Badmovies.org Forum

This is a tough idea.  I'm sort of watching THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE (1974) on the IFC that some have espoused "hatred" for, and thinking to myself that it does not cease to amaze me how well made this film is.  The tone, the score, the artistry, the relentless Horror (yet a lack of gore) make this the one to beat.  And it hasn't been.  Though some might cite 'Torture Porn" (like ROB ZOMBIE who's practically made a career distilling this film and not that well, or ELI ROTH's HOSTEL) but I think the term, really coined later than this film, would be "Slasher."  And the best of the bunch remains THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE .  If ever a film spawned a technique, this was one.  Are there others? 

WHAT FILM INVENTED THE GENRE? 

One word-PSYCHO .

The Last House on the Left or Cannibal Holocaust. Gotta go way back dude.

Those films would be from 1972 and 1980 respectively.

Two questions:

1) How far back is 'way back' dude?

2) What genre were you suggesting those two invented?

SPOOF DOCUMENTARY: This Is Spinal Tap

my guess... unless theres any earlier than '84, when Tap came out?

Kurosawa probably has to come up sooner or later in a discussion like this, since so many directors point to him as a source of ideas and inspiration. I guess you'd have to name Rashomon (1950) as the start of the "truth depends on who tells it" concept, though I don't know if there are enough of those to make a genre. He Said, She Said (1991) is the only other one that comes to mind.

But you know that shot of the burning sun that you've seen in so many westerns, or in any movie whenever they want to indicate that it's really, really hot? I recall Robert Altman on the extras of some Kurosawa DVD, I think this one, as saying that Kurosawa was the guy who first thought of turning the camera right at the sun. And Altman immediately stole the idea to use in TV westerns.

Which genre are you talking about? Torture porn?

A few that come to mind immediately without thinking very hard:

THE WILD ONE (1953) is the earliest biker movie I can think of.

BLOOD FEAST (1963) is famous for starting the gore genre.

Speaking of H.G. Lewis, I think 2000 MANIACS (1964) was the first torture-porn movie.

THE IMMORAL MR. TEAS (1959) is credited as the first "nudie-cutie", and therefore the beginning of the softcore porn industry. 

BLOOD FREAK (1972) definitely started the Christian gore/anti-drug horror movie genre. 

BLOOD FREAK (1972) definitely started the Christian gore/anti-drug horror movie genre. 
[/quote]

That was quite the extensive genre wasn't it? :tongueout:

GODZILLA 1954 - Kaiju Eiga

MR VAMPIRE - Jiang Shi

My first reaction was to climb on the "What genre?" bandwagon and shout with everyone else, then I re-read the last bit.  I assume you are asking which movie(s) started off specific "sub-genres" - since most genre categories were borrowed from literature and the pulps?  If so. .

BLOOD FEAST; usually attributed as starting the gore trend.

Before this the genre was simply referred to as "roughies", IIRC.  Not sure what the first roughie was though.  Anyone?  Also related to this theme would be the "revenge" sub-genre of horror.  Alas not sure what the first flick in this category was.  I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE?

Sci-fi: There is pre and post STAR WARS sci-fi.  But SW definitely created a sub-genre of it's own.  (see, STARCRASH, THE HUMANOID, BATTLE BEYOND THE STARS, &tc)

Sworld-and-sandal: The first Italian Hercules movie is usually attributed as starting the "peplum" genre.

Other sci-fi: ALIEN knock-off.  Alien started the so-called "Alien" sub-genre of sci-fi even though it wasn't entirely original itself.  (see GALAXY OF TERROR, CREATURE, FORBIDDEN WORLD, INSEMINOID, STAR CRYSTAL, &tc)

Horror, the "slasher" flick: Depending on who you talk to this either began with BAY OF BLOOD or the first FRIDAY THE 13TH movie.  This is also a genre some classify as belonging to the 80s.

