MovieChat Forums > Seul contre tous (1999) Discussion > Do we really need films like this?

Do we really need films like this?


I'm certainly no moralist but I watched this after reading many comments on here about it and it's really not what I expected. There are claims of brilliance and ground-breaking cinematography, if blatant shock tactics are brilliant then I know nothing. What is the merit of showing a scene where a man actually continually punches a pregnant woman in the stomach? There are even comments on here to say she deserved it! That alone should stop anyone from watching this disturbing film. Another poster actually asked the question "Is this character really bad or a victim of his surroundings?" As if our surroundings or upbringing is an excuse for raping your own daughter! It may be a factor, but it certainly isn't an excuse. If we want to know about incest, rape, murder, violence, we can always watch the news. Let's not forget this is still creative film making not factual or anecdotal reporting and I really am struggling to find the value in watching something like this. What do we gain as a viewer? What have we learned? How are we entertained? What are we meant to feel? If disgust was the objective, the film hits the mark, but is that ever a reason to watch a film? True, it was very believable, even the extreme scenes (most of the film) were honestly portrayed and well acted but what is the point? I want an experience from anything I take part in, from a sit-com, to a film, to a poker game to a bungee jump. I never want to just play a passive part in anything I commit to. It doesn't mean I want explosions or special effects, just a moving or emotional experience, be it sad, exciting, thrilling, funny, thought-provoking or any other emotional adjective you can apply. For all the people who now jump on the "thought-provoking" part, yes, absolutely it was thought-provoking, it resulted in me writing this post after all, but to what end? I don't feel in any way different after watching it, and I think that is the crux, if I haven't learned anything new or I haven't had any kind of emotional (any kind of emotion) reaction, I've wasted my time. What's worse, maybe I wasted my time (about 10 minutes so it's not so crucial!) writing this! My motivation for doing so was just to see if there any like-minded people out there. I don't need validation for my beliefs however, I'm just wondering if I'm in the minority or the majority (from the comments I've read here, very much the minority, but that's ok!) I'm not religious (actually I'm a completely committed atheist!), I don't have any kind of hang-ups, and I don't stand on any moral high ground, I just really question the need for film making of this kind. Oh, and for anyone completely opposed to my views about this film and it's ilk, watch Bad Boy Bubby, although completely ridiculous in plot, you'll probably enjoy it (that's honestly not meant as condescending as it reads, sorry!)

reply

Yes, we do need films like this. This picture, like it or hate it, leaves an imprint upon the viewer. It forces viewers to actually think about what they have just seen. And maybe even discuss it. Just like you have.

"Master your high or die under the staff!"

reply

So basically you are saying that you would watch anything, regardless of the content? Everything we watch leaves an imprint, some are deeper and some imprints linger longer than others. It didn't force me to think about the subject matter or the content of the film at all. It made me question the need to watch it in the first place. I'm not discussing the characters motivations or the reality of the situations in any way, absolutely not.
Have a look at this thread and tell me if you don't agree with anything I've said.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0157016/board/thread/121028301
You're right on one count, I am actually discussing the film (in whatever context) here, so you could argue that without watching the film, I wouldn't be writing this! That's too paradoxical for my small brain to work out!

reply

I want to see everything that isn't boring and mundane.

I don't care about an "imprint" or whatever it is that you're talking about. I enjoy new experiences. Movies that bring nothing new to the table are a dime a dozen... they are the feed for the livestock amongst us.

Movies like this... they stimulate parts of the brain that otherwise would be left unstimulated. Therein is value far above the price of the DVD.

Everything you turn your eyes from is another thing you don't fully understand.

reply

What we need are more films like these.

Keep up the good work Gasper .

reply

Whoever wrote that is obviously playing a sick joke. Can't you tell? You shouldn't rule out a thought-provoking movie just because of a stupid comment like that. Why didn't you post one of the many intelligent comments posted by someone who actually got something out of the film? It's the story of a very troubled man. Like it or not, there are people like that. This film is going places other films do not. If you don't like it, don't watch it. But saying that it shouldn't have even been made? That's a step too far. Have you even seen Irreversible? Read Roger Ebert's review where he explains how that film is a statement against rape and violence:

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20030314/REVIEWS/303140303/1023

We do need movies like these.

