MovieChat Forums > The Killing Room (2009) Discussion > I find it horrifying that some viewer fi...

I find it horrifying that some viewer finds the premise plausible


The film misses the psychology of suicide bombers by a mile. It focused on the willingness to sacrifice and completely missed why these people would want to give up their own life in the first place. To save other lives is simply not enough as an incentive. As someone has pointed out, suicide bombers take other lives too. To wit, suicide bombers need a sense of justice. The experimenters in the films have no sense of the importance of justice, just as sociopaths have no sense of love and the bonds that exist among friends and family.

OK, it is perfectly fine to have sociopaths as characters. However, by depicting the experimenters as sociopaths instead of plausible but amoral people the film becomes a cheap exploitation film and/or fantasy (American Psycho, Natural Born Killers, etc) and loses value as a social commentary.

One cannot help but wonders if the film makers themelves are also unaware of the importance of the sense of justice in the context. Of course there is the implicit focus on the morality of the experiment, and all the killing is meant to outrage the viewer. Alas, the moral indigntity is waste on the strawmen villains.

As the subject line indicates, I find it horrifying that some viewers finds the villains plausible, since it means that they, like the villains as well as the film makers, do not understand suicide bombers at all. Will they become our policy makers someday? I shudder to think about.

Am I paranoid? The fact that there has been no film or literary work that gives a clear examination of the moral complexity of the Vietnam War has already become back to bite us in the form Afghanistan and Iraq.

reply

"It focused on the willingness to sacrifice and completely missed why these people would want to give up their own life in the first place"
No sarcasm intended, but did you watch the very last part of the movie? Basically they are only interested in someone who's willing to sacrifice themself for others. The reason doesn't matter. That's what phase two is all about. Indoctrination.
As for the rest of your post, I too felt that the test givers were a little implausible, but I only say perhaps that they only go along with it for fear of what could happen to them or their family.

There's always money in the banana stand.

reply

yeah, what's next? going to discuss what makes people work for secret organizations like this? what makes them do horrible stuff just because they work for a secret organization?

people are different.

reply

Do you seriously think that after witnessing the gratuitous killing of the other testees (esp. the last one), the survior can be "indoctrinated" into thinking the testers are righteous?

That is exactly my point -- that the testers think that "reason is not important" is analogous to sociopaths unable to grasps the importance of the emotional bonds between human beings. The film makers may or may not agree that "reason is not important". If they do not, then the films is exploiting implausible strawmen. If they too think that reason is not important, then the film makers themselves missed the issue by a mile.

Let me give another analogy. In the old days, the criminal system (judges, jurors, et al) did not care why people commit murder. Presenting a low life with a history of petty crime as a suspect and people would automatically assume that he was guilt. "Who knows what really goes on inside the minds of the depraved? And who cares anyway? We know that he has broken the law before, so obviously he has no regard of the law and can kill for whatever reason!" The testers are exactly like that. "Who cares what really goes on inside someone who is willing to sacrifice oneself? And who cares anyway? As long as he has shown this willingness once we can make him kill himself for whatever purpose we want him to have!"

See what I mean?