Torture Porn:  The door to this genre was opened by the Hannibal Lectur movies, STRANGELAND, and their ilk IMO.  Though the genre didn't really get a label until movies like SAW and HOSTEL came out.

&tc

"Roughie" is sort of a term of art for the more violent sexploitation features that followed when the novelty of the nudie-cuties wore off.  The first one my have been Russ Meyer's LORNA (1964) or THE HEADMISTRESS (1965).


What defines torture porn, though?  Why are 2000 MANIACS and THE INCREDIBLE TORTURE SHOW [AKA BLOODSUCKING FREAKS] not considered part of the genre?  Certainly there was a modern mini-revival of this kind of film, but exploitation movies centering around torture are nothing new.

Thought of another one: although there had been films where women just happened to be in prison, I think the women-in-prison formula (new fish, sadistic warden, lesbian sex, shower scenes, etc) started with Jack Hill's THE BIG DOLL HOUSE in the early 1970s.

Sorry, Kester, I'm not picking on you. There is a point in your response I want to touch on, but otherwise this is a general post and not specifically a response to your post.


Bringing up 'I Spit on Your Grave' as a potential starter to the revenge sub-genre (though I would consider the rape/revenge movie itself to be a distinct sub-genre) raises an interesting point.

Is the first such film of any sub-genre really where that sub-genre starts?

Case and point with 'I Spit on Your Grave': it was born out of a Made-for-TV movie called 'Revenge for a Rape' which preceded it by two years. There are two main differences between the two movies in that the victim in 'Revenge' is not the one who is the avenger, but her husband (played by Mike Connors), and 'Spit' does not have the twist ending as she knew her attackers, unlike in 'Revenge' where he thought he knew who they were, but he killed the wrong guys.

Even though 'Revenge' inspired 'Spit', and the later 3D movie 'Hunting Season' (which was a direct take-off of it, save that the victim is the hunter, but makes the same mistake), 'Revenge' did not become the poster child of the sub-genre, but 'Spit' did.

Though, even before both of those, some would point to movies like 'They Call Her One Eye' and 'Last House on the Left', even though both of those were preceded by 'Hannie Caulder' (1971).

Quite frankly, 'I Spit on Your Grave' was rather late in the sub-genre as rape and rape/revenge was not a stranger to the grindhouse scene of the late 60s and early 70s.

Which, though, invents a sub-genre; the first such movie, which often often cannot be agreed upon, or the one which became most synonymous with the sub-genre from which others sprang?

good point

Im just thinking about shark movies...was there one before JAWS? I cant think of one before, and there have certainly been lots since, and JAWS is also the film most synonymous with shark movies.

I can't think of one either, but it should be noted that the subgenre went beyond sharks to include a number of other animals (Grizzly, Orca, etc). That would be the specific Jaws format, but do the roots of the genre (small town or group of people terrorized by rogue predator) go back further? I guess that is an extension of Menard's question - whether the subgenre is a killer animal or the specific Jaws format.

Similarly, while disasters have been depicted in films for years, Airport (1970) kicked off a specific style of "disaster film."

No worries.

 :cheers:

Menard,

To address some of your remakrs. .

IMO it's hard to nail any sub-genre down to one specific movie as having "INVENTED THE GENRE", as the OP put it.  However there are certain movies that can be pointed to as being the "film [that] spawned a technique" or, rather, movies that made a big box office smash and became so popular their format and/or formula became widely imitated; and thus influenced the genre.

Take STAR WARS.  The same year this came out so did CINDERELLA 2000.  Yet who even recalls this movie today?  It's the same way with TV.

STAR TREK has become so iconic that it's virtually impossible to make a sci-fi space opera series and NOT have it compared to ST.  BABYLON 5 was called a imitation of DEEP SPACE 9 when it first hit the airwaves.   But it overcame this.  Alas SEAQUEST DSV was called a shameless rip-off of the same series from the start and remains so to this day.  Why?  Because it remained clichéd and formulaic.  In this the TV genre also shows us how overuse of genre tropes can render a genre meaningless.  Take the cop/police drama.  These have been so over done that they're all just cop/police dramas.  You may remember one or two but, after a while, they all blend together into vapid insignificance.  Just as the STAR TREK franchise did before it imploded with ENTERPRISE.

