I kept reading about how graphic the rape scene in this was, but I found it to be more ridiculous and hilarious than anything else. He drugs her, cuts her in pretty, spiral patterns and then rubs salt on his body and proceeds to hump her missionary style? LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL! I dunno...I know that would feel terrible, but visually it's not all that graphic as say, the rape scene in Ichi the Killer, where we see a guy beating the *beep* out of a girl. Mild, at best.
The poster never said anything about wanting a more graphic rape scene. The poster just simply pointed out that it wasn't as graphic as others have led him to believe. Granted, I have to disagree because I think it was graphic. But certainly not the MOST graphic..Cannibal Holocaust takes the cake for that one. BUT, you should really read what the original poster says before jumping the gun.
Indeed. The poster never mentioned to want it more graphic, yet calling the scene "hilarious"? I mean common, I don't mean to come across as melodramatic, but that is just fvcking tasteless.
I agree with you--the rape scene in "The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo" was disturbing to me.
I saw it in an art-house, and when it was happening, I was looking around to see what kind of reactions other attendees had, and pretty much everyone was just silent.
I think that the director might have been going for the same effect that Alfred Hitchcock was after, when he killed off his heroine in "Psycho". I couldn't believe that that was happening to the protagonist of our story. Really left me with an uncomfortable feeling...
Seems rather pointless, to me, as well. If he was going to let her live or let the anesthesia wear off, I would understand the whole salt part (man, that would hurt!!), but to use salt on her cuts and have salt all over him while raping her, causing massive friction, if he's turned on by pain and suffering, why have her anesthetized to it? That's what I found weird.
-Dad, who's that? -Oh, that? One of my patients. He's...sick. -Will he live? -It's looking grim.
The girl wasn't anesthetized (in the traditional sense), she was paralyzed. There's a difference where anesthesia is concerned, usually people undergoing surgery are either given: A) a nerve block (local anesthesia), OR IV anesthesia or spinal block, if they will be awake for the procedure... or B) a sedative coupled with a paralytic to put them to sleep & then keep them from moving if they will be put under for a procedure. This is what General anesthesia is. But in the case of the film, he only gave her the paralytic agent, to keep her from moving, but otherwise she was wide awake & in plenty of pain.
Only reason I know this is because I used to be a surgical tech.
I agree that it wasn't the worst of the worst but it just shows you how desensitized people are getting if they can watch something like that and laugh it off. Think of what that would be like for someone. For me it's not necessarily how much is shown but the very idea of what something would actually be like to experience. I suppose it's more the psychological side of it.