"Due to budgetary setbacks, the light at the end of the tunnel has been shut off."

reply

[deleted]

Percepto, the 10 minutes you took to write that were not wasted. And don't think that we'll automatically think you're religious for not liking a film that happens to be graphic--I am deeply religious (in a hopefully good way, not the bad everyone-except-Christians-suck way), and I loved Noe's "Irreversible." As for this film... well, I'm glad I watched it. It was very, very moving. I think the very end made the film a better film than it might have otherwise been, because the Butcher finally realizes he doesn't want to live alone, that his determination to be alone was him trying to compensate for his sh!!tty life. It redeems the movie a little in my eyes. But I still don't agree with the Butcher's view of the world. He wants to be a victim to make himself feel better, but he got himself in all those messes. He could have chosen to jack off or sleep with whores instead of getting into bad relationships; he could have chosen to learn all the facts before chasing after the man who he mistakenly thought molested his daughter. But he made his own mistakes, and he got himself into every bad position he got into.

But I think films like this should be watched by those wise enough to handle them. Even if we don't agree with it. As Milton says, if you haven't had your beliefs tested, then they aren't worth anything. Well, the first 80 minutes of this movie tested my belief that we are not victims and that we are responsible for our life's outcome, and my belief that life is not pointless and meaningless. And in the end, this movie did not change those beliefs of mine. As an added bonus, I now have a bit better idea as to where all these "victimized" people are coming from, and I now know how better to handle it.

I gave this film 8/10 (keep in mind I'm free with 10's, though). But I gave "Irreversible" 10/10.

"Introduce a little anarchy." ~The Joker
"We Fascists are the only true anarchists." ~The Duke

reply

Really well said, johnmichael-2!

Deeply Religious? And your signature contains both a quote from Salo and from the Joker? Wow...I might actually like your church.

"Master your high or die under the staff!"

reply

Thanks for your reply. I still haven't seen "Irresversible" and my inquisitive nature tells me that I know I will sooner or later. If I'm not "wise" enough to watch films like this, then so be it (I'm not taking your comment personally, as I said in my 1st post, I have no hang-ups or concerns about my own beliefs) but it seems people are forgetting, it is just a film after all. It's not a documentary, it is someone's creative interpretation.
Just to be clear, I watch the "SAW" films with relish and they are among the most brutal and horrific films I have ever seen. The difference is (to me, anyway) is they are not trying to make some sort of social comment. It is just a piece of entertainment and I am left entertained afterwards. This film did not entertain me, stimulate me (again, apart from the proviso that I was obviously stimulated enough to write on here!) engage me or otherwise occupy me.
My beliefs have not been "tested" in any way. I'm not questioning anything apart from the value in watching it. I still feel the same way, I can watch or read the news if I want my beliefs tested as there is enough depravity in the real world for me to ever feel the need need to search it out in films.

reply

Hi,

Well, first I would like to appologies for my english. I'm not english or american so you might find some mistakes.

