Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films
Jenny Sanders
Jenny wonders where rape fits in to the empty-headed horror films she used to enjoy...
So I'm sitting shoving DVD after DVD into my computer, and I'm getting increasingly bothered. Something isn't right in the film world and I feel like I'm in a very small minority who have noticed – or care.
In the last couple of weeks, I've been reviewing so-called horror films which are less 'horror' and more 'horrible'. Yeah, you expect some disturbing content when you watch Psycho Zombie Killers 13, because otherwise they'd have to remove the words 'Psycho', 'Zombie' and 'Killers'. And possibly the number 13. But we have a new trend creeping in which doesn't involve the un-dead, more the brain-dead.
It's rape. In an apparent return to a short period of the 1970s which we all would all do well to forget, the portrayal of violence against women, particularly sexualised violence, seems to now be the mandatory inclusion in any slasher, creature or zombie flick. Take The Wizard of Gore, with its scenes of women being stripped and brutally tortured (but they're okay in the end, so that's fine). Or Insanitarium, with a woman being tied to a bookshelf and raped with her own underwear in her mouth (to add insult to injury, she barely reacts). Maybe you'd prefer Lilith, with its objectionable 'twist' involving a woman forced to have sex with her own father in the name of religion (but hey, she deserved it).
The list goes on. Otisgenuinely believes that the kidnap and rape of teenage girls is the basis of an entire comedy. Oh yes, and how could I forget Donkey Punch, where even consensual sex involves belting the woman in the back of the head? Is anyone else starting to squirm?
Don't get me wrong, we've been here before. Wading back through the mists of time will reveal 'exploitation' films like Last House on the Left, which features situations so vile that reading the synopsis on Wikipedia might make you throw up. And then there are the unfathomables, like SS Experiment Camp, where you get all of the above but set in Nazi concentration camps. An article in The Times this year notes the BBFC comment “there is nothing in this film that anybody should have any concerns about”, before pointing out that “The film depicts women being raped, electrocuted, hung upside down, having their ovaries cut out and burnt alive in incineration chambers by guards dressed in Nazi uniforms. That does sound 'concerning'.”
You're not bloody joking. But the difference now is that where we once had laws to prevent this material reaching our screens, we now have laws that seem to look on and approve. The BBFC is not only passing everything it can get its hands on, it's letting us all know about it in the form of its ridiculous categories (“Ooh look: 'Violence, frequent, some sexualised' – let's hire this one!”). The 74 films banned back in the Eighties are now no longer 'bad', despite being exactly the same as they were before, and so we're getting mega-edition six-DVD box-sets and some nice new modern versions to boot. Wander into HMV and you too could own footage of a teenager being raped while her attacker carves his name into her chest. Wonderful.
It begs a question about what's changed between then and now. If it was down to Wes Craven et al, you've believe it was a reaction to the increase in violent worldwide events – torture at Guantanamo Bay, for example. Craven maintains that films like Last House were a reflection of the horrors of the Vietnam War, and that he was trying to capture this in his film-making. Watching him being interviewed on a documentary last year, it would have been perfectly fair to come the conclusion that he was actually capturing his own puerile and depraved thoughts in order to make a bag of cash. (Of course, I can't say that, because it's 'art'.)
More likely we're just sliding further down the slope than we've previously managed, having nothing like the Video Recordings Act 1984 to save us this time around. It seemed to start, at least publicly, with franchises like Hostel – a combination of porn and torture which with huge intelligence produced the phrase 'torture porn'. In the original Eli Roth picked on men and women alike, but Part II was more obviously heading into 'violence as rape' territory and both films equated mutilation with sexual excitement. The House of Commons even pointed out that owning stills of Part II could be against the law as examples of 'extreme pornography'. (Action taken: none.)
Roth, like Craven, applies all kinds of intellectual reasoning to his films, and everybody seems too scared – or uncaring, or unaware – to challenge it. Even the term 'torture porn' would seem wrong on various levels, but the 'free speech' argument and the desperate desire not to look like Mary Whitehouse has resulted in nobody attempting to challenge the trend. Charles Walker MP stood up to describe the obscene nature of Hostel II, but being a Conservative he didn't count and it got through uncut – unlike in Germany, where the uncut version is banned, and New Zealand, whose government required the removal of an entire scene before it got a release. In the UK we will happily allow the portrayal of sexual violence against women, but Fight For Your Life is still banned outright for racist language and Cannibal Holocaust got nearly six minutes cut out of it...for animal cruelty. We have strange priorities.
It's difficult to write an article like this for two reasons. The first is that it inevitably loses its way when all you really want to say is “For God's sake, let's ban this shit”. The second is that it's incredibly hard to fight for what I can only describe as 'balance'. I'm no zealot – I don't want to see the removal of all vaguely unpleasant content from the shelves and can't see any good reason for doing so. But equally I can't sit and watch the blatant and unchecked use of women being violated for 'entertainment'. It makes no sense to me that it could be remotely acceptable. Sadly, having a 'bad feeling' doesn't wash in this 'rational' society. I have to show that all this stuff is causing harm, and “Duh, look around you” doesn't cut it.
I also need to be thinking in extremes - I've either got to allow it all or be completely against everything, otherwise my opinion doesn't count. If that's not a reflection of the desire for conflict we seem to have in this world, I don't know what is. Any room for Ms Middle-Ground?
Yeah, it might pass. Perhaps I've been really unlucky. But as far as reviewing horror films is concerned, in the last two weeks it's been three-for-three. Once is uncomfortable. Twice is offensive. Three times is fashion, and if we're going down that route then let me be the first to object. Strongly.