The equivalent in movies is the sequel.

And what of ALIEN?  There's numerous movies that get panned as being "Alien knock-offs" yet many of us here can point to specific movies that came out years before Alien which were, if not virtually identical, so close to what Alien was that it boggles the mind.  For instance there was PLANET OF THE VAMPIRES, a movie with virtually the same premise as ALIEN.  Both movies involve ships landing on a distant world to investigate a alien signal, IIRC.  Both movies have their characters stumble on an alien vessel, finding giant sized dead aliens, and fighting off parasitic alien life forms.  (IN POV they are preternatural spirit entities that inhabit the dead as opposed to the physical xenoid BEM alien parasites of ALIEN.)  Yet it's ALIEN that has become, and  remains, the genre yardstick.  Even though some of the latter movies are really knock-offs of imitators movies!

Too, you're quite right about I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE being a "rape/revenge" movie, thus placing it into a sub-category of the genre.  Yet IT is the movie that immediately sprang to mind even though there were many "roughies" that preceded it in the ouvre of the revenge genre.


KP

Rev. Powell, Esq. ,

Haven't seen any of those so I'll take your word for it.  Yet it is interesting to note that from the first roughies to today's torture porn, the latter possibly being mainstream Hollywood's equivalent to the roughies of yesteryear, our genre categories continue to develop, often independently of each other, yet remain very similar.  I suppose it's a sign of the times for you are quite right that torture porn is nothing new.  We've had a multitude of genre labels that fit this same type of movie -- whether called "hard gore" or "gorn" (gore porn).  It's just that none of these movies were produced as A-movies by mainstream studios.

I think what sets the current "torture porn" apart from it's predecessors is these are movies made, not unlike the Guinea Pig series, specifically to showcase mindless brutality and human on human atrocities.  BUT, and here's the big difference, these are major big budget MAINSTREAM (as in put out by major studios) movies.

Too, previously such movies offered the veneer of being (somehow) socially redeeming or, at least, offering up cautionary tales.  Then again that was how most exploitation movies were passed off.  They were morbid fables but shilled as being meaningful parables nonetheless.  Such was the case with the Nazisploitation sub-genre.  Exploitation directors sold the movies to us as being based on true stories and thus illuminating dark sinister, and forbidden, corners of the human pysche.  They dared us to watch.  They dared us NOT to be affected.  And, really, their gore was obviously fake so while we, the audience, might cringe we could also laugh because it was so obviously fake.  Not so today.

Today, with modern FX, we get bodies and organs sculpted in silicon that look more real than the genuine article.  This surreal reality is thrown in an audiences face.  We're not dared to believe, we're defied NOT to believe.

Yet what is redeeming about movies like SAW or HOSTEL?  These movies are unrepentant in their gleeful exploration of sadism.  The mainstream audience has picked up on this and thus the "torture porn" label was born.  This despite the fact these kind of movies have always been around.  It's just, in this particular case, the label was applied more out of shock by mainstream audiences.  An audience who if you asked them about Guinea Pig would say: "That's like a hamster, right?"

At least that's more or less my current working theory.   :wink:


KP

Georges Melies and his silent era films would have to be amongst the earliest sci-fi, fantasy and horror films. Then we had Einstein's films (including a version of Frankenstein), the German Expressionist stuff and even more. Typically books and folklore seemed to be the basis behind the plots of most early Horror. There were shocking images in a lot of pre-code Silent era Horror.

Just thought that was worth noting.

[psst]...

Edison's

...[/psst]

 :tongueout:

Along those lines, THE GREAT TRAIN ROBBERY (1903) clearly invented the Western genre in film.   

