It's weird how a lot of people just don't get it

Has anyone watched all three films and realised that there's a storyline running throughout? People keep saying 'there's no storyline'... it's about the downfall into depravity and how it destroys those who focus on it. The fact that throughout the three films the main characters become increasingly hostile toward each other I found more powerful and realistic than the other much cited 'in the mind of a killer' movie Henry:PSK (the ending of which I found a tad abrupt). And you can look at it one of two ways: 20mins of footage of girls throwing up on each other is boring and pointless, or 20mins of footage of girls throwing up on each other becomes increasingly disturbing because the killers DON'T get bored of it.

And yeah, I'm a geek, and I've watched it multiple times. But better this than *beep* saw or hostel bull*beep*.

The great filmmakers of the past century are rolling over in their graves.

It's not a point of getting it or not, because anybody that can process a film can conclude the purpose, or atleast some of the initial aspects the director, writers, wanted to express. But the reason why this receives critisism is because it's utter trash. Plain and simple. I understand pushing the envelope, showing these killers in their everyday lives, and so forth, but it's so depraved that it ruins the point of cinema. If I wanted to see sick and twisted things I would watch the news or kill someone myself!

Cinema has come a long way, but too much realism ruins the purpose of a film. I know kids die, people are murdered, and I know serial killers counld be next door, but I don't need a first person perspective to see that. A good film leaves the details to the imagination, and has a purpose. Vogel is no genius for creating a fake snuff film. I like films that are realistic, but not untolerable. I like gritty but I rather watch The Third Man over this any day.

Films reflect reality, this is true, and the point is fascinating, but watching a mock-up film has no purpose or reason. It was like watching a pointless series of the most hardcore things imaginable. If you had a tape of Dahmer I'd watch it to see inside his mind, but this has no value in comparison. It's gritty, it's cruel, and it's real, but why? Why did this need to be made? There are films out there that get across the same purpose without the horrid degree of brutality and murder.

Movies are insightful, ie the killers have average lives when not killing, but the intention of films is not to make people uncomfortable, or a film unwatchable, they are meant to be an artistic expression through story, characters, and so forth.

Like I said, if I wanted to watch real murders I'd find video footage, but a film? Seriously? What has ToeTag Pictures achieved by showing us a damn near perfect depictions of murder? Nothing. Absolutley nothing.

If life is so fair why do roses have thorns.

The point is that they are still human and they do like to do normal things, they don't run around stabbing people 24/7.

that's not a point.

"Hey! I'm a genius! Let me post my befuddlement at how others simply do not comprehend the finer points of this film! 'Cause, you know, I'm a genius! So when others don't 'get it,' it's... like.. WEIRD! It's WEIRD how others don't get it!"

Imbecile.

--
"Den Gleichen Gleiches, den Ungleichen Ungleiches."

[deleted]

It plays itself like a genuine snuff film so I can defend it like you, but the first did it right. It was actually BRUTAL and disturbing. This was graphic and gross but it tried way too hard.

MovieKid100's mom is a prostitute. One Direction sucks. You're Next failed. What else is new?

it's not about serial killers it's about serial *beep* everything looks unnatural and forced and fake . all parts u want to see are darkened or not shown , there is no point in watching this crap or any of AU trilogy crap , all u see there - naked bodies , dirt , blood , and few morrons who are playing 'serial killers' . It will make u loose ur appetite but nothing more . no value , no shocker
if u want something shocking watch Philosophy of a Knife (2008)or Kimyô na sâkasu (2005)

I can understand that, I truly can, but he falters in two ways.

Firstly, he shouldn't have populated his film with infantile, screaming man-children. All of the characters in this film are a whining adolescent's view of what a serial killer is, people who swear to seem cool, are bumbling, inept and useless, have no real desire to kill, and are simply morbidly obsessed with disgusting things, but not in the way that people who have morbid fascinations actually are; in the way people who have no clue what it is to be morbidly fascinated with something wrote them as. I'm not going to get into the psychology of the characters in this movie, but I am going to claim that these people have never, ever existed. They are not still human, and they do not do normal things. They are gross caricature.

Secondly, in 1986 a film called Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer was released for the first time. It is directed by a man called John McNaughton, and it is a masterpiece. It is terrifying because it actually feels real. It actually has some sense of the psychological profile of a serial killer, and it doesn't play that up with infantile histrionics or a hideously self-congratulatory attitude.

So, let's suppose Fred Vogel fixed everything wrong with the film (which would be some feat indeed). He'd simply be left a pale imitation of "Henry", because as it is, this film is simply Henry: Kiddie Edition.

And yes, I did /get/ this film. I actually think it's a pretty novel concept, and I'm certainly not saying that "Henry" should have begun and ended all serial killer movies. Se7en and The Silence of the Lambs were pretty damned good, and there's a little film called Tony: London Serial Killer that I found extremely affecting. Man Bites Dog had roughly the same remit as this, and in imbuing that film with satire, the film-makers found a very effective way to make a faux-documentary/"real" film about serial killers, whereas this film is just base and ugly (and I'm not saying that because of the way it's made).

This film is cheap, exploitative, and an affront to the many film-makers who have successfully made interesting and ideologically sound movies about serial killers. It's not weird how people "just don't get it"; you have simply seen something in this film that isn't there, and been unduly influenced by the film-maker, who on the basis of this movie, has not got a clue.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~

What would you do if I died today?


I'd die tomorrow.