MovieChat Forums > Hei tai yang 731 (1988) Discussion > I can't believe the fact they used a rea...

I can't believe the fact they used a real corpse...!!

posted 16 years ago by Hywel666
23 replies | jump to latest

People going on about all sorts of grim scenes in this movie and how disturbing it was, but no one seems too bothered that they used a corpse of a real boy in it for the autopsy scene.. They had his parents permission and so on and he explained his ethics, but is it me, or is this disturbing as hell?!

I'm not afraid of death and feel that there is an unhealthy taboo element in most countries, but I just can't imagine giving the go ahead to put my dead son's autopsy in a movie, as important as I might feel the content of the movie is.

Is this a cultural thing, where this type of thing might be less of a big deal in the far east? And no, that's not being racist or ignorant, I am genuinely puzzled by this...

"A little plumbing! Got to plumb! Plumb the depths! The depths of hell!"

[–] nihilistic_tyranny 16 years ago

I was a bit disturbed by this at first...
But you have to keep in context.
Japanese culture at the time was based around honor.
They defended their honor with their lives, and being dishonored was worse than death.
Perhaps the parents of this child agreed to let them use his body to make this film, because they believed it would be an honor and a privilege, and because they believed in the powerful message this film conveys.

*Apathy Is The Cure*

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] championofcathay 15 years ago

yeah apparently this guy didn't understand what happened in the movie and who made it and why they made it.

But then again I remember some dude on Empire of the Sun board yapping about how he deeply appreciated the story and history of that film but for some reason keeps referring to that Japanese sergeant as "the Chinese official" the whole time.

[–] hallogallo 15 years ago

--- "Japanese culture at the time was based around honor." ---

Erm, last time I checked this was a Chinese/Hong Kong movie made to condem Japanese WW2 atrocities. The producers especialy flying in a corpse from Japan would be the geographical equivelant of say a British production flying in a corpse from, say, Morocco.

"I think you're a load of old crap too, Mr Mulligan."

[–] TurboBastard 15 years ago

Your right this is a step to far I feel even in film making, every one is whining about a cat coverd in fake blood but nothing about a real little boy being cut open.

[–] Hieronymus_Fabricius 14 years ago

Corpses don't suffer. Cats and rats do. Don't know if the cat scene was real, but the general consensus seems to be that the rat scene is.

[–] mad_men 14 years ago

People kill rats all the time... not saying it was right to use them, but just stating a fact...

[–] sschind 14 years ago

The real little boy was being cut open in a standard procedure autopsy. It was done by doctors not actors. All the filmmakers did was get permission from the parents and whomever else was necessary to film it and put it in the movie.

They didn't just take some random cadaver and cut it up for no reason just so they could have it in the movie.

[–] TurboBastard 14 years ago

I understand that but it's a way over the top thing to be used in a movie I know there are other parts of this film which are very bad but they are all SFX. I don't consider a real childs autopsy that goes on for some time to be relavent or a replacement for SFX.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] CodyMulcahy 15 years ago

It is quite disturbing. I've seen autopsy footage before and I knew right away it was real. And it seemed like the cadaver had facial hair, which more or less clarified it for me.

http://www.middlegraystudios.com/blog

[–] jocrismachado 14 years ago

Yes, it is very disturbing, for me its too... but if you think well, there is not anything really wrong in using a real corpse, after all the person is already dead and parents supposely accepted it. It adds much more realism thought.Its more less the same thing as giving it to scientific studys.
However i think is very wrong using live animals like they used :(.Poor cat.

[–] Falconeer 14 years ago

I also find this stuff completely repulsive. I wonder why there is such a fascination with seeing the inside of a human body. It seems both very sick and very immature at the same time.

[–] escape1979uk 14 years ago

Sick and Immature?

Tell that to John Hunter, the man you have to thank for Modern day Surgery.
His "Sick and Immature" attitude towards the human body has saved more lives than I could count.

This scene was in keeping with the film, and was done with permission.

[–] Falconeer 14 years ago

I am not a surgeon. If I want to see a real human body opened up i will find a documentary about surgical procedures. What a STUPID COMMENT, comparing the wonders of modern surgical procedures to an exploitation film from the 70's. I also enjoy bowel movements, and they are very important to health and survival. But I dont want to see footage of someone having a bowel movement when i am watching a film either. If i want to see that i will watch a "Twilight" installment.

[–] poisonpill98 14 years ago

If you don't want to see a real body cut open or any other equally disturbing scenes, what are you doing watching this movie?

Surely you know the reputation? I'm sure the movie got that rep for being the perfect Sunday afternoon flick for the entire family.

Also, it's not exactly and "exploitation" flick. Mou's purpose was to bring attention these atrocities (which were even worse in reality), even if it means making an extremely disturbing flick. He didn't do it purely for the entertainment of gorehounds, you know?

My advice to you is: try a Disney flick. I suspect that would be more to your liking.

[–] Falconeer 14 years ago

I haven't watched this movie, i have only heard about the details. I love bloody films as long as they are good films. This one just sounded a bit too extreme for my tastes, im not condemning the film. I was just curious as to why people would want to look at material this extreme..

[–] Nocturnx13 8 years ago

To bring attention to the fact that this really happened. If it wasn't this extreme we wouldn't be talking about it. It wouldn't have garnered the attention it has.

[–] sschind 14 years ago

The experiments that this unit conducted were far more sick and repulsive. There were things they did to their victims that the director said even he couldn't fathom showing on film.

If one wants to show the true horrors of what went on in this camp and others like it it is not possible to make the movie too sick and disgusting.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] BulmaPunkRocker 10 years ago

The boy was already dead, and they had all the permissions to film the authopsy, with the doctors dressed up in-characters.

STILL, IT'S A VERY DISTURBING FACT. Unfortunatelly, this fact, and the infamous animal abuse scenes (cat & rats), are so shocking by their nature, that one actually forgot about the film's plot.
I think the director did it the wrong way. Maybe he should have wait a bit more, until Hong Kong have development FX and make-up techniques, so we can actually focus on the plot, and the atrocities of WWII, not the atrocities commited by the filmmakers.

Please excuse my terrible redaction, english is not my native language.

[–] Flynn2 9 years ago

I *beep* hate autopsies yet I am aroused by them as well. I like autopsies on women though, the whole idea of a child autopsy is horrifyingly paedophilic.

Edit: I have never seen this film but I saw a clip of the female cadaver being dissected on documentingreality.com and in the description it said the footage was from this film so I looked it up on IMDB and then when I thought it couldn't get any worse I find this thread on the message boards.

[–] BulmaPunkRocker 9 years ago

Edit: I have never seen this film but I saw a clip of the female cadaver being dissected on documentingreality.com and in the description it said the footage was from this film so I looked it up on IMDB and then when I thought it couldn't get any worse I find this thread on the message boards.

You are confused. This film doesn't feature any women's autopsy, just a boy autopsy. The frosbite arms I understand were real, but they looked so fake...

Please excuse my terrible redaction, english is not my native language IMDb = Catch-22