Kester,

Here's another early roughie: THE DEFILERS (http://www.geocities.com/onemillionmilesfromtaste/defilers.html) from 1965.  I link to the article because it explains the use of the term "roughie".  I think the term was probably invented by Dave Friedman and his gang; at least, that's where I I first heard of it.  I haven't seen LORNA either, myself, and I'm not sure if it's "rough" enough to be the first in the genre.

I agree with your theory on "torture porn".  Some critic invented the term to describe a recent trend in movies (SAW, HOSTEL) that he didn't particularly like.  There's nothing new in the moral tone of these films, except the fact that mainstream studios now back them.  I think the "socially redeeming" element isn't a significant difference; those tacked on morals were always obviously insincere.  On the other hand, more realistic special effects may change the experience of the viewer.  You're right, it's easier to laugh at H.G. Lewis' obviously fake effects, which helps insulate the viewer from the sadism.  Today's torture porn is more in your face, and definitely more unpleasant.       

Of course you're correct Menard. Oops! My Bad. (Insert embarrassed smiley here).

Pretty sure there's some Italian films from the 60s and 70s that were influential on the "torture" genre. Most of them probably do it more effectively too by what they don't show as compared to today's let's club them over the head with it approach.

I hope yer keepin' score on yer little thread there, coz that's more virtual karmer for menarder. 
I think you all missed the point!  Do I have THE POWER to pull the plug on this thread...???  :bouncegiggle:  :teddyr:  :bluesad:

I was thinking WHAT FILM OF ANY GENRE INVENTED SUCH GENRE?   :wink: Apparently most of you figured it out.  I'm not always clear, but I think precise.  Watch out for my hickory schtick.  At least I incite discussion!   :smile:

:bouncegiggle:  :bouncegiggle:  :bouncegiggle:

In addition to JAWS spawning a whole bunch of cruddy "Animal attacks cliche area knownst only to cop, hunter, researcher, and corrupt authority figure" lesser-ripoffs, one can say similar things happened with THE HAND THAT ROCKS THE CRADLE and AMADEUS.

Hand that Rocks the Cradle - Family is disturbed by dangerously neurotic "Nanny figure" who wishes to usurp the wife and mother. (Maybe it started with Fatal Attraction?)

Amadeus - The important parts of a famous musician (Played by an American)'s life, with a good amount of made-up bits thrown in to make them relatable to the audience. (Watched a bunch of these direct to video masterpieces in school :P)

How about the gangster movie, the kind that focus on the gangster? Modern audiences would probably point to the "Godfather" franchise, but I'd guess that James Cagney's Public Enemy (1931) probably created this genre, unless anybody knows of earlier or more iconic examples.

And how about the heist movie, the one that's all about setting up a complicated operation and then pulling it off (always overcoming a few glitches of course)? Did that start with Ocean's Eleven (1960)?

I think "inventing" a genre is somewhat of a misnomer.  One movie may "invent" a certain plot, but if it doesn't inspire a host of imitators, it hasn't done anything for a genre.  Another movie may come along, use that same plot structure, and start a whole wave of similar movies.  That movie started a genre, even though it didn't "invent" the plot structure. 

Alien is a good example.  There was a 1958 movie called "It!  The Terror From Beyond Space".  The plot was nearly identical to Alien, but it didn't inspire a whole host of imitators.  It! perhaps invented that particular plot, but Alien created the sub-genre.  And I'm sure if you wanted to research it you could find plenty of earlier movies where people were trapped in a confined space and menaced by something scary.

As far as "caper" pictures go, both John Huston's The Asphalt Jungle, with Sterling Hayden, and Stanley Kubrick's The Killing, also with Sterling Hayden(!), were made in 1950 and 1956 respectively.  These were the first films to do the precision-timing/multiple-player heist/robbery storyline that "Ocean's 11" gave a somewhat comedic twist to.  The earlier films were more serious crime-dramas -- and the carefully designed plans didn't go as planned --

I actually think that the real modern predecessor would be Topkapi(1964), which had the elements of comedy and irony that we would later expect in such films like "The Sting".  As films evolve, it becomes difficult to see just where the looked-for genre begins --

peter johnson/denny crane

Well said Jack.