reply

"Do you seriously think that after witnessing the gratuitous killing of the other testees (esp. the last one), the survior can be "indoctrinated" into thinking the testers are righteous?"
You see, that's where I think people like you and I have to give the film a little more credit. Not the test takers. I mean, it's possible that if you or I were in this situation, we'd be the ones to die, because we don't have the original willingness to kill ourselves just to save a few more. Phase two was never shown to be effective 100% of the time, but we have to assume, for the sake of the movie, that it's effective sometimes. And that's what they're looking for.
I don't think indoctrination would be effective, but then again, I wouldn't try to kill myself in that situation, so already I feel detached from Cannon's character's way of thinking.
"That is exactly my point -- that the testers think that "reason is not important" is analogous to sociopaths unable to grasps the importance of the emotional bonds between human beings. The film makers may or may not agree that "reason is not important". If they do not, then the films is exploiting implausible strawmen. If they too think that reason is not important, then the film makers themselves missed the issue by a mile."
I'm not sure whether the filmmakers missed the issue...perhaps though, that's what the original MK ULTRA tests did, and the filmmakers came up with a dramatic, probably on some level exaggerated, story to tell about the experiments.
"Let me give another analogy. In the old days, the criminal system (judges, jurors, et al) did not care why people commit murder. Presenting a low life with a history of petty crime as a suspect and people would automatically assume that he was guilt. "Who knows what really goes on inside the minds of the depraved? And who cares anyway? We know that he has broken the law before, so obviously he has no regard of the law and can kill for whatever reason!" The testers are exactly like that. "Who cares what really goes on inside someone who is willing to sacrifice oneself? And who cares anyway? As long as he has shown this willingness once we can make him kill himself for whatever purpose we want him to have!""
I'll have to take issue with this analogy. Not that it's wrong to paint some historical practices in this light, I agree that it happened. But I think a better analogy is to do with people in real life trying to commit suicide. I would assume that if you're trying to find someone willing to kill themself for their country, you'd take someone who tried to kill himself in the past over someone who would choose to save themselves. You would have someone who's so fed up with life that they might be willing to believe anything you told them.

There's always money in the banana stand.

reply

"Do you seriously think that after witnessing the gratuitous killing of the other testees (esp. the last one), the survior can be "indoctrinated" into thinking the testers are righteous?"
Why do you think they tried, quite sucessfully, to make them believe that they were abducted by muslims? They don't want them to believe the testers are righteous, thats the first step in the indoctrination ("it used to take 8 hours").

reply

The testers revealed their true identities and their ruthless nature (they considered killing the other testees was justifiable) at the end of phase one. Whatever the sole surviving testee came to think about Muslims was immaterial to whether he would ever obey the testers again.

reply

I disagree. But I think the riff between our perspectives goes deeper than just this film. I would hardly call American Psycho and Natural Born Killers (one of the most prescient films since Network) "cheap exploitation." Certainly this film is exploitative of 9/11, of MK Ultra, of the torture memos, ect. But I think the punchline at the end is supposed to lead one to believe that it's not Nick Cannon's character who will be the bomber, but rather Chloƫ Sevigny.

All the same, the movie is off point because a human bomber in a C4 suit is nowhere near as effective as a smartbomb or one of our android airplanes. And realistically, this program wouldn't be all the much more cheap.

However, knowing the reality of CIA involvement in the cocaine trade and its relation to Nicaraguan anticommunist fighters, the Tuskegee Syphilis experiments, the real MK ULTRA experiments, the torture memos, ect. ect. ect. just to name a select few evils (and those are just of the US government, to say nothing of Russia's habit of poisoning people with irradiated tea pots) I don't find these "sociopath" villains to be all that absurd.

,Said the Shotgun to the Head--
Saul Williams

www.myspace.com/ohhorrorofhorrors

reply

No doubt the CIA has flout the law many times and could be quite amoral. However, I am not sure there have been many real plans that reached the kind of sheer blind ("sciopathic level") arrogrance displayed in the film. Unless, of course, that the rumored plan of inciting Cubans to overthrow Castro by portraying him as the anti-Christ actually existed. (Robert Kennedy was said to have come up with the idea.)

reply

MK ULTA was a 20 year program with 10s of billions of dollars designed to search for mind control...

Google the name Gary Webb. Not only have we done things on this level of evil, we've done them with a disgusting regularity. The torture memos? You know that Abu Graib is far from the bottom, right? They're still discovering secret US military prisons all over Eastern Europe where we were employing ex-KGB guys to torture enemies. This isn't some distant past, this is the last 5 years. And it's probably happening now, too.

And you know what's really screwed up? If you or I were in power, we would almost certainly approve of it too.

,Said the Shotgun to the Head--
Saul Williams

www.myspace.com/ohhorrorofhorrors

reply

You seem to have missed my point, which is NOT that the testers are immoral or evil (and there is a distinction that I will skip for now), but that the tester have a fundamental misunderstanding of human nature. This misunderstanding per se is neither immoral or evil. However, as in the case of sociopaths, it can lead to evil.

The programs you cited do not fit into this category.

