What is the most offensive film ever?

[RCMerchant]

Some horrendus piece of filth called SQUIRM FEST. I actually got rid of it after one sicking veiwing. And it cost me over 20 dollars!
 It envloves a very hungary japanese woman eating live cockroaches,maggots,and human sh!t,puking it up....and eating the puke.
Ugh.

Sure that's not porn?

If your a housefly,I guess.

[Monster Jungle X-Ray]

Also, I have to ask, if no one legitimately enjoys these hard-to-stomach films, how do their sales fare? I can't imagine someone popping in Salo for an enjoyable afternoon, or it really flying off the shelves to do that same thing.

I'd still like to see that film, shocking as it is apparently, I doubt the scat-eating and actors pretending to be underage is going to sicken me too much.

I bought SALO when it first came out on DVD with a vague notion of its reputation simply because I was buying most of what The Criterion Collection was putting out at the time. Like some of the early CC releases it went OOP fast, and the aftermarket on that one soared to the hundreds of dollars. Recently it has been re-released in different packaging, but I won't be picking it up again. It is probably not as shocking now given the race to out-gross one another that some of these directors seem to be involved in.

The recent spate of torture porn films and the success of the SAW pictures is giving horror a bad name imo. I've watched the 1st two SAW films, and that was enough for me not because of the extreme gore factor, but because they were mediocre, and very poorly acted. How that they have managed to catch on so well is beyond me, its like someone saw too many Nine Inch Nails videos. I think that even though it has flaws too the same sort of premise was done much better in CUBE.

Whenever a faux snuff, or torture film comes out I can only think back to Nicholas Cage in 8mm, and his strained "acting" while viewing the murder film.

[Psycho Circus]

I'm surprised 'Cannibal Holocaust' hasn't been mentioned yet. I saw it for the first time the other day, sure doesn't make the human race look very good. The killing of animals, rape and torture of people just to feel powerful. . . the entire human race should be offended.

I'd add "Cannibal Ferox" and "Faces Of Death" aswell if we're going down the 'ol REAL killing, eating, raping road... 

[BUREINPARESU]

Some horrendus piece of filth called SQUIRM FEST. I actually got rid of it after one sicking veiwing. And it cost me over 20 dollars!
 It envloves a very hungary japanese woman eating live cockroaches,maggots,and human sh!t,puking it up....and eating the puke.
Ugh.

Sure that's not porn?

If your a housefly,I guess.

It basically sounded extremely familiar to some Japanese porno Something Awful reviewed about a woman eating cockroaches, made me pretty sick reading it. :X

Monster Jungle X-Ray: Saw's overcharge of sequels is, to me, just like any other horror series that wears thin quickly, the Saw movies aren't dynamic or overly good to me at all. Simply reading about real murders or awful ones that are filmed by sick freaks are enough to make me ill for the rest of the day, torture porn films are usually a harsh reminder of those, but without the genuine evil behind them.

Speaking of which, I was extremely worried to read a tabloid the other week, and the biggest story in it was about a 10 and 11 year old torturing a 9 year old in the most brutal fashion. It was some truly upsetting and angering stuff, those kids don't deserve jail, they deserve hell in a single room. I do find it somewhat interesting how it was claimed they watched Chucky movies as a kid, gee, where have I heard that before, I guess history repeats itself. 

[Javakoala]

I'm surprised 'Cannibal Holocaust' hasn't been mentioned yet. I saw it for the first time the other day, sure doesn't make the human race look very good. The killing of animals, rape and torture of people just to feel powerful. . . the entire human race should be offended.

I'd add "Cannibal Ferox" and "Faces Of Death" aswell if we're going down the 'ol REAL killing, eating, raping road... 

There goes my LEET status.

Had to chime in on this one.  Most of the stuff in the original and follow up Faces of Death film is fake.  It was reshot and you will see the same actors in other segments from one to another of the films in that series. They did use news footage of some deaths but that was minimal.  Or they showed footage and misrepresented it, like the chorus on stage when the stage collapsed.  Horrifying to watch.  But no one was seriously injured, but the Faces Of Death folks tell you that most of them died and faked footage of the mutilated bodies.

And Cannibal Ferox wasn't AS bad as others in that vien.  In fact, Umberto Lenzi wanted to show real animal death so he had an animal staked out so a snake could kill it.  His crew revolted as the cameras were rolling and said that if he didn't stop the whole thing, they were going to pack up and leave, deserting Lenzi in an area where a tribe of true cannibals were rumored to live.  He knew they were completely serious and he had the animal saved.