Similarly Star Wars most certainly did NOT invent the space opera genre, a genre which really evolved in the pulps, was even adapted into various comic formats, and became caricaturized in the early B&W serials (Flash Gordon, Buck Rogers, &tc) then slowly began to re-emerge in the 50s as, once again, stories for grown up audiences.  Yet when most movie critics review a space opera themed movie Star Wars is inevitably the ONE movie they ALL refer to.  Seldom will a critic even seem aware of the literary genre from which these movies draw their inspiration, much less the movies and serials that preceded it, which is a shame.

Then again when a movie becomes popular they often become iconic representations of the genre, as Alien and Star Wars has and, to a lesser extent, as have the movies in the modern goresploitation "torture porn" genre.  So, too, in literature.  Viz. "Tolkien fantasy" et al.

Which just goes to show being first isn't quite as important as being POPULAR first.   Taint fair but that's life.  :wink:

Ocean's Eleven may have been the first american one, but I believe there was a French movie from the 50s called Rififi dealing with a complex heist

RIFIFI was 1955, that's what I thought of too.  Although, as Peter Johnson pointed out, THE ASPHALT JUNGLE was made in 1950.  That's the earliest "heist" movie I can think of, though there were probably earlier ones.

Quite a few people fail to understand that Lucas was paying tribute to the serials of his own childhood with movies like Star Wars and Raiders of the Lost Ark. It would be most accurate to say that those movies ushered in a new era for their respective genres.

Personally, I prefer the approach that defines a seminal film by what it brought to the genre. Star Wars was far from an original story, and Lucas is pretty honest about using sources like Joseph Campbell, Isaac Asimov, Fritz Lang, etc. The movies that copied the plot are not really important.

The importance of Star Wars, aside from being a cultural phenomenon, has more to do with technical innovation, style and even its revolutionary approach to merchandising. After Star Wars, practically every movie and TV show set in space adopted techniques from Star Wars and tried to look like Star Wars. The scale got bigger. Spaceships became huge, highly-detailed, blockier and covered in hull plating and other details, not to mention huge, glowing reaction engines on the rear. Space battles all included small fighter craft. The future became decidedly more lived-in, with the norm being less shiny and clean, and more old, dirty and patched up.

Star Wars did not so much invent a genre as redefine it.

LITTLE CAESAR (1931 also) starring EDWARD G. ROBINSON is certainly a contender for at least co-founding the modern gangster genre. 

(http://5g8.net/upload/contender2.jpg) (http://5g8.net)

 :bouncegiggle: :bouncegiggle: :bouncegiggle:

I think this film, cited below in a screencap, invented it's own genre... but I can't decide what exactly the genre would be... what film?  What genre? 
(http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff259/allhallowsday/WHATTHEHECKISTHIS7.jpg)

Remington Electric Razor commercials?  :teddyr:

Nome!

I was reading an anime magazine a while back, and there was an article discussing this very issue (though in that case, it was what series started anime genres/cliches-giant robots, fan service, magical girls, etc). One of the major issues the article brought up, which many have already mentioned here in one way or another, is that there is a difference between a film/series that creates a genre, and one that makes the conventions of the genre stick. To use another anime reference (I'm about to really nerd out here), the first real japanese "magical girl" series was Sally the Witch, back in the 70's. Yet the show that made the trend popular was Cutie Honey, which came much later. In the same way, while Blood Feast may have been the first to use gore, Psycho is definately the film that made the slasher genre really take off. (

Psycho preceded Blood Feast by 3 years. The slasher sub-genre really didn't take off until much later. Though Halloween was the catalyst for it, even though it existed in bits before that, what really set it into motion, IMO, was Friday the 13th. The number of slasher flicks released shortly after the success of Friday the 13th was astounding. Friday the 13th was released 2 years after Halloween.

