Yeah, but to have a film "executed" and something like real life invasion of a country are actually two different things. But then again, unlike films for instance, an event of such type and magnitude would not be rated and reviewed and commented on as if it was a FICTIONAL MEDIUM OF FILM or simply a MOVIE.
But then in his review of Keith Lemon he says (from memory) "just because I'm a movie critic it doesn't mean I have to review all films, you are a DJ it doesn't mean you play all records"... That said (even if the end product was similar) Serbian Film has pretentions of cinema/art, Keith Lemon didn't.
@@onefromthemodem But isn't there a distinction between seeing and reviewing a film? Kermode may feel, upon watching it, that a particular film isn't worth reviewing. Likewise, for a DJ to decide they won't play a particular record, I'd hope they'd at least have heard that record first.
@@GregOrCreg fair, but his argument (in that review) was that he was bullied by peer pressure to see it. I like Kermode and enjoy his reviews (hence why I recall both comments), with Lemon I agree with him that it's not cinema so not worth bothering with I was just pointing out his contradictory quotes.
@milster And you can tell for sure, Mayo hasn't even seen or explored anywhere near as many films as Kermode did, and when Mark was about "Category 3 Hong Kong exploitation cinema" or "Jorg Buttgereit's "Nekromantik" (1987) film, he was like "What on Earth are you on about?", maybe do some more film research Simon? And I also bet my life that the uncut version of A Serbian Film, Mayo wouldn't last halfway through it, and yes mostly because of its disturbing and over the top sadistic and sexually violent content.
Alexander Dahoola Part of Simon’s job on the show is to act as a listener to a mainstream film programme and question anything he believes the average listener won’t understand that Mark says, not for his benefit or for the benefit of those well versed in cinema, but for the benefit of the masses who tune in who like films but perhaps aren’t obsessive about them. This, I think, he does very well.
@@alexanderdahoola8188 Film research is Kermode's job, not Mayo's. 90% of listeners won't understand Kermode here, and Mayo is trying to get him to elucidate, because that's what Mayo is there for.
@@alexanderdahoola8188 spoken like a man with lots of time to watch obscure films assuming that is what 99% of people do. Forgetting that this show is not a lecture in film history but a mainstream film review show.
I'm listening to this so that I don't ever have to watch this film. Mark's a humane, civilized critic and I trust him. I'd rather he told me about it than I soiled my mind and eyes with stuff that will hurt me for the rest of my life.
A good example of how it can go horribly wrong for a mainstream director trying to pull off a mind bending blockbuster and failing is Aronofsky's The Fountain. I loved the film but it was such hard work to decipher the plot that audiences rejected it and it was a huge flop. the mind bending blockbuster is an incredibly difficult dichotomy to traverse and takes a genius to to succeed in it. Nolan did very well, as the box office receipts and the critics praise indicate.
The first film in a long time where i am genuinely wary about watching it. I love horror and most other genres, but i fear this film will stay with me in an unpleasant way.
It will , and it will stay within your mind like an unspoken memory which you would try in every way to avoid or dissociate yourself with its presence. If you are one of those film enthusiasts who drills his/her attention to get the FEEL of what characters are subjected to in situations, then you are in it for some seriously psycho-pathologically distressing content.Also, the actors have done tremendous work of leaving you feel numb, with initiation of post trauma..
Defo agree with you reshma.. I watched it a few years back after feeling that I have never seen a proper scarey film... Me & my friend had dinner then watched SF... I can honestly say that since then I cannot get the pictures out of my head and have to live with the trauma of watching SF consently.... Its weird, you feel like you belong to some filthy club and you're too ashamed to admit you've watched it. If anyone else is reading this then please make sure you look after yourself mentally afterwards, you will have some PTSD type symptoms after, no lie and I'm a mental health nurse
I can't say I watched the whole film, I downloaded it and knew nothing about it. I was disturbed by what I saw, and I fast forwarded through most of it to see what i was watching. When I checked it out on Wiki to see wtf I had just semi-watched I nearly died when I saw the director called it an allegory. Clearly the makers of the movie thought up the most disgusting things possible and made a movie around them - actually the plot around it is a good story in itself, but those scenes were the most disgusting things I've witnessed. Ever. Don't watch it.
Does Mark like Irreversible? It's one these infamously shocking films (along with Serbian Film, Cannibal Holocaust, etc.) by I actually think it's incredible.
its very fucking worrying. i was just on a date with a girl and she asked me if id seen this film, i havent and never will, i had to look it up and couldnt believe what i was reading, but the horrfying this is she found the film "funny". i will not be dating her again.
Steven Campbell Hahaha no mate trust me she turned out to be an even bigger twat than I thought. I'm glad I walked. She messaged me the other day actually lol
@milster I'd rather have my date ask me about A Serbian Film than Transformers. I mean, both would be disturbing, but the first would at least be possibly interesting.
Kyle Kallgren’s discussion of A Serbian Film is worth watching. I couldn’t even get through a summary of the so-called plot, and Kyle explains why there is more to the film than shock value. Never ever going to watch it myself, though.
Also, I understand of course that unlike some or even a lot of viewers, Mark Kermode is obviously a very experienced and mature and intelligent adult film critic who is also very much a leader in his profession and country, so OF COURSE the way he states his opinion as well as WHAT he says would be DIFFERENT to how us simple viewers would do so, but notice how Mark Kermode, even though his opinion on the film is not positive, he doesn't outright whine and complain about "Ew, look at how sick and disgusting" he found the film to be, and give it 1 out of 10 or less and start talking about the desire to exterminate or legally or otherwise punish the filmmaker and others responsible for it, even goes out of his way to talk about how he did find some merits to it ("It is technically well done") and compares it bravely to other (better) slices of extreme cinema out there. And do you think there is logic and reasoning behind this? (Debate in public OR in private if you wish.)
I also say it because even on TH-cam, people who, negatively in that sense and case of course, reviewed, often went and were like "Oh don't see it as it will scar (not "scare") you" or one guy went into long, angry and graphic details about how its director "Should be shot in the "expletive deleted, f word" head" and others, with Mark Kermode, it does NOT seem to be the case, even if he WASN'T overall impressed with the movie EITHER.
This partially sums up why Mark Kermode is really one of the only critics that I like and follow. I even go back to this review every once in awhile as a refreshing reminder of how to properly judge or criticize film, even films one doesn't care for. I don't always agree with Mark of course. When it comes to comedies, even though I think most would agree it's rare to find a good one these days, Kermode seems to get more sensitive and PC which does baffle me at times, how such a sophisticated and intelligent individual can love & appreciate some more controversial or "edgy" films but scoff at a dumb comedic work. But for the most part he's usually very insightful and well versed in filmmaking and a great source for lesser know hidden films.