This is just the fifth column that Den Of Geek publishes every week. We therefore cannot help you with your dictators or the avoidance of triangulation devices.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by Midnighter on August 15, 2008 10:41:01 AM
"Cannibal Holocaust got nearly six minutes cut out of it...for animal cruelty. We have strange priorities. "
There is a big difference between actors portraying psychotic rapists, sadists and murderers, which we all know isn't real, and ACTUAL animal cruelty filmed purely for a "horror" film.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by Matt on August 15, 2008 11:49:19 AM
"Why do films have rape in them now?"
"I don't care, just get them out of here!"
You have no interest in solving any real problem, just tidying up and pretending there isn't one. If you're genuinely interested in sorting it out, perhaps start asking 'why' so you can find out what the genuine reason that this trend you find disturbing has occured is. Otherwise, please don't tell me what I should or shouldn't be able to watch in my free time. It's none of your business.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by RonHogan on August 15, 2008 01:02:58 PM
I've never said, “For God's sake, let's ban this shit” in reference to any act in any movie ever. I'd rather watch a million on-screen rapes to prevent one off-screen rape. If it bothers you, don't watch it. There's a reason I don't watch Uwe Boll films.
If we're going to start banning shit from movies, let's start by banishing the shakycam.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by dbayon82 on August 15, 2008 01:12:31 PM
Couldn't agree more with this article, and disagree more with Matt for his pathetic justification for wanting to watch this stuff. Don't get me wrong, I'll defend a movie to the death if I think it's a genuinely good film - and if the scene in question has merit - but Hostel had no redeeming features whatsoever. Just an unimaginative nastiness that can't fail to put ideas into a few warped minds out there.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by Matt on August 15, 2008 01:31:53 PM
RE:dbayon82
There's no justification for wanting to watch anything in my comment. Anywhere. Did you actually read it?
Your comment was great though. "I'll defend a movie to the death if I think it's a genuinely good film " You actually admit you have no interest in the content of a film or what effect it may have on society so long as you think it's good. Did you even read the article? Because whilst I don't agree with what it said, it isn't calling for a ban on sexual violence in 'bad' movies only.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by twosheds on August 15, 2008 01:33:07 PM
I'd rather watch a million on-screen rapes to prevent one off-screen rape.
Don't see that correlation at all, unless it's the venerable notion that sex in cinema stops men who would otherwise have raped. That's a far hotter potato, particularly in Ron's native land, than anything in this piece.
If it bothers you, don't watch it
Who expected that it'd be there? Thirty years of slasher films since Halloween have personally not prepared me for the very recent influx of rape in horror films. Lots of horror fans, particularly female horror fans, have been taken by surprise at having a species of movies they enjoy ramp its classic misogyny up from second gear to fuel-injected.
In the UK, the BBFC, which provides the ratings and advisory notices for theatrical and disc releases, has 'violence' as a category and also 'sexual content'. It has no category for 'sexualised violence' or 'rape', as opposed to certifiers in countries like New Zealand. It will occasionally mention 'sexualised violence' in the subdescription, but that's it. If they institute a RAPE category, it'll be easier for me to give it a miss.
And I would. I'm not interested in watching rape in a rubber-necking context in a movie that is intended to be escapist, and I'm sorry for people who either are or who don't give a shit. This isn't like serial killers or vampires - it's too fucking close to the more common horrors of real life. And it's too politically contentious to be handled in this way.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by twosheds on August 15, 2008 01:38:00 PM
Your comment was great though. "I'll defend a movie to the death if I think it's a genuinely good film " You actually admit you have no interest in the content of a film or what effect it may have on society so long as you think it's good.
This criticism makes no sense. If he thinks it's good then it means he thinks it has merit, and that he already has favourable opinions regarding what influence it might have on society.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by moakle on August 15, 2008 01:39:25 PM
I think grapes should be banned from movies. I hate them.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by DuncanMonkey on August 15, 2008 01:49:15 PM
It's about now I wish I could call some kind of pub meeting to discuss this properly, as it's a soapbox subject for me and therefore could go on for hours, but just a few points:
I think even loosely using the term 'let's ban this' will make the majority of us visualise a Daily Mail headline and become automatically defensive of our freedom to see what we want, Matt isn't saying he loves watching rape movies, but that it's his choice.
I think you (Jenny) have had a really unfortunate run of movies that have not only been rape themed, but also been terrible to watch. Like all subgenres it will no doubt come and go again, but trying to ban it won't actually help anything. I can tell you that as a zero budget short filmmaker I am currently looking to try and make a feature, although I'm trying to avoiding the cheap exploitation route it is very tempting. I could pour my heart and soul into an artistic endeavour and get nowhere, or try and make a cheap movie that relies on nastiness and controversy to sell it and get it sold. I'm not defending the recent films you've seen because I haven't seen them, but it's certainly understandable that it's a cheap and easy way to get recognition as a filmmaker...
Hostel is by far the most underappreciated comedy of the last decade (falling on a chainsaw is so over the top I couldn't help myself), but Hostel 2 is dire, I wouldn't worry about whether Part 2 was uncut or not, I didn't even clock the violence as the film was so damn bad. Besides when it comes to a sequel most people are even better informed in choosing whether to see it or not, just leave Roth to his childish whims and let the box office do the damage.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by Matt on August 15, 2008 02:02:35 PM
"If he thinks it's good then it means he thinks it has meritmerit, and that he already has favourable opinions regarding what influence it might have on society"
Not necessarily. Good is subjective and can apply to a lot of things, it doesn't necessarily have to have any bearing at all over what influence a person may feel it has over society. You like something, you can describe it as good for any number of reasons. When applied to film criticism in particular it is generally used to describe the quality of the film, not the effect it will have on society.
