I'm not going to argue you should like a movie you don't like. It either takes or it doesn't.
This is nothing more then TORTURE PORN that really is unfair to rape survivors because by the end of the movie you are glad that she was raped and wish more horrible stuff would have happened to her.
Who's this "you" who's glad? No, maybe
you yourself were glad by the end of the film that she was raped, but I wasn't.
Like there's a matter fairness to be weighed about rape? I believe if you could be glad
anybody was raped you forfeit any moral standing to say what's unfair to rape survivors, because nobody deserves it. If you're say there's any situation where the survivor "had it coming" you're part of the problem. If you're saying that any terrible person dishonors the virtue of those other rape survivors (those who did not have it coming) then you've fit rape into a natural justice system. That's a cornerstone of rape culture.
So, don't pull your honoring deserving rape survivors as your moral superiority, because you're betraying them as you say that.
I had a best friend for four years who owned a tattoo parlor and i have been a part of many groups that live deviant lifestyles (BDSM, Transgendered, Adult Babies) and this movie is a joke. The characters in the film are lunatics. If you ever come across people like this run far away cuz bad sh!t is a coming.
Yes, and I know a lot of doctors who weren't like Mary, or the other doctors in this film. I don't believe the movie dealt with typical people even for atypical lifestyles. Any character it has is not meant to resemble your friends. The "Horror" label should tell you that.
Also, much of the horror wasn't derived from the body mod people, but from Mary herself.
Yes you reap what you sow... but I dont have to watch it and there should be a warning on movies like this or they should care an X rating because the scene with the doctor in suspension is going to stick with me for some time and I wish the producers would have warned me... I think we need a new classification of movies... Because this is not The Shinning... or Camp Sleep Away... or Texas Chainsaw... Movies like this... like the SAW franchise... even Audition... intentionally want to disturbe viewers in a genere where I think they believe the fans have become numb... not all of us have...
You didn't take the genre of horror as a warning from the producers? That's like somebody who goes skydiving and then complains they weren't warned it involved heights. After this has apparently happened to you before, with Saw and TCM, you still haven't figured out you should just take nausea and shock as a normal hazard of the genre?
Some of us actually feel for another human beings suffering and we enjoy Horror movies because we get to watch people face their fears and overcome them.
You do know that it wasn't real, don't you? That nobody was hurt? That what you were shown visually, with sound and in two dimensions was nowhere near as graphic as it would have been if you had been present in real life?
Why should any genre be limited to "facing fears and overcoming them?" You have any idea how fast that would become monotonous, even for you?
American Mary was a tragedy. Mary Mason was a tragic character. She got raped and did the wrong thing to deal with it. Now, it definitely isn't Shakespeare, but it's like MacBeth, where the main character is not sympathetic, where there are horrible scenes in it, and it wasn't about someone facing fear and overcoming it.
So, it wasn't on the theme you prefer for horror movies. It isn't only about shock, though that has much to do with it. Everybody wants to break new ground, and despite what you might think, filmmakers like the Soska twins take horror as their art. They're trying to be original.
To reiterate, I don't think you can talk about empathy with other human beings when you thought Mary deserved to be raped.
This is nothing more then TORTURE PORN . . .
Porn is something that's made especially for sexual stimulation. It's kind of like a sex toy. A lot of works can be used that way, and filmmakers know this, but the question is whether the creator meant it like that. I think the Soska twins would deny this was torture porn. It's bit like saying Puff the Magic Dragon was a drug song. As Mary Travers said, wouldn't I have just written a drug song if I meant it as one? They shot and edited a lot of footage if this was just torture porn, and post it on a website. Really, if it's just all appearance people can go to Youtube for that now, and would.
A writer or filmmaker is always going to be open to to charges like "torture porn" if they relate the horror element to sexual themes. And it sometimes isn't what's intended, though some wouldn't mind if they made more money by people using it as torture porn.
However, what it comes down to is this: we both paid for entertainment. I was entertained; you weren't. So, which of us wins out here?
reply
share