@@brentulstad3275 I don't think Kermode has got more PC (he has always described himself as a "Trot" & very left wing) but he has an issue with gross-out humour and a particular dislike for the emperor's new clothes that is "ironic" humour. So much (see MacFarlane, Apatow and others) falls into "ironic" where the director invites an audience to laugh at sexist/racist/homophobic jokes and go 'ah... but we don't mean it' - but whereas when done well (and this goes from 1963's Carry On Cabby to present day South Park) the racist/sexist/homophobic character is the butt of the joke/exposed for what they are in much of what Kermode dislikes the jokes are made by sympathetic characters, are insidious/cheap and are ultimately not funny. And that's before we get on to the Sandler, Lawrence, Murphy, Farrelly or Wayans stables. (That said, re Wayans, I love Don't Be a Menace)
Much of the problem with Serbian Film is the pretension and the fact the director cannot decide on the allegory - one interview he says it's a response to the highly self censored, anodyne, Serbian Film industry where films say nothing and do nothing and are funded from outside and then in later interviews claims more intellectual references to Serbia's history. One reviewer got the nail on the head when she said you find yourself searching for deeper meaning than was intended to absolve yourself from the viewing experience.
@@wrexshunt happy new year to you! still, please don't watch this grim exploitative trash it has no merit. It will either offend you or bore you but you will not be entertained. all the love to you wrexhunt
I'm not denying the depth or genius of Kubricks filmmaking. When I argued that other than 2001 his films were fairly straight forward as I was referring to the narrative structure. what makes him so successful is that his narrative structure is fairly conventional making it accessible to the base audience. This is combined, like you say, with a metaphorical depth that appeals to the more cerebral members of the audience. I don't think the fact that Aliens is a metaphor for the vietnam war
Inception was great for what it was a mainstream large budget blockbuster that proved these types of films can be just as cerebral as they are shock and awe.
I hate censorship don't agree with it. Everyone who's of age should be able to see what ever film they like uncensored. In saying that I thought the subject matter of the film was just unnecessary. Don't get me wrong if people enjoy watching that kind of stuff in movies that's there choice, I'm not judgemental but I'm afraid it was not for me.
If this movie wasn't censored, I never would have watched it. There wouldn't have been a reason to. So yeah, not only does censorship not work, it will always work against what it's trying to do. People tend to be attracted to things that are banned and considered taboo, that's the reason people watched this film in the first place.
Crime has been going on for years and centuries 😏 the days of Jack the ripper for example who never witnessed a gory movie and never played a videogame 😏
I think you have to a very dull, callous person to watch imagery like this without being touched in some way. Not being horrified by stuff like this is like not being able to laugh at jokes, or not being able to taste food. It's nothing to be proud of.
Maybe in some movies viewers weren't, or at least some of them, horrified because they found it unconvincing, pretentious and stupid etc and even cinematically too pompous or over the top, whilst knowing it's all fake, to be too affected by it, and they may have a strong stomach for disturbing cinema as well.
people keep on saying he doesn't talk about the rest of the film besides the gore. It's because some people (like me) couldn't see much else of the film except the gore. I mean sure, sit on your high pedestals and say "But there's this meaning to it you're not getting" Or just accept that it's not a film for everybody, and the one's it's not for aren't to be trodden down because they don't "get it".
While not a deep movie, it does have one point. I don't see anybody not living in Serbia understanding that very simple point of the movie, because it's talking about the state of Serbia and the people running the country. A couple of times it's alluded that the baddies are actually government men, who are basically tricking, using and exploiting people and the movie ends saying "even when you're dead, we'll still use your corpse and fuck you in the ass". Which is in a sick sense true because they do use dead people's votes during elections... They even used the name of my friends grandfather, he almost beat up the guy at the door when he found out. It could have been better without some of the scenes, violence and a bit of more thought, but it's not the worse thing ever. It at least has some merit with the way it's shot and the great music.
Also, when Mayo started towards the end talking about how "Mark would have read about the history of the Balkans" etc I also wondered, does being a FILM CRITIC, like Mark Kermode obviously IS, actually require one to read BOOKS that are NOT related to or are about FILMS, and does it require say someone to UNDERSTAND them well? What if Mark, or I MYSELF for example, was to read a history book, on Balkans or otherwise (I for one am not that much of a reader) and I couldn't UNDERSTAND IT, certainly NOT enough to relate my knowledge of it to a certain FILM, whether to understand its message or otherwise, would I FAIL as a film critic then?
i avoided the movie for THE longest time. so many people say the title of THIS movie in the same breath as "Salo", but i finally saw ASF, and my eyes could not have rolled into the back of my head any harder. it's entirely just a loose excuse of a story, made only for shock, with cheap effects, and for that... i'm thankful. i also have zero desire to watch this again.
I love Nolan...but he doesnt come close to Kubrick..Kubrick was a master filmmaker and in my opinion, the greatest filmmaker ever...opinions aside, Kubrick is a better filmmaker than Nolan...Nolan deserves tons of praise for reinventing the summer blockbuster...id like to see him do something on the smaller scale and focus much more on story
Don't get me wrong here like, it was a sick film i'll accept that but because it was acted and directed so well i will give it at least some credibility. The thing that surprised me more was how did all the actors pull this off.
I think people are missing the point here! If you say you hate this film "This made me angry" etc, you've obviously chosen the wrong genre of film to watch. By the viewers perspective it just proves the film had done it's job, and the cast had performed their roles so convincingly. Getting actors to perform so well in it deserves some credibility at least.
Well... Some topics and their explicit depictions are by their virtue taboo and de-facto not something that can be met with understanding. And it's also about how it's shown and portrayed and this movie just tends to rely a little too much on shock value and it kinda goes beyond genre watching choices for some people. And, well, those other aspects... It doesn't have to mean that either.
I saw it up to a certain point and it wasn't for me. I mean, I'm not sure about the allegory angle and whether it has some merit or whether it was just the director pulling some bullshit right from his ass in order to justify the movie's existence, but I didn't see any allegory either, but then again I'm not Serbian and I'm not aware of the inner workings of Serbia or its culture so I really don't know. What I CAN say though is what I saw of it was extremely disjointed, like a series of shorts stitched together, and what I did get from it was that this movie was going for shock factor-fueled horror. Which is, I guess, fine for some people? But not for me. I can deal with horrifying imagery and cruelty, but only if it serves a purpose and not just a nihilistic one. I love horror movies, I love being disturbed and shocked, but I don't like it when it has no meaning. Because it's like eating bad-tasting food for the sake of eating bad-tasting food. And I've seen people around acting like they're superior for being able to watch extremely disturbing imagery, but that's not really an admirable feat to me. It's really nothing to be proud of. Anyone with a level of empathy low enough could watch a baby getting delivered and then raped to death and not get disturbed by it, which means anyone with a higher than the bare minimum level of empathy will be disturbed by it. It's low-hanging fruit. And yet I can't really feel like I hate this movie. I don't know why. I couldn't get to the end of it because I'm already depressed and I don't need this shit, but I don't hate it. I don't hate the concept or even the imagery itself, because there is stuff like what happens in the movie also happening all around the world, maybe in secret, but it surely does happen because if it can be imagined then it can be done, and unfortunately I know about people who would... do *that* to newborn babies. I'm just not into it. If you like it then whatever, but it's not for me. You know what movie I really really DO hate with a seething passion? The Lion King's remake. But that's a rant for another day.