An example of this might be to reference The Dark Knight, a film you (I think it's you, I may have the wrong SN for you though) described as being the 'best' super hero movie of the year. I think it would fair to say you think the film is good (you'd be right, it is). Does that mean you think it's not damaging to society to have the Joker stabbing people and Batman throwing people from buildings?
These are things that could just as easily 'put ideas into a few warped minds out there'.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by DuncanMonkey on August 15, 2008 02:23:18 PM
Actually while trying to remain calm, I just re-read the article again and can't let 'having nothing like the Video Recordings Act 1984 to save us this time around' slide. That act didn't save anyone, while Jeffrey Dahmer was out killing and watching Return of the Jedi on loop, I found myself, as a growing horror fan, unable to see films like The Exorcist, Texas Chainsaw and The Evil Dead for years. The thought of another 'act' makes me angry as the people in charge will always react to media hysteria rather than merit - Childs Play 3 anyone?
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by Overfiend on August 15, 2008 03:40:03 PM
Jenny, I had to review Otis for this very site, and you're right in your description of it. I couldn't believe how blatantly the director was saying "Isn't rape hilarious!" There was just nothing to redeem it.
I think the pertinent point here is, we should not be calling to ban any kind of film, because no matter what a film may show, you can bet it will never be as dark or twisted as what a human can think up on their own without any help. Also, people should have the freedom to watch or make art (in some cases I use that term very loosely) about whatever they want.
BUT. I think we should be calling for the BBFC to make it clear what is in a film. We're warned heavily about violence and swearing and nudity, so why is it that there seems to be a taboo about using the word "rape"? Personally, I watch a lot of horror films with both friends and family, and just lately I'm absolutely dreading a rape scene coming up, because I'd be mortified to have something like that playing on the screen in front of my nearest and dearest.
I don't think it's wrong to portray rape in a film, anymore than it is to show violence or other dark acts - cinema and art stand as a world of their own, to some degrees. But acceptence of such themes relies heavily on how those themes are handled. In the case of such films like Otis and countless others like it, proceedings just feel highly immature and repellant.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by Richie9 on August 15, 2008 03:46:25 PM
“For God's sake, let's ban this shit”. Seems like a sufficently eloquent summation of my feelings to obviate the need for to leave a comment really. Other than, if you really feel that strongly, get the petition online, get the sample letter up on a Web site, get the address to send it up on the same site and get it going. I'll sign and I'll send the letter.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by Midnighter on August 15, 2008 05:17:18 PM
Won't someone PLEASE think of the children!
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by twosheds on August 15, 2008 06:34:34 PM
Won't someone PLEASE think of the children!
From the article:
I don't want to see the removal of all vaguely unpleasant content from the shelves and can't see any good reason for doing so. But equally I can't sit and watch the blatant and unchecked use of women being violated for 'entertainment'....[apparently] I've either got to allow it all or be completely against everything, otherwise my opinion doesn't count. If that's not a reflection of the desire for conflict we seem to have in this world, I don't know what is.
So at one end of the cultural spectrum we have far-right fundamentalism of all kinds, Yashmaks, beheadings, the compulsory teaching of 'intelligent design' and the end of any movies that anyone would want to watch. At the other end we have Holocaust Rape Porno, Rollerball and webcam-murder on demand.
Midnighter - the bit between these two extremes is what's known as 'society', where we have to work out where the boundaries should be. It's not reasonable to quote the fucking Simpsons anytime anyone dares ask a question.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by Midnighter on August 15, 2008 06:54:10 PM
My post was a sarcastic comment on some of the replies on here, not on the article itself, and it should be obvious how sarcastic it was since you obviously know the context of where the quote comes from.
My actual thoughts on this "article" aren't much, hence my very short first reply to this.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by twosheds on August 15, 2008 07:11:44 PM
Midnighter - Doesn't make a lot of difference to my point, does it really? + Yer might want to read the comments AND the article before weighing in.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by Midnighter on August 15, 2008 07:20:20 PM
And just what was your point? I can't seem to find one.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by twosheds on August 15, 2008 07:25:15 PM
My point was that as soon as you spot someone suggesting restraint in a blur of text that you CAN'T BE BOTHERED TO READ. you see the forces of right-wing repression ranged against you and leap in with yer Simpsons classic.
You do this, I now know, without even reading the article and having any idea what the discussion really is. That's my point. I think most people would have picked it up.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by Midnighter on August 15, 2008 07:41:39 PM
I read the whole article and was the first person to respond to it thank you, so please don't assume anything. "Articles" like this have little weight or substance, since, as the artcile writer themselves point out, you have to either ban nothing or everything. You can't cut rape while leaving in someone being slowly torn apart or cut up. You yourself said that 30 years of slasher films since Halloween hasn't prepared you for a supposed sudden influx of rape into horror, yet rape in horror easily pre-dates Halloween and most other slasher films. I do, however, agree with you that the BBFC should maybe have warnings about sexual violence along with the other content advisory information, but then how far should that be taken? Do people have to be warned if there is a religious joke that may offend them? I'm a huge horror fan and I may be desensitized to a lot which is why a lot of the films mentioned here really don't interest me, films like Hostel are just plain boring in my eyes, whereas Halloween, Dawn Of The Dead and the like are excellent movies all round, not just in the horror genre, but I would never dare tell anyone what they can or cannot watch. None of the gore, rape or torture in Cannibal Holocaust bothered me, because I know none of it is real, I can differentiate between reality and fiction/special effects, but the actual animal deaths really offend me (same with Men Behind The Sun), as they are REAL and totally unnecessary in any film production outside of documentaries, and I'm not just saying that as an animal loving vegetarian. If you'd like to go back and read the comments in order you will see that my sarcasm was in response to the previous poster who appears to be in favour of banning "this shit". More importantly, why do none of my posts keep their formatting?
