Surprised at how...


... serious the tone was. I know, i know, maybe it was just me, but i just watched it yesterday and was expecting something of, oh i don't know, a slapstick tone if you will (mostly from reading viewer's reviews on this site) and despite how silly some parts were (these parts refer to flaws visible from budget constraints and bad acting) and despite at how outright exploitation the movie is (remember the disclaimer at the beginning of the movie?) I was truly disturbed, and was thankful for any of the little comic relief that was put in there.

I liked it, being an exploitation fan, but was impressed at how... bad it made me feel, not for watching it necessarily but, i don't know, for how cruel the people were in the movie (I know they're supposed to be cruel) and perhaps at how sympathetic some of the victims were. I'm not going to go so far as to say that this director had an important statement to make (but I did think he had an artistic vision, how little there was of it) but overall I was disturbed in a way I wasn't expected to be. The tone of the movie added to that feeling I think.

Any opinions or thoughts?

Peace is not the absence of affliction, but the presence of God. ~Author Unknown

reply

I agree.

I was expecting something less serious. I have trouble verbalising what I mean. Not - as you say - slapstick. But less serious.

Here is an example that I mentioned in another thread here at Imdb.

Ilsa pisses on a general. She could have pulled any face at all, including a totally ecstatic ("orgasmic") face.

In fact she pulls a total upside-down smile.
As if she had just farted in her own space-suit.

It could have been quite a light-relief scene.
But no... More alarm and despondency.

reply