Not to be taken seriously? Been reading the headlines recently? know much about Savile, Huate la Gurenne, North Wales Care Homes, Cyril Smith, Leon Brittan, Ted Heath? The list goes on and on
MrMartGonzo ye, but his argument is that movie as a movie is not what it itself thinks it is. a competent director would've had no problems "nodding" towards those directions, but the only skill shown in this one was that it was shot really nice. thats about it.
hmm... gore was nice, i give you that much but acting wasn't top notch. just barely manageable, and the score wasn't memorable even the slightest. neither were shit, full stop but they weren't anything to call home about either.
I agree in principle, I thought it was a very good film, the acting was great, the plot was well crafted and it was beautifully shot. I mean, I can at least respect Mark Kermode`s opinion on it because he was trying to be fair and objective, whereas most people, including those who haven`t seen it, judge it because they don`t like gore.
I thought it was an ok film. The ending stayed with me for weeks. And I thought it looked great, was well acted and had a great soundtrack. Whether I would watch it again …..
@Bassbait He never says that he thinks that these films shouldn't exist. Abstaining from seeing a film because you think it sounds revolting has nothing to do with critical integrity. Abstaining on those grounds is a personal choice based on your own beliefs of how films such as this may or may not affect the viewer. Mark Kermode is not a self-appointed moral guardian - and if he started acting like one then I'd be disinclined to value his opinions as highly as I do. He is a film critic.
I like Lost Highway and I like David Lynch. However, its not a fair comparison because a lot of Lost Highway just doesn't make sense and isn't supposed to. Lynch can get away with this because, well... because he's David Lynch and thats his niche. If everybody was doing what David lynch was doing it would be frustrating and unsatisfying. Whilst I enjoy Lynchian nightmares I don't want to watch them all the time. It's not unreasonable to enjoy traditional well rounded stories.
...how does that relate? You DID NOT frame your comment to imply, your humple opinion, that Kubrick was massively important, influential and innovative. You made a definitive statement that Kubrick was unsurpassable and derided someone else.
@bak2skooltv yes i've seen it and wish i hadn't. Technically it's fine, the leading actor is quite good in fact, but it's completely morally corrupt. Dr Mark's comparison to The Aristocrats joke is very apt. It pushes the boundaries for the sake of pushing the boundaries... but where do you go from there? Do people really need to see all that sick shit? Because the point it was making is really superficial and, if there were parallels to Serbia, then I'm quite sure most Serbians would object.
+babyshambler Could not agree more. I watched this with rightfully some trepidation, and the first 20 minutes does pose an interesting proposition, with the hint of state involvement etc. But from the now famous 'new born porn' onwards this spirals into sub Hostel silliness. The 'plot' and the splatter are just so stupid in that crap teenage 'how far can we go' way, that at the end I was so baffled why anybody would enjoy this tasteless braindead movie. File along side such turgid tripe like Love Camp 7, Island of Death, Human Centipede 2 and August Underground:Mordum....
I skipped through 70% of this movie every time some bulls$#t popped up that I knew I wasn't going to be able to stomach, which was almost the entire film.
If you want to know why you probably shouldn't watch this film just read the synopsis on imdb, it just seems like a film made to deliberately wind people up.
I absolutely disagree with the review but there a re some wonderful insights in here. A Serbian film is very much like Nightmare in a Damaged Brain, both films reach for some intangible, and fall short. Neither is innovative, or does it connect on an emotional level, or a political level in the same way that Salo or Antichrist has don, both of which are also rather extreme films.
@Totalpranny Ha ha. I know what you mean. I have a fascination about extreme films like A Serbian Film and August Underground Mordum. I wouldn't ever watch them because I have been disturbed by far tamer fare in my time. I love researching people's reactions and opinions on them though. I wish I had the bottle to watch them though because I believe I'm missing out. Cutting Moments is supposed to be a great film but I haven't the balls to watch a woman cutting her lips off with shears. Eugh !
@Acibeb Nah. Most critics slammed it. As well they should. It's laughable tripe of the highest order. Anyone who likes the movie is a jagoff. And at least Saw and Centipede aren't pretentious.
@Tristanslav 1 or 2 more things: "Industry people might have exposure to the technical aspects of a film." What the f*ck? So what!? No one has denied that on a purely technical level A Serbian Film is well-made. The CONTENT is the contention. I still think you brought up your industry experience (twice!) to try to sound like an authority - that's why I have an issue. "...People [i.e. me] who try to impose their opinion on others by rubbishing their comments." That's what an argument is, comrade.
Whilst I agree I don't see the film has any deeper allegorical meaning the film itself was more then pure exploitation in my opinion. I've seen plenty of pointless horror/torture type films that just show scene upon scene of suffering with no deeper meaning where as I felt a Serbian film did go deeper then that. You feel so bad for Milos and by the end I thought it was a very sad film.
I’ve seen A Serbian Film, and once is more than enough! Two particular scenes are just horrible to even consider filming and you can’t unsee them - not a movie I would recommend at all, even though cinematically it’s not the worst movie ever made
@Tristanslav Thanks, I read the email with interest. I intend to send you a rebuttal; my only fear is that, in order to do it properly, I may have to watch this bloody film again... Just gimme a little time. One immediate complaint: you say I probably wouldn't be interested in your thoughts on modern, horrible, 'mainstream' porn and its relevance to this film. But of course I am interested. That's one of the reasons I'm against A Serbian Film - I see it as largely the same thing. But more later.
well....the BBFC is redundant. Anyone can watch the unedited version online - if you feel you need to see horribiblalityness. BTW - this film is a joke and if you want 2 fuck your brain up good, i reccommend MDPOPE 1 & 2 - which will destroy all your faith in humanity 4eva. Peace.
@ribtin When a 44-year-old man gives his 13-year-old conquest a date rape drug and takes advantage of her vulnerable state, that is certainly statutory rape, but it is also "rape-rape." How can sex be consensual when one of the two involved has been severely drugged-up? (Not to mention that Geimer has always maintained that she begged him to stop.) Polanski was supported by Hollywood-types because they admire the 3 or 4 good movies he has made. It was nothing to do with a miscarriage of justice.
well thank god mark has not seen murder set pieces as that film is even more offensive than a serbian film i would have liked to heard his opinion on it though.
It's the epitomy of torture porn, very well exexcuted, and very extreme. But I didn't connect with any of the characters and the supposed allegory never came across in any meaningful way. Check out the far superior 'Life and death of a porno gang', also from Serbia. Also very extreme, but more grounded in reality, thereby more disturbing. It's also funny, at times even touching.
What I find disturbing is that film makers like this aren't dragged screaming into a padded cell and subjected to psycho analysis for the rest of their natural lives. People get arrested and put in jail for having child porn on their hard drives - how is making a film of a baby being raped any different?
Because it's entirely fictional. Don't get me wrong: I think that the act of infant-rape is sickening and completely vile, but we shouldn't censor fictional entertainment, because otherwise where does it end? If you're completely against the things depicted in A Serbian Film (like me), then that's fine, and it's your prerogative not to watch it. Preventing others from doing so, however, isn't something we should allow. Provided it is rated and given an official certificate, then it ought to be allowed into public consumption.