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by twosheds on August 15, 2008 07:45:21 PM
Thanks Midnighter, that was a bit more illuminating than the quote. If you want paragraphs and formatting here, bold, italic etc, you have to put the HTML in. I know it sucks, but that's how it is.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by Midnighter on August 15, 2008 07:59:19 PM
And thank you for being a bit less belligerent.
It's often hard to get a fully formed opinion across purely in text, and I admit I'm not the most articulate of people, but to be brutally honest a lot of articles on here piss me off so much that I have to stop myself replying to them for fear of going off on one. It seems that 4 out of 5 articles here are just negative diatribes against something, be it "worst of" lists or pointless reviews of something bad that most people who frequent a site by the name "Den Of Geek" would already know isn't the best there is to offer.
I starter coming here for the Ian Gibson column and found myself coming back everyday for the other news and articles, but now I just find myself getting angry at how negative this place can be. And yet I can't stop myself reading!
(And hopefully this post will have some form of formatting...)
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by keithunder on August 15, 2008 08:14:56 PM
The real horror is that this government passes legislation purely to appeal to a percieved Daily Mail redtop audience. The criminal justice bill passed recently has a clause in it which could put you inside for for three years having a clip or a still from a legally available film. Its one thing trying to make somethings less available it is quite another to put people inside for possessing something the government find distastefull.
www.backlash-uk.org.uk
for more information on this.
Re: Metal Mickey series one DVD review Posted by TheInfamousMrD on August 16, 2008 09:58:35 AM
The context within the film dealing with or depicting an act of rape is what makes the difference between acknowledgement of the subject matter and exploitation of the subject matter.
On-screen representations of abuse where it is implicit that the audience derive entertainment from the exploitation of abuse is wrong.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by Midnighter on August 16, 2008 11:57:06 AM
But don't we all (we as in horror fans) derive entertainment from masked killers chopping up annoying teenage cliché characters?
To remove just rape from films, be it filmed as a socially aware comment on society or simply as exploitation, gives the message that rape is bad, but hacking people up with a machete isn't.
Any sane adult knows that rape, murder and torture is neither socially nor morally acceptable, and that what happens on screen isn't real. Maybe some of us are so used to it that we are either desensitized to it or have come full circle and once again find it shocking. Rape, torture and mutilation have all been included in horror films simply to shock people. When it was first done it was shocking, after a while it becomes part of the style, and now we have a new generation of film makers using the same chock tactics they grew up on but making films for a different generation who didn't grow up with those original shocking films.
I know people who are around my age (29) and find the re-make of The Grudge scary and can't make it through Hostel, but they didn't grow up watching the same films as me, so there is bound to be plenty of younger people who never heard of Halloween until Rob Zombie came along. So these new film makers are making films to shock those people, not us.
DVD has replaced exploitation cinemas. Films full of death, rape, torture, mutilation and so on have been around for many years and existed in the worlds of exploitation and mondo cinema, now it's just moved to the straight to DVD home market.
When I was younger I would have loved some of these mindless films, purely because I was seeking out things that would shock me. I WANTED to be scared, disgusted and shocked. I wanted films to freak me out, so I kept looking for more and more, but these days I just get bored of shock tactics and every now and then I'll watch a new "shocking" film in the hopes that it will scare the shit out of me, or at the very least be a decent enjoyable film. I spend more of my time seeking out good French films now as I've grown up and moved on a bit, but I still think the film industry needs to stick to it's guns when it comes to exploitative horror and present these themes for a new generation of kids who want to be scared.
Now, some people may say that seeking out more and more horrific things isn't a mentally sound state to be in, but I refuse to believe that anyone who watches anything in a horror film and then commits that act was directly inspired by the film. The person has to have those urges in them already and has to be in a state of mind that pushes them to do it. True, a film could be the trigger for such an act, but it's a gun that's already loaded and is set to go off at one time or another.
In reality rape is about power and using and holding that power over someone weaker. In film it's generally used as a shock tactic and to make a scene more horrific. Two very different things.
As an aside, the only 2 films I can think of off the top of my head that have ever freaked me out (aside from Watership Down.... ) are 8MM and The Descent. The Descent freaked me out cos I hate the idea of being stuck in a small space, the horror aspects didn't bother me at all. And the first time I saw 8MM it freaked me out at how close to reality it could be. Everything else in horror is so unrealistic that I can't help but either laugh at it or enjoy it for being over the top. Heads being smashed open and brains flying everywhere is great stuff, but I can instantly distance that from reality and go on to watch Amelie or another film with more substance (Amelie being my favourite film of all time, just to give a bit of comparison to my love of horror).
I think it's healthy to enjoy a bit of gore, rape and murder and know it's not real. Hard day at the office? Fed up of being stuck in traffic or being cut up all the time? Then a quick blast on GTA gets rid off all that stress. And watching Horror films with non horror fans is great just to see the looks on their faces.