Anyway, I'm pretty surprise by your reaction about this film.
I agree, it's just a movie and a creative interpretation.
But what a creative interpretation!
Nobody can say that we like "clockwork orange" or "salo" for the horrors and the violence on it (I hope...), but for the way they express the limits of human being and conscious, the way they chocked us with the realism of societies allowing things like these happening.
And I think it's working way better than any documentaries.
I'm not talking about the way it's written that's another subject.
I would love to see news written like this everyday but it's definetly not the case.
I'm not even talking about "Philippe Nahon"(the butcher) performance, just amazing.
I just think that you didn't watch it at the right time.
If you were looking for entertainement, noé is not the director whose going to entertain you.
There's a major difference between films like "saw" and films like "seul contre tous" (original french title).
In the first one, the main purpose of the movie is to show you some horror and entertain you with it.
You're right, the second one is a social critic and the subject of the film itself is the loneliness, the poverty, the stupidity, the fascism and the violence is just an expression of it.
I think we forgot sometimes that the purpose of films are not only entertainment .
The good thing about cinema is that it brings you in a lot of different worlds even the most realistic and horrible ones, and in this case it's also questioning about the world and the era we're living in.
This is just my point of view about that kind of films and most precisely this one that I really like for a lot of different reason but it's not the subject.
I tried to answer that question: "Do we really need films like this?" and for me that question doesn't even exist. There's films like this! Like it or not, they're part of that magnificent art called cinema and I think they have a lot of things to tell and teach us.
I would like to be more precise on everything I wrote but there's so many things to say about this film.
I don't expect you to change you're mind about this film I just hope you'll watch it again with another point of view... sometimes.
Best regards

reply

I can watch or read the news if I want my beliefs tested as there is enough depravity in the real world for me to ever feel the need need to search it out in films.


EXACTLY THE REASON I WONT BE WATCHING THIS FLIK......

reply

Gaspar Noe is a confused man who thinks he is making art just by showing outrageously violent and explicit images.

Nothing is true. Everything is permitted.

reply

Well your name is Genghis Khan, so... I'm not real keen on your opinion when it comes to violence and explicit imagery. Gaspar Noe is quickly proving to be one of the most groundbreaking directors of his generation, perhaps not the greatest, but certainly very talented. People like you would have said the same things about Kubric's "A Clockwork Orange" in the 70's, or Bunuel's "Un Chien Andalou" in the 20's. If everyone was like you, we would never make any sort of advancement in film.

reply

I agree with you, no we don't need films like this.

Strangely I would shocked and jolted by Irreversible. Because it made me thoughtful of how tragedy and vengence can change people's worlds. And though SCT had a similar theme, the big difference here for me is that when I was jolted with Irr.I saw everyday desent ppl I could relate to and felt sadly drawn into their world. I felt as though at the core of the butcher was a black heart full of hate.

Just my take but if the butcher had just hugged or helped his daughter-the end or killed himself. I might have aligned, understood and had food for thought to relate to. We all do have stress out hard times. But when you want to show me a down and out guy that turns to fetal murder and incest because he has a hard life, F-that. Ppl out there have harder lives and don't do that, so no I don't need to watch nor align nor feel sampathy for a written charater who uses violence & sexual abuse as an outlet for being down and out.

A story, not needed, no moral grounding, a story.
A let down after Irreversible.

I also agree the tech. filmmaking was not blow your mind awesome. The audio punctuations and VO were annoying. Though it made me a bit dizzy I was impressed how the Cinematography added to the story telling in Irreversible. The only interesting element was the docu style conversations the butcher had with old friends.

Sidebar: the Acting all around was good.
Though after this and Haute Tension I'd love to see P. Nanon in a cheery non psycho role.

My 2 cents

reply

Thanks for your input, though it seems we are in the minority with our views on this film, although that doesn't make them any less valid. My opinion has not even slightly wavered after reading all the comments in opposition to my own, as no-one has offered any argument to anything I wrote in my original post. I'll be happy to avoid films like this in the future but I'm sure I'll probably stumble upon them accidentally!

reply

[deleted]

do you admit that even if the content was garbage (i, personally didnt understand the meaning of at all) that the directing was unbelievable. Noe has a certain style or panache that shows in every movie. i just wish his content was better. irreversible still just came off as a movie for the sake of art. Dont get me wrong it was a beautifully filmed movie with a mediocre story and the reverse storyline wouldve worked better forward in my opinion

reply

[deleted]

why pretend that men punching pregnant women in the womb don't exist?

i find it amusing that you think none of the events that happened in the movie are plausible in our reality

worse things happen. much, much worse.