Kieran McLoone But its fiction that some fucked up person came up with and had a desire to put on celluloid. As for where should it end? At raping babies I think. Its a very easy line to draw when debating censorship.
If that's what you believe, then that's fine, but we clearly see this very differently. Personally, I feel that if a piece of fictional media isn't directly hurting anybody, then it has the right to exist, no matter how abhorrent or vile. Of course, giving information about what exactly is in a movie is important, but that's as far as censorship should go, in my opinion. It's like, I know there's these messed up films like A Serbian Film, and I choose not to watch them. That doesn't mean I support baby rape or anything, it just means that it's not to my taste. How can you say it's "a very easy line to draw"? Can you somehow rank every single human act in terms of acceptability, then draw a line at the point it becomes 'too far'? That's way too subjective of a thing to do.
tinblue Are you having that much trouble distinguishing fantasy from reality? It's a film, a movie, not child porn, not abuse. An illusion to make the viewer feel uncomfortable. I suppose every movie that implies sexual abuse to kids should be banned as well? What a great idea, then we can act as if it doesn't exist and that will obviously make it go away. Your ignorance is baffling. To compare a fictitious film to the seriousness of *real* children being sexually abused is sickening. Please seek help, you need it more than the people watching cheesy shock movies.
@Acibeb fair point. Personally I hate predictable Hollywood films where I can guess the entire film withing the first 10mins. Yes the film is shocking (I though the baby rape scene could have been put together better thou, its a film within a film) but some of the acting is still bad!
In my opinion inception was far better than T2 or Aliens, better acted and a more cerebral story. I guess thats the crux of the matter, he was making a mind bender that had to appeal to the lowest common denominator - not an easy task but successful. As far as i'm aware James Cameron has never made a mind bender of a movie. Other than 2001 Kubricks movies have been fairly straight forward. That leaves Lynch and if it was any closer to Lynch it wouldn't have been a blockbuster.
A Serbian film came up in conversation recently and I couldn't really remember it so I came here to refresh. That's the biggest crime of the first imho. Despite the fact that it's basically a film which relies heavily on shock factor, it's weirdly forgettable, and kind of boring.
@Tristanslav You post 8 replies, THEN tell me you can't be bothered arguing!? The thing that bothers me about you is that you never attempted to answer my very first question. I wanted to know how on earth a film with content like this can be viewed as "thoughtful and intelligent"? I want to know how those delicate words can be applied to a ceaselessly, brutally obscene piece of torture porn. "It's a metaphor for the Serbian experience" - I'm unmoved. Surely there are better readings that that?
@Bassbait You guessed the entire of Inception before you saw it? No, you didn't. Stop being so pretentious. Just because you like obscure low-budget art-house films that doesn't automatically make you intellectually superior to people who watch mainstream cinema. Inception is a very good film, and is remarkably complex and subtle for a big-budget blockbuster.
![แฉ [2/4] 17 ก.ค. 67 “ลิลลี่ เหงียน” เปิดใจหลัง “เอิร์ก เลเดอเรอร์” ตอกกลับเรื่องโกงเงิน 50 ล้าน](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/s8KapfEO5NI/mqdefault.jpg)
![[SUB] 베몬이 교관님 멘탈을 탕탕 후루후루~٩(๑❛ᴗ❛๑)۶ FOREVER 웃게 되는 갓기들의 수련회 | 돌들의침묵 | BABYMONSTER(베이비몬스터) 'FOREVER'](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/FISAO7BwIxE/mqdefault.jpg)
"Well you know, it was well executed."
"Well so was the invasion of Poland!"
Yeah, but to have a film "executed" and something like real life invasion of a country are actually two different things. But then again, unlike films for instance, an event of such type and magnitude would not be rated and reviewed and commented on as if it was a FICTIONAL MEDIUM OF FILM or simply a MOVIE.
I hate to sound like a philistine, but the judge had a point.
@@alexanderdahoola8188 and there, good folks, went the entire concept of a witty analogy "whoooosh" right over your head.
By the Soviet Union?
"Can you explain that?"
"No."
Genius.
Reminds me of the David Lean interview with Lynch, when Lean asks him to explain Eraserhead.
Talk too much
"I didn't understand what you said there"
"No"
“Did you ever see that film the Aristocats?”
"What the Walt Disney?"
That didn’t go unnoticed.
"If you're going to be a film critic, you have to see everything. That is the job. If you're not doing it, you're just playing"
👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽
Sure kermode, nice deflection. We knew he was dying to see it
@@frankmerker630 He certainly was so he could say whole heartedly it is trash.
But then in his review of Keith Lemon he says (from memory) "just because I'm a movie critic it doesn't mean I have to review all films, you are a DJ it doesn't mean you play all records"... That said (even if the end product was similar) Serbian Film has pretentions of cinema/art, Keith Lemon didn't.
@@onefromthemodem But isn't there a distinction between seeing and reviewing a film? Kermode may feel, upon watching it, that a particular film isn't worth reviewing. Likewise, for a DJ to decide they won't play a particular record, I'd hope they'd at least have heard that record first.
@@GregOrCreg fair, but his argument (in that review) was that he was bullied by peer pressure to see it. I like Kermode and enjoy his reviews (hence why I recall both comments), with Lemon I agree with him that it's not cinema so not worth bothering with I was just pointing out his contradictory quotes.
"Lovely Stuff!" - Dean Gaffney.
Lovely snuff
That ending will never leave me. Traumatising.
It was so bad he fucks someone to death
I love Mayo desperately trying to get Kermode to use more mainstream comparisons. To be honest, I didn't understand most of the stuff he said.
@milster And you can tell for sure, Mayo hasn't even seen or explored anywhere near as many films as Kermode did, and when Mark was about "Category 3 Hong Kong exploitation cinema" or "Jorg Buttgereit's "Nekromantik" (1987) film, he was like "What on Earth are you on about?", maybe do some more film research Simon? And I also bet my life that the uncut version of A Serbian Film, Mayo wouldn't last halfway through it, and yes mostly because of its disturbing and over the top sadistic and sexually violent content.
Alexander Dahoola Part of Simon’s job on the show is to act as a listener to a mainstream film programme and question anything he believes the average listener won’t understand that Mark says, not for his benefit or for the benefit of those well versed in cinema, but for the benefit of the masses who tune in who like films but perhaps aren’t obsessive about them. This, I think, he does very well.
@@prefab12 Nail on the head mate
@@alexanderdahoola8188 Film research is Kermode's job, not Mayo's. 90% of listeners won't understand Kermode here, and Mayo is trying to get him to elucidate, because that's what Mayo is there for.
@@alexanderdahoola8188 spoken like a man with lots of time to watch obscure films assuming that is what 99% of people do. Forgetting that this show is not a lecture in film history but a mainstream film review show.
A Serbian Film was a great laugh; a perfect sunday afternoon's viewing for all the family
My children preferred Martyrs
If this is more unrelentingly cruel than Salo I will eat my... Well, the less said about that, the better.