I better stop typing now before this post becomes longer than the article itself!
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by twosheds on August 16, 2008 01:13:43 PM
Midnighter - To remove just rape from films, be it filmed as a socially aware comment on society or simply as exploitation, gives the message that rape is bad, but hacking people up with a machete isn't.
No-one said rape should be removed from all films. That is a rocky road. But the way rape is handled in a film like The Accused, Boys Don't Cry and even a thriller like The Debt Collector is very different from what's currently becoming a trend - the use of rape as titillation in horror movies and even - God help us - a horror 'comedy' like Otis. It's just 'rape porno' by proxy: the same way that 'lads mags' became 'skin-mags for cowards' in the late nineties applies here. Rape-porno, where the actors are allowed to portray rape-scenarios in a pornographic context, is legal in the US, albeit subject to very strict guidelines. And since it is legal, that's where this kind of material belongs when it is approached as 'entertainment'.
The rape scenes in A Clockwork Orange and Frenzy were, to my mind, in the same class as this current spate of rape in horror movies, even though I generally like those films, which were directed by Kubrick and Hitchcock respectively. In that period, movie-makers were revelling in the sudden and hard-won freedom from decades of repression and censorship under the Hayes Convention and the MPAA; and that explains a lot of the sex and gore between 1968-78. And a lot of the rape in movies like Straw Dogs, as well as the aforementioned. They were getting it out of their system. Quite why it has returned now is less clear, at least to me.
To my mind, you or I might be able to stick watching a horror film, even The Accused, with our mums, though it would be uncomfortable. But I bet neither of us would want to watch Otis with her. We'd be ashamed, and quite bloody right too.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by twosheds on August 16, 2008 01:58:02 PM
BTW, want to see something really depressing on this topic...?
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by Midnighter on August 16, 2008 02:50:42 PM
Sorry, I should have been more clear, I meant removing rape from the kind of horror films we are talking about, not all films.
But films such as I Spit On Your Grave, Baise Moi and Thriller all exploit the shock of rape. Yet they seem more acceptable because "it's all ok in the end" as the victim gets revenge, whereas new films could be argued to show that rape doesn't have a "happy ending". Straw Dogs is a beats of it's own as the various cuts make the rape appear in different contexts, such as the fact that Susan George's character actually appears to enjoy the rape and sees it as payback on her husband.
And yeah, the responses to that article are worrying. It's a scene that needs to be in the film as it's a big part of the background of the characters, and a scene that hopefully will be handled well and do justice to the comic. To be turned on by such a thing in this context is worrying, that's not to say a lot of people don't get turned on by that kind of thing behind closed doors with other consenting adults. But, as I stated, rape itself isn't about sex, it's about power, so maybe these guys are getting off on the fantasy of the situation rather than the reality, I dunno.
As for watching horror with my mum (or dad), no such look, they both hate horror films but never stopped me watching them. They didn't treat me like liberal hippies or anything when I was growing up, but I guess i was mature enough at a young age to know the difference between fiction and reality. I've listened to Cypress Hill since I was about 10, never smoked a joint in my life! And I love Motley Crue but I've yet to turn into a coke sniffing, drunken rock star ;-)
Years ago when I started getting interested in banned films (most of which are now available totally uncut) I actually thought the BBFC should release a "21" category which would be able to show anything cut from an "18". As liberal and anti-censorship as I am I still think there are some things even 18 year olds shouldn't be watching (or rather there are many 18 year olds who shouldn't be watching certain things!).
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by Midnighter on August 16, 2008 02:53:27 PM
To sum up (before leaving the internet and doing something with my saturday haha) I still don't think you can remove exploitive rape (or any form of sexual violence on a man or woman) without removing any of the violence, as to do so sends the message that rape is bad but hacking people up with a chainsaw isn't.
And I still think that actual animal death is far worse than any fictitious representation of rape, murder or torture.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by RonHogan on August 16, 2008 03:13:49 PM
And I still think that actual animal death is far worse than any fictitious representation of rape, murder or torture.
ANd I think real-life murder, rape, and torture is a lot more worthy of spending money to try and stop or prevent than anything that happens on screen in a movie theater (or straight to DVD film).
I was under the impression that the sexualized violence tag was regularly used there. If we have a qualifier for rape, then the fact that the land of the Video Nasties doesn't have one is a bit stunning.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by twosheds on August 16, 2008 03:38:34 PM
Ron: ANd I think real-life murder, rape, and torture is a lot more worthy of spending money to try and stop or prevent than anything that happens on screen in a movie theater (or straight to DVD film).
Who wanted to take federal funding away from the police to tackle this? This has absolutely nothing to do with the issue.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by LizLemon on August 17, 2008 06:04:26 AM
@twosheds - unfortunately, I missed the line above your link 'BTW, want to see something really depressing on this topic...?' and went there.'
That kind of shit is what keeps so many women from participating online (without a false male identity anyway.) Comments like that, about a subject like rape, for the smirky-sick thrill of getting a laugh out of other anonymouse sick fucks is.... unbelievable.
Yes, Jenny. i'm squirming too. :(
I feel really ill right now. And worried. And despressed.
I think a lot of people got fired up by words like 'ban', but let's face it guys, none of you are ever going to feel the same way about this subject - to your core - as any woman does. If you could, you might see why it was easy for Jenny to want to wipe it out.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by Midnighter on August 17, 2008 09:50:30 AM
Male rape happens too, but sadly isn't as widely reported and more often than not appears to go unreported to the police.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by LizLemon on August 17, 2008 11:14:42 AM
Sorry, Midnighter, but I'd predicted that woukd be the next reply and it kind of proves my point.