Gaspar Noe uses his skills to show us the side of life we often forget, often ignore. he shows us a side of man that we rarely project on ourselves or those around us. he shows us people under pressure.

just because events are shocking does not mean the application of shock tactics. truth is more shocking than any fiction.

reply

>why pretend that men punching pregnant women in the womb don't exist?

Some people here forget what the woman said to the man before he lost his nerve. I am quite sure a number of people here who are passing moral judgments on this guy's character would do the same thing if a woman called them a *beep* Sure he should not have kicked her coz she was preggy but would have just slapped her couple of times for that. I mean she never behaved like a respectable lady throughout the movie; I even wonder what made the guy get involved with a piece of sh*t like her in the first place. While a man's weapon is his hand a woman's weapon is her mouth; just because a woman uses hands fewer times than her mouth doesn't mean her crimes are not crimes. Mental assault is more damaging than physical assault. I find it appalling how people ignore or forget a woman's wrongdoings but at the same time are quick to crucify the man to a cross even if his actions are merely retributive. Huh. We sure are living in a radical feminist world.

reply

>why pretend that men punching pregnant women in the womb don't exist?

Some people here forget what the woman said to the man before he lost his nerve. I am quite sure a number of people here who are passing moral judgments on this guy's character would do the same thing if a woman called them a f*ggot Sure he should not have kicked her coz she was preggy but would have just slapped her couple of times for that. I mean she never behaved like a respectable lady throughout the movie; I even wonder what made the guy get involved with a piece of sh*t like her in the first place. While a man's weapon is his hand a woman's weapon is her mouth; just because a woman uses hands fewer times than her mouth doesn't mean her crimes are not crimes. Mental assault is more damaging than physical assault. I find it appalling how people ignore or forget a woman's wrongdoings but at the same time are quick to crucify the man to a cross even if his actions are merely retributive. Huh. We sure are living in a radical feminist world.

reply

It's really all about empathy.
Not understanding the creeps and aceepting that that do these things but to understand why they do it.
That's really interesting to me anyways.
Understanding without necesserly accepting the line of thought.

reply

I finally watched this movie, after years of avoiding it because it just sounded too punishing. But now I'm kinda bewildered by the shock-value yellow police tape that's wrapped around it.

Sure, it was well made for what it was trying to achieve. The antihero's voiceover thoughts and his assault on the pregnant girlfriend (though she's made wholly unsympathetic) were duly politically-incorrect "extreme."

Still I found Noe's vision too narrow to really care about anyone here. The protagonist is an ugly cartoon of rage and frustration--but still a cartoon. The rotely shocking, mostly off-screen incest element has been much more powerfully explored in other movies.

I just don't get it. Not that I really WANT to be appalled, offended, or whatever. But if that's the goal, "I Stand Alone" feels a strained exercise in contrived nastiness that just isn't all that horrific. It tries, but falls short. I take it from some reports that "Irreversible" goes a lot further.

reply

I am a Christian, and have made it somewhat of a mission to find and watch deeply disturbing films. I'm not sure why, maybe it's the simple fact that they are disturbing, but I'm not afraid of being disturbed. This movie, like all the best disturbing movies I've seen (Salo, Last House on the left, Calvaire, Cannibal Holocaust, I spit on your grave, Eden Lake, Deliverance, Gorno, Elephant, Summer Scars, Family Portraits: A Trilogy of America, etc.) forces me to examine the point of view of the main characters, or the philosophy the director is trying to show us if he/she cares to do so. I Stand Alone and films like it are necessary because it reflects the condition of the world for many, and we need to understand the points of view in these movies if we ever want to change this world (even a little bit) for the better. The entertainment value may not be present in these films, but I ask who said all movies have to entertain us just to be considered good. If movies just engage us (on an intellectual level) they should also be considered good and important movies.

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

reply

Thanks for the recommendation, Bad Boy Bubby was good :) Not sure how similar it is to this one though.

reply

Bad Boy Bubby is one of my favorites. I Stand Alone was OK, but the original title One Against All is more accurate, and could stand as Noe's motto.

reply