[Allhallowsday]

...And Cannibal Ferox wasn't AS bad as others in that vien.  In fact, Umberto Lenzi wanted to show real animal death so he had an animal staked out so a snake could kill it.  His crew revolted as the cameras were rolling and said that if he didn't stop the whole thing, they were going to pack up and leave, deserting Lenzi in an area where a tribe of true cannibals were rumored to live.  He knew they were completely serious and he had the animal saved.

Have you seen CANNIBAL FEROX?  It's bad. 

[skuts]

I got a video from PETA once that featured live pigs being flame-throwered for "burn research" Their screams were horrible. I could never watch the thing all the way through and eventually got rid of like because just owning it made me feel corrupt.

[Javakoala]

...And Cannibal Ferox wasn't AS bad as others in that vien.  In fact, Umberto Lenzi wanted to show real animal death so he had an animal staked out so a snake could kill it.  His crew revolted as the cameras were rolling and said that if he didn't stop the whole thing, they were going to pack up and leave, deserting Lenzi in an area where a tribe of true cannibals were rumored to live.  He knew they were completely serious and he had the animal saved.

Have you seen CANNIBAL FEROX?  It's bad. 

Actually, after reading your post, I sat down and watched it...for the third or fourth time.  I stand by my statement.  The most exploitative death of an animal was the croc, and the camera spent so little time on that scene that it was pointless for any reason.  The turtle that was killed was cooked and eaten, and unlike Cannibal Holocaust, it wasn't done with snickering at the camera.  The monkey that was eaten by the leopard was cobbled together from stock footage. And as I said, the little coatimundi was NOT killed.  The pig was killed in the pit scene, but information implies it too was cooked and eaten.  Yet none of these lingered over the deaths of the animals except for the scene with the coatimundi, and that animal lived, in spite of the implication that it died.

Am I happy these things were done? No. Am I offended? Mildly.  You watch Westerns where horses are shot out from under the Indians and the cowboys.  In the good old days, they used trip wires to take the horses down at full gallop, leading to many broken legs and, ultimately, dead horses. But that's good entertainment, right?  Or the Animal Police shows on Animal Planet. "But they catch the people who do these awful things, so it's okay." Yeah, watching an hour of animal cruelty for effing entertainment is "okay"?

It's all a matter of what people are willing to put up with.  And I'm not suggesting you or anyone else here finds the Animal Police show entertaining or that you are fans of horses being maimed to make Westerns. At what point do you draw the line is what I'm really asking? 

Animals are slaughtered on a daily basis for food, clothes and other items and very rarely is it pretty or non-frightening for the animal. Ever eaten meat when you weren't doing so for your ultimate survival? Ever do it because you just wanted the texture or the flavor? Then you have, by distant connection, participated in the slaughter of an animal for your entertainment. Sure, you didn't SEE it, but it happened nonetheless. For entertainment.

What makes Cannibal Ferox any different? Very little, actually, in my opinion.  But then I find Cannibal Holocaust to be pointless and offensive in its use of animal violence.

But that's just my take on it.  Your opinions and mileage may vary.

[SkullBat308]

Cannibal Holocaust is worse than Cannibal Ferox!

[voltron]

Baise Moi... 'nuff said. 

Just saw it. I didn't find it all that offensive really, I'd read up on the movie beforehand and I knew what I was getting into as far as the violence and sex scenes go. I'm all for extremity in cinema - it's always nice to see people pushing the envelope one way or another. I thought it was a decent, but flawed piece of work - the ending didn't really do it for me, it seemed to be more of an afterthought than anything. I would give it a  for now, though.

[Allhallowsday]

Actually, after reading your post, I sat down and watched it...for the third or fourth time.  I stand by my statement.  The most exploitative death of an animal was the croc, and the camera spent so little time on that scene that it was pointless for any reason.  The turtle that was killed was cooked and eaten, and unlike Cannibal Holocaust, it wasn't done with snickering at the camera.  The monkey that was eaten by the leopard was cobbled together from stock footage. And as I said, the little coatimundi was NOT killed.  The pig was killed in the pit scene, but information implies it too was cooked and eaten.  Yet none of these lingered over the deaths of the animals except for the scene with the coatimundi, and that animal lived, in spite of the implication that it died.  Am I happy these things were done? No. Am I offended? Mildly.  You watch Westerns where horses are shot out from under the Indians and the cowboys.  In the good old days, they used trip wires to take the horses down at full gallop, leading to many broken legs and, ultimately, dead horses. But that's good entertainment, right?  Or the Animal Police shows on Animal Planet. "But they catch the people who do these awful things, so it's okay." Yeah, watching an hour of animal cruelty for effing entertainment is "okay"?  It's all a matter of what people are willing to put up with.  And I'm not suggesting you or anyone else here finds the Animal Police show entertaining or that you are fans of horses being maimed to make Westerns. At what point do you draw the line is what I'm really asking?  Animals are slaughtered on a daily basis for food, clothes and other items and very rarely is it pretty or non-frightening for the animal. Ever eaten meat when you weren't doing so for your ultimate survival? Ever do it because you just wanted the texture or the flavor? Then you have, by distant connection, participated in the slaughter of an animal for your entertainment. Sure, you didn't SEE it, but it happened nonetheless. For entertainment.  What makes Cannibal Ferox any different? Very little, actually, in my opinion.  But then I find Cannibal Holocaust to be pointless and offensive in its use of animal violence.  But that's just my take on it.  Your opinions and mileage may vary.