The point I was making was to acknowledge that a female author of an article like this brings to it her own gut feelings on the subject.
I can empathise with victims of gay-bashing, race-related violence, religious persecution or any number of other atrocities, but I'd never for one second claim to understand how it would feel to be in their shoes.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by Midnighter on August 17, 2008 11:37:50 AM
Then we go straight back to my point that to even start such an article implies that rape is worse than chopping people up with a machete or a chainsaw.
True, I could never begin to understand how a woman feels on ANY subject, being that i am indeed male. But rape is rape regardless of gender. True, it possibly happens more to women than to men, but that doesn't make it any less worse. Plus I don't think this is a subject where a blanket opinion can be given to everyone of the same gender, I'm sure there will be some women who don't have a problem with these films and plenty of men who do. Rape is an horrific act, but we aren't talking about rape, we are talking about actors portraying a fictional role within a secure environment, and can in no way be compared to the actual act of rape. I love seeing heads blown apart in films, the more gore the better, but in reality that's a totally different matter. I love war films, but I'm very anti-war. My taste in films and my actual real life points of view totally contradict each other, and I suspect many people are the same.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by twosheds on August 17, 2008 12:25:12 PM
Okay, the 'rape is not as bad as chopping people up argument'. Let's go...
1 in 60 US women are said by the Rape Abuse & Incest National Network to have been the victims of an attempted or completed rape in their lifetimes. 90% of rape victims were women - not to denigrate the issue of male rape, that puts the focus pretty firmly on the rape of females. Also, a rape occurs every 2 minutes in the US as opposed to every 33 minutes for murder.
Unless you're an orphan with a very limited social circle, someone in your phone book has been through it. Maybe your mother or your sister...? Is it still 'just a fact of life' that's fit for puerile treatment in horror films? I bet you're a lot LOT further removed from knowing anyone who was chopped up/hacked/strangled etc.
Incidentally, the college-age women who are the strongest female demographic for the type of horror films under discussion here are 4 times more likely to be sexually assaulted.
Whichever statistics you want to believe about the under-reporting of rape, your own common-sense will tell you that there's a substantial hidden tide of rape victims. Would you want to stand up in court and let the world know what happened to you?
BTW, you think 1 in 60 US women raped is an exaggerated figure? I've taken that into account and only quoted 10% of the published figure. Which is actually 1 in 6.
This is a dismal, common and cowardly crime that is all around us, and it deserves better treatment in film than this.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by Midnighter on August 17, 2008 12:59:17 PM
To be honest I actually thought the statistic was 1 in 3 women suffer rape (but that may be a worldwide statistic).
However, we aren't talking about reality, as I said, we are talking about fiction, and we are talking about an area of fiction where horrific things are the main part (and are actually the selling point). The kind of rape we see in these films is a far cry from the majority of actual rape, be it a spurned lover getting their power trip or a unsuspecting girl dragged into a park or back alley. There have been many serial killers over the years but I suspect none have been "as bad" as Jason Vorhees or Michael Myers, because the kind of stuff they do is far from realistic. I don't suspect many (if any) rapists exist in the manner of Otis.
On a one-for-one basis the act of rape cannot be argued to be as bad as the act of murder. True, in many ways rape can be "taking the life" away from somebody, but there is a bigger chance of mental recovery and moving on with life than there is from being murdered (obviously).
The article says: "But equally I can't sit and watch the blatant and unchecked use of women being violated for 'entertainment'. It makes no sense to me that it could be remotely acceptable. Sadly, having a 'bad feeling' doesn't wash in this 'rational' society. I have to show that all this stuff is causing harm, and “Duh, look around you” doesn't cut it."
Which strongly implies that all the non-sexual violence IS acceptable in "this rational society". But violence isn't (and shouldn't) be acceptable in any form in any society. But, as I've said, we're talking about fiction here, not reality.
The article also says, and as I've pointed out I find this the most offensive part: "In the UK we will happily allow the portrayal of sexual violence against women, but Fight For Your Life is still banned outright for racist language and Cannibal Holocaust got nearly six minutes cut out of it...for animal cruelty. We have strange priorities."
It's much more than animal cruelty, it's actual animal death for the sake of entertainment. The films contains staged rape, staged murder and staged torture all committed by "professional" actors who all consented to appear in the film and act the parts they were told to. There is no real rape, murder or torture, but there is real animal death that could easily have been re-created by the special effects team and no animal need have died purely for entertainment. So yes, if staged rape is worse than actual mindless animal death, we do indeed have strange priorities.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by twosheds on August 17, 2008 01:45:32 PM
Midnighter - Here's where I have a problem with you and Ron saying that there are worse things than screen rape to worry about. Yes, there are. But they're not the issues under discussion here. I agree with you about animal cruelty, but it is not an issue in horror films produced in the US (which is where most of them are produced), and the last controversy I remember on the issue was with Uwe Boll using seized footage from a dogfight in Seed.
Yes, rape is common. And you know what some of the most common rape is? Child rape. Shall we put that in our horror films too? Hey, since AVP2, Mother Of Tears, Funny Games and other releases of the last 18 months, killing kids has become acceptable - so why not raping them? That'd really wake us up and get our jaws dropping. After all, following some of the arguments in this thread, horror films need to keep continually pushing our boundaries or we get bored, God forbid. And it's only a movie, right? Just fiction, as you say.