That deserves a high-five
haaaah!
***** well someone doesn't get the joke
***** salo isn't sicker than a serbian film. See for yourself.
Try a newborn baby being raped Fran. Yeah. Beat that.
I'm listening to this so that I don't ever have to watch this film. Mark's a humane, civilized critic and I trust him. I'd rather he told me about it than I soiled my mind and eyes with stuff that will hurt me for the rest of my life.
Hey it's that guy who never gets any.
@@leonlawson2196 lucky. everytime I call somebody a pussy my comment gets auto-deleted : (
Yeesh, grow a pair.
A good example of how it can go horribly wrong for a mainstream director trying to pull off a mind bending blockbuster and failing is Aronofsky's The Fountain. I loved the film but it was such hard work to decipher the plot that audiences rejected it and it was a huge flop. the mind bending blockbuster is an incredibly difficult dichotomy to traverse and takes a genius to to succeed in it. Nolan did very well, as the box office receipts and the critics praise indicate.
The first film in a long time where i am genuinely wary about watching it. I love horror and most other genres, but i fear this film will stay with me in an unpleasant way.
It will , and it will stay within your mind like an unspoken memory which you would try in every way to avoid or dissociate yourself with its presence.
If you are one of those film enthusiasts who drills his/her attention to get the FEEL of what characters are subjected to in situations, then you are in it for some seriously psycho-pathologically distressing content.Also, the actors have done tremendous work of leaving you feel numb, with initiation of post trauma..
Defo agree with you reshma.. I watched it a few years back after feeling that I have never seen a proper scarey film... Me & my friend had dinner then watched SF... I can honestly say that since then I cannot get the pictures out of my head and have to live with the trauma of watching SF consently.... Its weird, you feel like you belong to some filthy club and you're too ashamed to admit you've watched it.
If anyone else is reading this then please make sure you look after yourself mentally afterwards, you will have some PTSD type symptoms after, no lie and I'm a mental health nurse
a hard film to get through...psychically painful
I can't say I watched the whole film, I downloaded it and knew nothing about it. I was disturbed by what I saw, and I fast forwarded through most of it to see what i was watching. When I checked it out on Wiki to see wtf I had just semi-watched I nearly died when I saw the director called it an allegory. Clearly the makers of the movie thought up the most disgusting things possible and made a movie around them - actually the plot around it is a good story in itself, but those scenes were the most disgusting things I've witnessed. Ever. Don't watch it.
"i skipped through a movie and read the wikipedia"
Now you can go back to watching My Little Pony!
The most unnecessarily horrific film i've ever had the regret of watching. The subtext or allegory is complete non-existent.
How is the subtext or allegory non-existant? It is completely clearly spelled out throughout the film as far as I can remember!
Does Mark like Irreversible? It's one these infamously shocking films (along with Serbian Film, Cannibal Holocaust, etc.) by I actually think it's incredible.
Reading the comments below, it worries me that these people are alive and walking around in the same world as my children.
its very fucking worrying. i was just on a date with a girl and she asked me if id seen this film, i havent and never will, i had to look it up and couldnt believe what i was reading, but the horrfying this is she found the film "funny". i will not be dating her again.
+Medina Sod I'd like that kind of girl.
Steven Campbell Hahaha no mate trust me she turned out to be an even bigger twat than I thought. I'm glad I walked. She messaged me the other day actually lol
Well I have children but at the end of the day it's just a film. I think it's well made with amazing acting
@milster I'd rather have my date ask me about A Serbian Film than Transformers. I mean, both would be disturbing, but the first would at least be possibly interesting.
Kyle Kallgren’s discussion of A Serbian Film is worth watching. I couldn’t even get through a summary of the so-called plot, and Kyle explains why there is more to the film than shock value. Never ever going to watch it myself, though.
Also, I understand of course that unlike some or even a lot of viewers, Mark Kermode is obviously a very experienced and mature and intelligent adult film critic who is also very much a leader in his profession and country, so OF COURSE the way he states his opinion as well as WHAT he says would be DIFFERENT to how us simple viewers would do so, but notice how Mark Kermode, even though his opinion on the film is not positive, he doesn't outright whine and complain about "Ew, look at how sick and disgusting" he found the film to be, and give it 1 out of 10 or less and start talking about the desire to exterminate or legally or otherwise punish the filmmaker and others responsible for it, even goes out of his way to talk about how he did find some merits to it ("It is technically well done") and compares it bravely to other (better) slices of extreme cinema out there. And do you think there is logic and reasoning behind this? (Debate in public OR in private if you wish.)
I also say it because even on TH-cam, people who, negatively in that sense and case of course, reviewed, often went and were like "Oh don't see it as it will scar (not "scare") you" or one guy went into long, angry and graphic details about how its director "Should be shot in the "expletive deleted, f word" head" and others, with Mark Kermode, it does NOT seem to be the case, even if he WASN'T overall impressed with the movie EITHER.
This partially sums up why Mark Kermode is really one of the only critics that I like and follow. I even go back to this review every once in awhile as a refreshing reminder of how to properly judge or criticize film, even films one doesn't care for. I don't always agree with Mark of course. When it comes to comedies, even though I think most would agree it's rare to find a good one these days, Kermode seems to get more sensitive and PC which does baffle me at times, how such a sophisticated and intelligent individual can love & appreciate some more controversial or "edgy" films but scoff at a dumb comedic work. But for the most part he's usually very insightful and well versed in filmmaking and a great source for lesser know hidden films.
@@brentulstad3275 I don't think Kermode has got more PC (he has always described himself as a "Trot" & very left wing) but he has an issue with gross-out humour and a particular dislike for the emperor's new clothes that is "ironic" humour. So much (see MacFarlane, Apatow and others) falls into "ironic" where the director invites an audience to laugh at sexist/racist/homophobic jokes and go 'ah... but we don't mean it' - but whereas when done well (and this goes from 1963's Carry On Cabby to present day South Park) the racist/sexist/homophobic character is the butt of the joke/exposed for what they are in much of what Kermode dislikes the jokes are made by sympathetic characters, are insidious/cheap and are ultimately not funny. And that's before we get on to the Sandler, Lawrence, Murphy, Farrelly or Wayans stables. (That said, re Wayans, I love Don't Be a Menace)
Much of the problem with Serbian Film is the pretension and the fact the director cannot decide on the allegory - one interview he says it's a response to the highly self censored, anodyne, Serbian Film industry where films say nothing and do nothing and are funded from outside and then in later interviews claims more intellectual references to Serbia's history. One reviewer got the nail on the head when she said you find yourself searching for deeper meaning than was intended to absolve yourself from the viewing experience.
I would find it really funny if Mark actually loved this film.