BTW, did The Attack of the Killer Tomatoes introduce the trope of monsters being killed by music?

MR VAMPIRE - Jiang Shi
[/quote]

Heh, yeah.  Here's a few other HK film sub-genres.

The gambling film - God of Gamblers
Heroic Bloodshed - A Better Tomorrow (I've heard some people argue Long Arm of the Law, but I disagree)
Kung fu film - The Chinese Boxer (in the sense of being based around bare handed fighting instead of weapons fighting)

Also, the blind/handicapped fighter genre really starts off with the first Zatoichi film, The Tale of Zatoichi.

Hey!  Allhallowsday asked a question!  We should at least try to answer --
I don't know what film the still is from -- It looks French/late '50's/early '60's.  But what genre hasn't been discussed yet?
She looks like she's trying to seduce him -- but it couldn't be the first "let's kill my husband for money" flick, as this doesn't look as old as "Double Indemnity" --
We need clues --
peter johnson/denny clueless

Is it an obscure non-English documentary that is considered a groundbreaking classic in it's country of origin?

 :teddyr:

Hardly obscure, though it's a near miracle the film is extant.  It is non-English but no documentary... and considered a groundbreaking classic of world cinema. 

Wages of Fear?

Not sure if it INVENTED the genre, but 'Poultrygiest' is the best Independent, Low-Budget, Zombie-Chicken Musical Parody I've seen in , ,well, , ever.

Nome.  The film is Italian and quite a bit earlier than WAGES OF FEAR.  If you'd seen this film you'd know it by the still.  Some say this is the genesis of a film school, many dissent, and understandably. 
(http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff259/allhallowsday/WHATTHEHECKISTHIS7.jpg)

Is it "Rome, Open City?"

You're getting warmer...

Not "The Bicycle Thief"?

Not THE BICYCLE THIEF or BICYCLE THIEVES (aka LADRI DI BICICLETTE).  You boys need to look at more of these great Italian films...  :smile:  This film is typically cited as the first "Neorealist" film, or "proto" neorealist, but as I wrote, an argument could be made that it isn't. 

Who you callin' boy, boy?  :hatred:

(http://www.filmfreakcentral.net/dvdreviews/tarzancoltreascap.jpg)


Why, it's Ossessione (Obsession), neo-naturally!

OSSESSIONE is correct!   Made during the war, and banned by the Fascists, they even attempted to eradicate the film by destroying all prints and negatives (but LUCHINO VISCONTI kept a copy negative hidden).  This film is usually the starting point for critics and fans of Italian Neorealism. 

Since Metropolisforever doesn't seem to be around, I'm glad to hijack his game.  If you care to Raffine, post another pic with either a hint of the genre, as the starter of one, or whatever you want.  Let's not get too obscure!  I'm surprised OSSESSIONE was such a difficult one! 

and despite it not being an overt exploitation flick, it's widely recognized that the virgin spring (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Virgin_Spring) (1960) was one of the precursors to last house on the left.

THE VIRGIN SPRING is a film I'm not fond of and the progenitor of LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT, a film I loathe (yet, I recognize it's importance).  THE VIRGIN SPRING is a fable, and, artful enough to get away with it's subject matter in ways that LAST HOUSE does not.   

Now there's an irony.

First, thank you; I had seen this movie back in the 70s on PBS, not long after Last House was released, but had no idea what it was called.

I was going to mention some of the scenes from it, but being that I did not know what it was, or the year, it seemed pointless. Certainly a controversial point in the film is the father killing the young boy; that scene alone would probably prevent it from being shown today.

A major difference between The Virgin Spring and Last House (aside from the period of the films) is that the father in Virgin Spring has no fear of the men who murdered his daughter; quite the contrary, when the showdown comes to a head, he is the one in control of two cowering men.