I bet you don't want to watch that film. I fucking know I don't.
The restraints that stop us putting something hitherto unspeakable (or unfilmable)on screen are not necessarily like the evil old Berlin wall, nor are the - very commercial - directors under attack here usually trying to prove polemic points. They're not that kind of film-maker. It's not that kind of film and it's not aimed at that kind of audience.
As for the effects of rape, which you talk about, I am presuming and hoping that you're not talking from a place of experience. If you're not, these are pretty glib comments for an 'outsider'.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by Midnighter on August 17, 2008 02:18:01 PM
Well, child rape has been use din films but (thankfully) not in horror films as far as I'm aware, the difference being that adult actors know the difference and have a fully informed opinion (I should hope) of what they are acting out and the context they are doing it in, whereas child actors generally wouldn't understand what it was they were portraying. Then of course there is the whole moral question of whether any form of violence towards children is "acceptable" in the context of a horror film.
Saying "worse things" aren't the issue here is a lazy way to get around the point that it's true. They are a part of the issue because they are all within the same films. If we were talking about films that just show rape with no "horror" side to them than that would be a different matter, but we aren't, we are talking about horror films where the main meat of it is that people get murdered, maimed, tortured and sometimes raped )I suppose the fact that rape gets put alongside those things for shock effect goes to show just how bad rape is).
I don't see what was glib about any of my comments, I don't have the time and space to go into a full psychiatric essay (and I'm certainly not qualified to do so) but it's an obvious fact that in realistic moral terms the act of murder is worse than the act of rape. I myself have not had a first hand experience of rap, thankfully, but people every close to me sadly have. And one of those people would probably surprise you with her views on this matter.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by LizLemon on August 17, 2008 02:37:13 PM
I've got to make a decision right now to stop coming to this page. It's far too upsetting to see comments like murder is worse than rape, as if we can decide what tops what in the Horrors of The World.
Rape is an act of violence, not sex, and it's just as brutal as murder and I'd dare to say that there are women - and men - who for a long time after, would rather have died than have lived through it.
I thank all that's good in the world that your female friend or relative has a stronger outlook on life. Something to be thankful for.
I have to wonder, if movies like Hard Candy had started a trend where castration became the new extra added attraction in every other horror film. who exactly might be bothered by that? Who might squirm a bit, protest it, and be offended when sites existed with post after post condoning and encouraging it and mocking anyone that spoke out against an established trend that used castration as a form of 'entertainment'.
I've got to move on to other pages because, although I always considered DoG to be an informative place, it was also always fun. And I'm not feeling the fun these past couple of days, although I thank Jenny wholeheartedly for being brave enough to speak her mind so publicly about this issue.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by MadOvid on August 17, 2008 08:33:12 PM
In some ways it depends on the context of the situation on if murder is worst than rape. There are many reasons why an individual would commit murder. Many of which are, perhaps not Just, but at the very least understandable.
Rape has no context. There is no situation where it is acceptable or understandable.
And as I am on the subject of context, a few hear have stated that whether rape is acceptable in cinema or not depends on context. Exactly what context is there that makes it ok to show rape/torture? What are some examples here?
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by twosheds on August 17, 2008 10:10:13 PM
Exactly what context is there that makes it ok to show rape/torture? What are some examples here?
The Accused and Boys Don't Cry are strong contenders. Rape isn't trivialised in The Bad Lieutenent or in The Debt Collector , and is a key plot element in both, as it is in The Generals' Daughter, The Offense, Once Were Warriors, Thelma And Louise, Sophie's Choice, 10 Rillington Place and Monster . It is also used (IMO) without being exploitative in Leaving Las Vegas , L.A. Confidential , Memento and K-Pax , and is a key plot element in The Handmaid's Tale . Though not equal to each-other in merit, these are all intense movies which don't present rape in the frivolous or prurient spirit of the horror-movies discussed in this thread.
'Controversial' rape scenes include: the gruelling 13-minute rape and murder of Monica Bellucci in Irreversible , which (like the rape inWaz) is essential to a deep theme of the film but is extremely harrowing to watch; and the rape and murder of Brenda Blaney in Hitchcock's Frenzy , which has been cited as both exploitative and repugnant and - like Irreversible - lauded for showing the grisly, cowardly and non-glamorous nature of the crime.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by Midnighter on August 17, 2008 10:31:52 PM
Sleepers could be added to that list (although it's been a while and I can't remember if rape is explicitly mentioned or more implied).
Maybe I should amend my opinion to say "the act of rape and murder are both as horrendous as each other, but the outcome of murder is certainly worse". Of course, murder happens for different reasons and some may be understandable but it doesn't change the fact that for whatever reason a life has ended.
I think things are starting to get a bit lost now, the whole point of this article was in the context of horror movies made for entertainment. Most of these films don't interest me, but I'll defend anyone's right as a consenting adult to appear and make such films.
If something like this was to come to heads with the law or public outcry then I think, as already mentioned, a bit better warning on the DVD case would help. DVDs used to have those little boxes saying "Language: some, mild" and so on, but don't seem to anymore, and not all have any content warning next to the certificate.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by Midnighter on August 17, 2008 10:34:29 PM
I should probably add that I don't wish to belittle anyone's experiences by saying anything is worse than anything else, but at least this whole thing has made for a rather interesting debate which has ate up more of my time than I was going to let :-)
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by kestrel1977 on August 17, 2008 11:28:23 PM
...and coming up next week on Den of Geek, a potted history of cinematic racism!