I am still to watch this one - watched martyrs and thought " never again"
Don't watch it, A year late i'm sure. Martyrs was horrendous but this is grotesque
@@87frontside what’s a year eh ! I won’t watch it - happy new year
@@wrexshunt happy new year to you! still, please don't watch this grim exploitative trash it has no merit. It will either offend you or bore you but you will not be entertained. all the love to you wrexhunt
I’ve heard enough about this film to know I’ll never watch it. This discussion concretes that view for me. Thank god I’m not a film critic.
thank god you never worked for the bbc i will never watch this film or pay my tv license
I'm not denying the depth or genius of Kubricks filmmaking. When I argued that other than 2001 his films were fairly straight forward as I was referring to the narrative structure. what makes him so successful is that his narrative structure is fairly conventional making it accessible to the base audience. This is combined, like you say, with a metaphorical depth that appeals to the more cerebral members of the audience. I don't think the fact that Aliens is a metaphor for the vietnam war
I found it tried to be so shocking that it actually failed in its task.
I laughed out loud at the Aristocats reference
Hahahaha typo intended.
Inception was great for what it was a mainstream large budget blockbuster that proved these types of films can be just as cerebral as they are shock and awe.
I hate censorship don't agree with it. Everyone who's of age should be able to see what ever film they like uncensored. In saying that I thought the subject matter of the film was just unnecessary. Don't get me wrong if people enjoy watching that kind of stuff in movies that's there choice, I'm not judgemental but I'm afraid it was not for me.
***** And people who play violent videogames are raging lunatics. Closeted psychopaths. Right?
If this movie wasn't censored, I never would have watched it. There wouldn't have been a reason to. So yeah, not only does censorship not work, it will always work against what it's trying to do. People tend to be attracted to things that are banned and considered taboo, that's the reason people watched this film in the first place.
I thought it was a good movie. Ive only seen the full uncut version of the movie. Yes it's shocking in some parts but I think censorship is way worse.
Crime has been going on for years and centuries 😏 the days of Jack the ripper for example who never witnessed a gory movie and never played a videogame 😏
Rubbish! No one over the age of 7 should be allowed to see a Transformers film!
I think you have to a very dull, callous person to watch imagery like this without being touched in some way. Not being horrified by stuff like this is like not being able to laugh at jokes, or not being able to taste food. It's nothing to be proud of.
@milster My friend after watching this covered himself in semen, also in his bed; life is full of such charming coincidences I find.
Maybe in some movies viewers weren't, or at least some of them, horrified because they found it unconvincing, pretentious and stupid etc and even cinematically too pompous or over the top, whilst knowing it's all fake, to be too affected by it, and they may have a strong stomach for disturbing cinema as well.
people keep on saying he doesn't talk about the rest of the film besides the gore.
It's because some people (like me) couldn't see much else of the film except the gore.
I mean sure, sit on your high pedestals and say "But there's this meaning to it you're not getting"
Or just accept that it's not a film for everybody, and the one's it's not for aren't to be trodden down because they don't "get it".
Here is an interesting fact, Kermode loves Friedkin, specially the exorcist, Friedkin loves Serbian film.
Yeah I heard that Friedkin loved A Serbian Film and I'm pretty happy about that :)
*A Serbian film finishes*
"That's quite an act. What do you call it"
"Art" *badum tis*
Less Pasolini than a Lucio Fulci movie, brilliant!
That was stupid.
Nah, Fulci's films are entertaining in their gory carnage. A Serbian Film just felt pointlessly cruel.
makes it a mind bender. Lots of conventional films are metaphors and have sub texts. Thats just filmmaking.
While not a deep movie, it does have one point. I don't see anybody not living in Serbia understanding that very simple point of the movie, because it's talking about the state of Serbia and the people running the country. A couple of times it's alluded that the baddies are actually government men, who are basically tricking, using and exploiting people and the movie ends saying "even when you're dead, we'll still use your corpse and fuck you in the ass". Which is in a sick sense true because they do use dead people's votes during elections... They even used the name of my friends grandfather, he almost beat up the guy at the door when he found out.
It could have been better without some of the scenes, violence and a bit of more thought, but it's not the worse thing ever. It at least has some merit with the way it's shot and the great music.
Also, when Mayo started towards the end talking about how "Mark would have read about the history of the Balkans" etc I also wondered, does being a FILM CRITIC, like Mark Kermode obviously IS, actually require one to read BOOKS that are NOT related to or are about FILMS, and does it require say someone to UNDERSTAND them well? What if Mark, or I MYSELF for example, was to read a history book, on Balkans or otherwise (I for one am not that much of a reader) and I couldn't UNDERSTAND IT, certainly NOT enough to relate my knowledge of it to a certain FILM, whether to understand its message or otherwise, would I FAIL as a film critic then?
Then again, its why Mark is UK's most leading critic and me am just an ordinary guy with heavy often movie-related interests.
what do you call the film? 'a serbian film' , great example from mark perfectly sums it up
@bak2skooltv I watched it the other day and was both replused and fascinated by it, ken?
I will never watch this film. I’ve read the plot and there is nothing there that will add anything of value to my life.
Which director is kermode referring to at 3min 35sec ?
Jorg Buttgereit, German filmmaker, director of films like "Nekromantik" (1987) and "Schramm" (1993).
I don't know how you could possibly argue a Serbian film is in good taste! Is that irony?
i avoided the movie for THE longest time. so many people say the title of THIS movie in the same breath as "Salo", but i finally saw ASF, and my eyes could not have rolled into the back of my head any harder. it's entirely just a loose excuse of a story, made only for shock, with cheap effects, and for that... i'm thankful.
i also have zero desire to watch this again.
I love Nolan...but he doesnt come close to Kubrick..Kubrick was a master filmmaker and in my opinion, the greatest filmmaker ever...opinions aside, Kubrick is a better filmmaker than Nolan...Nolan deserves tons of praise for reinventing the summer blockbuster...id like to see him do something on the smaller scale and focus much more on story
Don't get me wrong here like, it was a sick film i'll accept that but because it was acted and directed so well i will give it at least some credibility. The thing that surprised me more was how did all the actors pull this off.
Watch Skining also from Serbia
Coming in 2021, An English Film
Yes, that was the point. See my longer comment above. (Seriously, no hate/trolling)
now the film maker's intentions all of a sudden matter? tnx, Mark.
I think people are missing the point here! If you say you hate this film "This made me angry" etc, you've obviously chosen the wrong genre of film to watch. By the viewers perspective it just proves the film had done it's job, and the cast had performed their roles so convincingly. Getting actors to perform so well in it deserves some credibility at least.
Well...
Some topics and their explicit depictions are by their virtue taboo and de-facto not something that can be met with understanding. And it's also about how it's shown and portrayed and this movie just tends to rely a little too much on shock value and it kinda goes beyond genre watching choices for some people.
And, well, those other aspects... It doesn't have to mean that either.
I saw it up to a certain point and it wasn't for me. I mean, I'm not sure about the allegory angle and whether it has some merit or whether it was just the director pulling some bullshit right from his ass in order to justify the movie's existence, but I didn't see any allegory either, but then again I'm not Serbian and I'm not aware of the inner workings of Serbia or its culture so I really don't know.