Whew! 

...And Cannibal Ferox wasn't AS bad as others in that vien...

Uhm... okay... I should have highlighted the portion of your comments I was responding to.  You wrote "...CANNIBAL FEROX wasn't AS bad as others in that vien..."  I was merely commenting that it is bad, in every way.  It's not the most offensive film I've seen, but emasculation, closeups of slimy mouths eating giant bugs, breast impalement... these were the things I found "offensive" mainly because they were exploitive and poorly done, not to mention gross.  I wasn't responding about animal cruelty, just the quality of that flick.   
And I suppose I should apologize to you for inspiring you to look at CANNIBAL FEROX yet again. 

[Psycho Circus]

I think if someone wants to make these films and people want to watch them so be it. If I, or anyone else disagrees wit the content then we just stay away from it. It's the same in any other form of art/media/entertainment, if someone wants to push the envelope and put something out there that's not been seen or done before, great. If it's offensive or has no merit, that's for the viewer/listenier/reader to judge themselves. I don't find any of the cannibal films appealing at all and agree with Allhallows (I don't see why you would want to purchase those film for the purpose of "entertainment"), but I won't try to change anyone else's opinion on the subject. 

[Flick James]

I very much appreciate the posts by Rev. Powell and others.  I find depictions of rape in film reprehensible.  While there have been very rare cases where such a depiction has been arguably warranted, in most cases, even when it’s being depicted as a despicable act, there is a disturbing titillation factor.  Rev’s Rob Zombie example was perfect.  In the Director’s Cut version of Rob Zombie’s Halloween, there was depiction of rape that was presented as a horrible act, and the act was avenged, the perpetrators killed, yadda yadda yadda.  However, like many such depictions, I was left with the vibe that it was a pointless scene that had no place other than to get the rocks off of some sickos out there.  Depictions of rape in films from the 70’s are atrocious, and even films I like I have to re-evaluate sometimes because of such depictions.  A Clockwork Orange is a film I love, and Stanley Kubrick is an amazing filmmaker, but it’s filled with rape, and it’s certainly glorified to a degree and we are led to feel sympathy for the central character by the end of the film.  Straw Dogs actually suggests that the victim in the rape scene began to enjoy it, which is extremely irresponsible.

I am not a censor, believe me.  I just think that such a topic should be handled with extreme care, and I believe that in many cases, depictions of rape are not handled well, and directors are using the “art” excuse or the “depicted as evil” excuse as a cop out for attracting viewers, because, let’s face it, there are a lot of men out there for whom the concept is arousing, and these films give them an excuse to get their jollys without having to admit that it’s a turn-on.  So, I guess I have to agree that it’s not a single film, but really about 98% of all scenes depicting rape that offend me.

[Monster Jungle X-Ray]

So, I guess I have to agree that it’s not a single film, but really about 98% of all scenes depicting rape that offend me.

IRREVERSIBLE is another film that the rape scene was very difficult to watch. Most male viewers pick out this scene in particular as vile and realistic, however every girl I've talked to that has seen the film has said the rape scene was completely contrived and unrealistic I find it interesting that the two sexes view some things so differently.

[Skull]

Lucky for me I dont remember the name of the film... :)

But the flick still haunts me from time to time... :(




*** this may gross you out ***


A few years ago a friend of mine showed me a VHS on extreme body piercings, few examples:

A guy with his (Hot Dog) sliced into 4 pieces and kept together with a ring, he would remove the ring and his (Hot Dog) would open like a peeled banana without the banana inside.

Another guy had a giant hole in the side of his (Hot Dog) and he used a special block with a hole in it so he could pee.

Then there was a girl with 50 pounds [maybe more] on her (Lower female part) she would be walking around with a long dress.

(I tried to block most of the other things in the movie out but I have a hard time forgetting these 3 characters)