It's these light-hearted discussions that make this site what it is.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by twosheds on August 17, 2008 11:39:21 PM
kestrel1977 - Wow, you won't let us tackle one tough subject when it encroaches on the Geek world? It's not like I picked this out of the hat for a ponderous and in-depth look. It arrived in my mailbox in the form of review copies, and in my inbox in the form of chats with Jenny about the attitude of these films.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by LizLemon on August 18, 2008 06:16:23 AM
Well, I'm glad I came back for another peek. I was chicken to say I'd stay away just because it was hard to read comments. That other linked site upset me so much :( and made me more keenly troubled by some comments here. Some here were upsetting to read but none contained the venom of the other site.
I love that we can air these things and it's good to hear others' opinions, even if mine's set in stone. ;)
MadOvid's question was a good one, and twosheds was ready with a pretty extensive collection of examples. I can't watch many of those films, great as some are, without skipping certain scenes and that includes Sleepers and one of my ultimate favourites - Shawshank Redemption - whether anything is shown or implied. I also can't watch things where kids die - once I know - like films named here and Pet Semetary. I rely on IMDB a lot for stuff like that and I'd rather have a spoiler revealed than be caught offguard by something I didn't wnat to see. Friends who know me warn me too. But sometimes both things let me down and I'm shocked - not in a good way. Clearer labeling would help, I'd imagine.
Midnighter - I have no doubt that you never wanrted to belittle anything or anybody ;) and you're right about good debate.
I really need to wipe the filth that was the other site's comments from my mind, though. That's gonna be a tough job. I kept reading, thinking... when is somebody going to say something decent!? Who are those guys!? And how do I make sure no woman ever comes across them!? :( I just hope none of them ever makes their way here.
I'm really glad I can come here and comment, even if I may not like every comment I read. :)
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by Midnighter on August 18, 2008 10:09:35 AM
Sorry, I totally over looked the comments on castration. As far as I remember, there isn't actually any castration in Hard Candy, she fools him into thinking she has. Pointing this out may undermine some of my argument but I'd rather have honest facts than let that slide and use it to back myself up haha
Off the top of my head Cannibal Holocaust and I think Cannibal Ferox both have castration, there's probably a few other films from that time period that feature the same kind of act, so maybe it's a "feature" that will soon return (of course, being able to show the actual act is a lot harder than showing any form of rape without going into graphic detail that probably would get the censors and Daily Mail up in arms). Naturally as a man I squirm more at the thought of something happening to male genitalia as I can relate to it more than something happening to a woman, which should go without saying. However, I'm not averse to it being used in horror films to try and freak people out. However I still think hacking someone up with a machete is worse than castration though.
Horror films tamed down in general a lot through the late 80's and 90's so I don't think it's just a resurgence in "70's style" rape that we are starting to see but also a resurgence in gore and shocks. All the video nasty nonsense calmed down and is so far in the past that people are once again making horror films like they used to, only with better/modern production values. I think film makers are picking up where things were left off in the early 80's, and are probably the people that grew up on those films in the first place (God help us when the generation that grew up with bad 90's/early 00's horror starts making films based on what they watched, the racks will be full of rubbish!).
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by Midnighter on August 18, 2008 10:12:17 AM
LizLemon: Don't worry, I have a feeling most of the guys on that site probably just act like that online to look "cool" amongst their internet peers.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by Richie9 on August 18, 2008 04:03:58 PM
I've just read through the debate since my last comment (the one which prompted the Simpsons quote) and I still stand by my original viewpoint.
I fail to see why people can't see that not all things in art are relative. In reality there are rights and wrongs in any given subject that apply only to that subject and not to any other. This is called the ability to make decisions.
Introducing a new set of guidelines on the use of rape in film does not suggest that killing or maining people is OK. The two things are seperate subjects. There is no argument that the logical conclusion of such a ban or set of guidelines would be any other ban or set of guidelines. You know why? Because the ban would exist in the real world, not an A-Level philosophy essay.
BTW - Somebody mentioned enabling HTML so you can create paragraphs and so on? Any idea how to do this?
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by Midnighter on August 18, 2008 04:18:00 PM
Ok, I'll bite, why is it ok to have people being maimed, tortured, chopped up and killed in these films but not ok to be raped?
As for HTML, there is no way to "enable" it, you just gotta type it into the box yourself (which is a very bad idea and a bit of a security risk, a bit of CSS and this page could easily be buggered up).
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by Richie9 on August 18, 2008 04:50:34 PM
It's not that it's OK necesarily, although it is more likely to be justifiable in the context of the film. It's simply that it belongs to an an entirely different argument.
It's just too tempting to introduce rhetorical motifs like 'if you say A, then you must also mean B' into a debate like this.
This last paragraph is just to see the HTML worked.
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by Richie9 on August 18, 2008 04:51:20 PM
It did, it did!
I feel like a Web design genius now ;-)
Re: Fifth Column: I Spit On Your Rape-Filled Horror Films Posted by Midnighter on August 18, 2008 05:00:22 PM
Being a "web design genius" is nothing to be proud of, you'd just end up spending all your time online debating rape and not getting any work done ;-)
A debate like this is exactly where the A and B issue comes into place, because we are talking about certain acts portrayed in the context of a certain genre of film. The article was clearly about the place rape has or hasn't got in the world of horror movies, a genre populated with and thriving on the most horrific things humanly possible.
There's nothing justifiable about Jason Vorhees chopping off someone's head with a machete by the way ;-)
View Archive |
Home
| Blogs 