What I CAN say though is what I saw of it was extremely disjointed, like a series of shorts stitched together, and what I did get from it was that this movie was going for shock factor-fueled horror. Which is, I guess, fine for some people? But not for me. I can deal with horrifying imagery and cruelty, but only if it serves a purpose and not just a nihilistic one. I love horror movies, I love being disturbed and shocked, but I don't like it when it has no meaning. Because it's like eating bad-tasting food for the sake of eating bad-tasting food. And I've seen people around acting like they're superior for being able to watch extremely disturbing imagery, but that's not really an admirable feat to me. It's really nothing to be proud of. Anyone with a level of empathy low enough could watch a baby getting delivered and then raped to death and not get disturbed by it, which means anyone with a higher than the bare minimum level of empathy will be disturbed by it. It's low-hanging fruit.
And yet I can't really feel like I hate this movie. I don't know why. I couldn't get to the end of it because I'm already depressed and I don't need this shit, but I don't hate it. I don't hate the concept or even the imagery itself, because there is stuff like what happens in the movie also happening all around the world, maybe in secret, but it surely does happen because if it can be imagined then it can be done, and unfortunately I know about people who would... do *that* to newborn babies.
I'm just not into it. If you like it then whatever, but it's not for me.
You know what movie I really really DO hate with a seething passion? The Lion King's remake. But that's a rant for another day.
I'm sorry that he had to watch this.
Not to be taken seriously?
Been reading the headlines recently?
know much about Savile, Huate la Gurenne, North Wales Care Homes, Cyril Smith, Leon Brittan, Ted Heath?
The list goes on and on
MrMartGonzo ye, but his argument is that movie as a movie is not what it itself thinks it is. a competent director would've had no problems "nodding" towards those directions, but the only skill shown in this one was that it was shot really nice. thats about it.
And the acting, practical effects, score were top notch. In case you missed.
hmm... gore was nice, i give you that much but acting wasn't top notch. just barely manageable, and the score wasn't memorable even the slightest. neither were shit, full stop but they weren't anything to call home about either.
why do you think a guy on the BBC would ever say anything about paedophilia?? hello? the bbc?
I agree in principle, I thought it was a very good film, the acting was great, the plot was well crafted and it was beautifully shot. I mean, I can at least respect Mark Kermode`s opinion on it because he was trying to be fair and objective, whereas most people, including those who haven`t seen it, judge it because they don`t like gore.
Pocketses McFlurry well said I agree 100 percent great film well made with amazing acting and I really felt for Milo
I’m a big horror film fan..... and certainly wouldn’t consider myself a prude.... but....
This film was unnecessarily unpleasant and just disgusting.
can he speak any faster?
I like Fulci.
Me too, from this "critic" it's pretty obvious that this guy is just a close minded snob imo.
It would be too much for me to watch, but the score is intense.
I thought it was an ok film. The ending stayed with me for weeks. And I thought it looked great, was well acted and had a great soundtrack. Whether I would watch it again …..
@Bassbait He never says that he thinks that these films shouldn't exist. Abstaining from seeing a film because you think it sounds revolting has nothing to do with critical integrity. Abstaining on those grounds is a personal choice based on your own beliefs of how films such as this may or may not affect the viewer. Mark Kermode is not a self-appointed moral guardian - and if he started acting like one then I'd be disinclined to value his opinions as highly as I do. He is a film critic.
I like Lost Highway and I like David Lynch. However, its not a fair comparison because a lot of Lost Highway just doesn't make sense and isn't supposed to. Lynch can get away with this because, well... because he's David Lynch and thats his niche. If everybody was doing what David lynch was doing it would be frustrating and unsatisfying. Whilst I enjoy Lynchian nightmares I don't want to watch them all the time. It's not unreasonable to enjoy traditional well rounded stories.
...how does that relate? You DID NOT frame your comment to imply, your humple opinion, that Kubrick was massively important, influential and innovative. You made a definitive statement that Kubrick was unsurpassable and derided someone else.
@bak2skooltv yes i've seen it and wish i hadn't. Technically it's fine, the leading actor is quite good in fact, but it's completely morally corrupt. Dr Mark's comparison to The Aristocrats joke is very apt. It pushes the boundaries for the sake of pushing the boundaries... but where do you go from there? Do people really need to see all that sick shit? Because the point it was making is really superficial and, if there were parallels to Serbia, then I'm quite sure most Serbians would object.
This film was just silly fluff. Nothing stayed with me afterwards. It was camp! Silly wigs and editing. It really doesn't deserve its reputation.
+babyshambler
Could not agree more.
I watched this with rightfully some trepidation, and the first 20 minutes does pose an interesting proposition, with the hint of state involvement etc. But from the now famous 'new born porn' onwards this spirals into sub Hostel silliness. The 'plot' and the splatter are just so stupid in that crap teenage 'how far can we go' way, that at the end I was so baffled why anybody would enjoy this tasteless braindead movie.
File along side such turgid tripe like Love Camp 7, Island of Death, Human Centipede 2 and August Underground:Mordum....
+Keith Thomas Totally agree, it was ridiculously camp.
Yes, it is really a comedy, just one so unbelievably pitch black and gross that few noticed.
Why are all of these reviews cut off at the end in the mid-WORD!?
@daveroberts192 Fair point, you know, i don't have a clue, maybe i'm a masochist.
I skipped through 70% of this movie every time some bulls$#t popped up that I knew I wasn't going to be able to stomach, which was almost the entire film.
If you want to know why you probably shouldn't watch this film just read the synopsis on imdb, it just seems like a film made to deliberately wind people up.
I absolutely disagree with the review but there a re some wonderful insights in here. A Serbian film is very much like Nightmare in a Damaged Brain, both films reach for some intangible, and fall short. Neither is innovative, or does it connect on an emotional level, or a political level in the same way that Salo or Antichrist has don, both of which are also rather extreme films.
@Totalpranny Ha ha. I know what you mean. I have a fascination about extreme films like A Serbian Film and August Underground Mordum. I wouldn't ever watch them because I have been disturbed by far tamer fare in my time. I love researching people's reactions and opinions on them though. I wish I had the bottle to watch them though because I believe I'm missing out. Cutting Moments is supposed to be a great film but I haven't the balls to watch a woman cutting her lips off with shears. Eugh !
@Acibeb
Nah. Most critics slammed it. As well they should. It's laughable tripe of the highest order. Anyone who likes the movie is a jagoff.
And at least Saw and Centipede aren't pretentious.
Merely designer repellency. Like a cockroach spray by Evian. Or Exxon...like licking a faulty oil sump.
Hostel 2 is worse since it is slicker.
@Tristanslav
1 or 2 more things:
"Industry people might have exposure to the technical aspects of a film." What the f*ck? So what!? No one has denied that on a purely technical level A Serbian Film is well-made. The CONTENT is the contention. I still think you brought up your industry experience (twice!) to try to sound like an authority - that's why I have an issue.
"...People [i.e. me] who try to impose their opinion on others by rubbishing their comments." That's what an argument is, comrade.