Certainly another difference is symbolism in Virgin Spring, and lack of anything beyond a basic script in Last House; unless you want to count the keystone cops as depth.

The father, in Virgin Spring, bides his time in taking revenge. I don't remember it all that well, but he does not fear the men, but more he seems to question what he ultimately feels he has to do.

There certainly is more than several references to cleansing in The Virgin Spring. The father wrestles a tree to the ground to use for the scrubbers to allow to men to bathe before he enacts his revenge.

The killing of the child could be taken in several ways from extinguishing the evil completely including any seed from which it can grow, to suggesting that no apple falls far from the tree.

A scene that grossed me out at the time was when the mute took a bite out of the loaf of bread that the sister had placed the frog in, and he bit right into the frog.

It's been a while since I have seen Virgin Spring, over 30 years, so my memories may not be that good.

well, i'm not trying to say that the two films are of the same quality.

I'm reminded of It! The Terror from Beyond Space, which had an extraterrestrial that hid in ventilator shafts, dragged people off to their deaths, was near impervious to weapons, and slowly picked the crew off one by one, as they gradually lost their ground and were forced to close off sections of their ship... um, except "It!" came out in the fifties  :tongueout: Truly, it's all been done before...

OK: Here's a couple of photos from films that invented their genres that might be a bit easy:

Film #1.
(http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t214/morrisawilliams/1234.jpg)

Film #2.
(http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t214/morrisawilliams/12345.jpg)

What do you mean?  It was on IFC, I believe, a year or two ago.

Not sure about #1, but pretty sure #2 is BEACH PARTY.

Do I post 1/2 of a picture from a film that founded a half-genre, or what?   :bouncegiggle:  I'll defer to whoever can get #1.

Film #1 is THE BEAST FROM 20,000 FATHOMS?

Both correct!

BEACH PARTY created those wonderful 'beach' films of the 60's and THE BEAST FROM 20,000 FATHOMS started the 'giant radioactive monster on the loose' genre, which in turn spawned the Japanese kaiju series.

Whoops - and sorry: I didn't think through the complications created by posting two photos.

Dude...Earth calling...they want you to come back. :lookingup:

I guess I should have specified on broadcast or otherwise public television in a time since a bare breast was accidentally exposed during Super Bowl half-time that networks have been a little timid with regard to certain subjects for fear of government fines or other threatened retaliations.

Remember the public broadcast of Saving Private Ryan, uncut? I don't. Our local station opted not to show it in the face of the Super Bowl fiasco. I didn't disagree with them as I feel that it was not only a stupid move, but awfully damn egotistical of Spielberg to think his use of the word 'f**k' is art over anybody else's.

I'm certain there are cable stations that show unedited episodes of The Jeffersons, All in the Family, and other shows that would be too politically incorrect for today's so-called standards; there are other stations that won't show them unedited.

I said 'probably' as it is a supposition and I don't know for certain, but I would guess that some stations would be a little timid about a scene where a child is killed by a man hurtling him overhead and throwing him against a wall to presumably break his neck (I suppose).

You may want to look up 'probable' and 'absolute' in a dictionary.

Who cares? 
What film is this...?

(http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/ff259/allhallowsday/WHATTHEHECKISTHIS9.jpg)

Please post yer own pic, we can play two at once, or are we overextended?   :smile: 

I'm overextended--or at least, that's what SHE said.  :smile:

Ah!  Ah!!!  I know that picture -- little boy commits suicide at the end -- That's postwar Aachen in the background --
CAN"T THINK OF NAME OF FILM!!!  Going crazy!!
peter johnson/denny crane

Now, now!  Shouldn't give away the end of movies...  :wink:  Hint: This is one of the most remarkable of all the films described as Neorealism.

Since nobody guessed, and not to make Peter Johnson crazed: GERMANIA ANNO ZERO is the film.