; however I think the two opposing viewpoints may be melding, at least in mythology, in recent years.

In modern classic films such as Blade Runner and Ghost in the Shell, machines literally become human.   In these stories science and faith no longer struggle against each other.  The boundaries between creator and creation blur to the point that one is indistinguishable from the other.  There is no longer any moralization against scientific creation, or denial of the human soul.

This is an amazing viewpoint.  No longer is one side railing against the other; only acceptance.  The process simply plays out, for better or worse, with or without consent.  We are as powerless to stop the intrusiveness of scientific creation, or even to deny the existence of the "Ghost" in the machine,  as we are to stop the passage of time.

I feel it is important to point out that these stories are not set in idealized futures, as one might expect, but in very realistic "cyberpunk" settings.  That being a future of extremely complicated technology existing simultaneously with squalid poverty, violent crime, and low culture.

These myths also seem to be a modern sort of Pinocchio story, that also say a lot about the bond between creator and creation.   In Genesis God created man "in His own image."  In Pinocchio the puppet wishes to become human.      

I don't think it is helpful for  science and faith to be seen as opposing forces, but that one should learn from the other, because neither by itself is capable of understanding the universe or our human experience.