One of the greatest films ever created
Said no one ever
@@reniisgod It’s amazing, learn a bit about film
@MURKYDEEP100 you didnt make up your opinion of him based just on this, youve obviously heard him before and disliked him so why bother watching this
I wouldn't disagree. I wasn't arguing that Nolan was as good a filmmaker as Kubrick. Obviously Kubrick is far superior.
Mark can't explain what it is to the Legh audience. Because he doesn't understand it.
is that what you said. I thought you were putting down someone else subjective taste.
Whilst I agree I don't see the film has any deeper allegorical meaning the film itself was more then pure exploitation in my opinion. I've seen plenty of pointless horror/torture type films that just show scene upon scene of suffering with no deeper meaning where as I felt a Serbian film did go deeper then that. You feel so bad for Milos and by the end I thought it was a very sad film.
I’ve seen A Serbian Film, and once is more than enough! Two particular scenes are just horrible to even consider filming and you can’t unsee them - not a movie I would recommend at all, even though cinematically it’s not the worst movie ever made
@Tristanslav
Thanks, I read the email with interest. I intend to send you a rebuttal; my only fear is that, in order to do it properly, I may have to watch this bloody film again... Just gimme a little time.
One immediate complaint: you say I probably wouldn't be interested in your thoughts on modern, horrible, 'mainstream' porn and its relevance to this film. But of course I am interested. That's one of the reasons I'm against A Serbian Film - I see it as largely the same thing.
But more later.
well....the BBFC is redundant. Anyone can watch the unedited version online - if you feel you need to see horribiblalityness. BTW - this film is a joke and if you want 2 fuck your brain up good, i reccommend MDPOPE 1 & 2 - which will destroy all your faith in humanity 4eva. Peace.
@ribtin
When a 44-year-old man gives his 13-year-old conquest a date rape drug and takes advantage of her vulnerable state, that is certainly statutory rape, but it is also "rape-rape." How can sex be consensual when one of the two involved has been severely drugged-up? (Not to mention that Geimer has always maintained that she begged him to stop.)
Polanski was supported by Hollywood-types because they admire the 3 or 4 good movies he has made. It was nothing to do with a miscarriage of justice.
“Torture porn is one thing…”
well thank god mark has not seen murder set pieces as that film is even more offensive than a serbian film i would have liked to heard his opinion on it though.
Fantastic
It's the epitomy of torture porn, very well exexcuted, and very extreme. But I didn't connect with any of the characters and the supposed allegory never came across in any meaningful way. Check out the far superior 'Life and death of a porno gang', also from Serbia. Also very extreme, but more grounded in reality, thereby more disturbing. It's also funny, at times even touching.
Now I'm kicking myself for not seeing that one when it played at my local rep theater now closed forever.
What I find disturbing is that film makers like this aren't dragged screaming into a padded cell and subjected to psycho analysis for the rest of their natural lives. People get arrested and put in jail for having child porn on their hard drives - how is making a film of a baby being raped any different?
Because it's entirely fictional.
Don't get me wrong: I think that the act of infant-rape is sickening and completely vile, but we shouldn't censor fictional entertainment, because otherwise where does it end?
If you're completely against the things depicted in A Serbian Film (like me), then that's fine, and it's your prerogative not to watch it. Preventing others from doing so, however, isn't something we should allow. Provided it is rated and given an official certificate, then it ought to be allowed into public consumption.
Kieran McLoone But its fiction that some fucked up person came up with and had a desire to put on celluloid. As for where should it end? At raping babies I think. Its a very easy line to draw when debating censorship.
If that's what you believe, then that's fine, but we clearly see this very differently. Personally, I feel that if a piece of fictional media isn't directly hurting anybody, then it has the right to exist, no matter how abhorrent or vile.
Of course, giving information about what exactly is in a movie is important, but that's as far as censorship should go, in my opinion.
It's like, I know there's these messed up films like A Serbian Film, and I choose not to watch them. That doesn't mean I support baby rape or anything, it just means that it's not to my taste. How can you say it's "a very easy line to draw"? Can you somehow rank every single human act in terms of acceptability, then draw a line at the point it becomes 'too far'? That's way too subjective of a thing to do.
tinblue Are you having that much trouble distinguishing fantasy from reality?
It's a film, a movie, not child porn, not abuse.
An illusion to make the viewer feel uncomfortable.
I suppose every movie that implies sexual abuse to kids should be banned as well?
What a great idea, then we can act as if it doesn't exist and that will obviously make it go away.
Your ignorance is baffling. To compare a fictitious film to the seriousness of *real* children being sexually abused is sickening.
Please seek help, you need it more than the people watching cheesy shock movies.
Aside from it being simulated.
I guess because it's """art""".
well its based on opinion
@terratrema HAHAHA funny shit, and i supose the fact his second name's kermode's a bit of a giveaway
@bak2skooltv it's just pretentious torture porn. There's actually no deeper meaning behind it. It merely pretends to have any.
@Acibeb fair point. Personally I hate predictable Hollywood films where I can guess the entire film withing the first 10mins. Yes the film is shocking (I though the baby rape scene could have been put together better thou, its a film within a film) but some of the acting is still bad!
This guy liked Howard the Duck though.....
+The Vicious Chicken of Bristol Where did he say that?
He's mentioned it a few times during reviews, can't remember which ones though.
that sounds unusual because he say he generally dose not like George Lucas films. Are you sure its he dose not like it ironically?
No mate, he honestly does like it.
+Toad Lash He said he liked it when reviewing Scott Pilgrim I think
I think I tried to watch this film, and just read the synopsis, puked, and moved on.
@hiimnick5 looks like someone tried to spell pretentious for the first time. Go ahead. Sound it out.
In my opinion inception was far better than T2 or Aliens, better acted and a more cerebral story. I guess thats the crux of the matter, he was making a mind bender that had to appeal to the lowest common denominator - not an easy task but successful. As far as i'm aware James Cameron has never made a mind bender of a movie. Other than 2001 Kubricks movies have been fairly straight forward. That leaves Lynch and if it was any closer to Lynch it wouldn't have been a blockbuster.
Shit dressed as shinola. People who defend it do so because they love the extreme stuff. My thoughts on it are just like Kermode's.
I love this film
A Serbian film came up in conversation recently and I couldn't really remember it so I came here to refresh. That's the biggest crime of the first imho. Despite the fact that it's basically a film which relies heavily on shock factor, it's weirdly forgettable, and kind of boring.
@Tristanslav
You post 8 replies, THEN tell me you can't be bothered arguing!?
The thing that bothers me about you is that you never attempted to answer my very first question. I wanted to know how on earth a film with content like this can be viewed as "thoughtful and intelligent"? I want to know how those delicate words can be applied to a ceaselessly, brutally obscene piece of torture porn.
"It's a metaphor for the Serbian experience" - I'm unmoved. Surely there are better readings that that?
@Bassbait You guessed the entire of Inception before you saw it? No, you didn't. Stop being so pretentious. Just because you like obscure low-budget art-house films that doesn't automatically make you intellectually superior to people who watch mainstream cinema. Inception is a very good film, and is remarkably complex and subtle for a big-budget blockbuster.
I was advised not to watch this movie, I now advise anyone else not to watch it either.