And I am horrified because the film makers (and some viewers) seem to have the same misunderstanding as well.

reply

Okay. I can buy that. I think the program could hypothetically work if the testees were lead to believe that had been kidnapped by "terrorists" and were rescued by the US at the end of the 3 trial stages.

,Said the Shotgun to the Head--
Saul Williams

www.myspace.com/ohhorrorofhorrors

reply

When I reflect on the methodology, I think the Chloe Sevigny agent was the real subject of the exercise. She was the perfect candidate for what they had in mind: cerebral, obedient, amoral.

I had to beat them to death with their own shoes. Nasty business, really.-Del Preston

reply

I agree.

,Said the Shotgun to the Head--
Saul Williams

www.myspace.com/ohhorrorofhorrors

reply

I think you hit it on the head right there. The point of the program was not to create mindless suicide bombers who would do whatever the government asked them to do. The point was specifically to convince the subjects that a specific enemy (Arabs/Muslims in this case) were behind the whole setup and then find subjects who had the capacity to commit suicide to save other people. Presumably, once a subject has been identified with the correct mindset, "Phase 2" will indoctrinate him to truly hate the "enemy". The, once he is fully indoctrinated, he can be set loose as a civilian weapon.

If the program were solely designed to identify people with the capacity for "altruistic suicide" there would have been no need for the stilted language on the test questions or the taped prayers in Arabic that were piped in.

reply



There was nothing about MK-ULTRA that made sense so what are you saying? To experiment on unwilling people in the way they did was immoral and while this film takes liberties the CIA is one large sociopathic operation. It's why the evidence must be destroyed. What the CIA does runs counter to human morality and will , if it all comes out will end the US as we know it. MK-ULTRA still exists and it still is running I'm sure.

reply

The premise of the plot is perfectly plausible; further, what could be taken as 'horrifying' is the level of naivety that the average American shows. Experiments of a similar depraved nature have occurred within this country countless times and across the world throughout history countless more. Terrorism is nothing new, nor is it something exclusive to those 'terrible' people living East of the 'civilized' world. Terrorism uses fear to control populations. Fear is a motivating tool that enables the 'terrorist' to modify behaviors to that which are more suited to their purposes. Fear is not some new thing that became prominent only during 9/11, fear has been a mechanism for behavioral modification for as far back as can be remembered in written history.

The science behind it isn't entirely simple, but in a nutshell, when you are exposed an overwhelming stimulus perceived as a threat, your body floods itself with adrenaline and enters what is known as fight or flight mode. The direction a person leans varies a great deal but has to do with the situation, their personality, past and training. The large majority of people in an extreme situation will enter flight mode, in which the brain will flood the system with a large range of hormones whose purpose is to SHUT DOWN the processes of the brain involved in logic, complex thinking and memory. In situations such as those, you are made to utilize your resources in manners that will aide you in escape, not puzzle out the situation. While this is useful in some ways, it lends itself as a double edged sword. You may become completely involved with your survival, but at the same time you become easily manipulated.

Fear can drive even a noble person to doing ghastly things. The Milgram experiments showed this rather handedly with placing someone in the roll of the of tester and the tested. Even in a situation as simple as fearing the results of failing to follow the implicate orders of someone in a position of authority only within the confines of the experiment, 26 out of 40 people complied with giving a potentially lethal dose of electricity and only ONE person would not give a dose above 300w, which is still damaging enough as it is.

You would think that the higher the stress, the more likely someone would stand and refuse. Instead, with increased stressful stimuli (insistence by a figure in authority), you see even less logical actions being taken, with further steps from their own morality. The fear induced by the situation caused others to act out of their own character. This didn't make them bad people, but rather people coursing along the natural inclinations caused by chemical reactions taking place inside their brain. Fear changes behavior in a situation with ease and can be used to condition new ones as well.

Using terroristic tactics to change the normal thoughts and behaviors of an individual has been a tactic of Warfare for ages. To keep a population in check, you strike fear into their hearts by killing innocents, burning down homes, etc. The population stays in check. The same could be said with changing usual behaviors of people. By constantly pumping fear into individuals they screened for ahead of time, they whittle down those who are already more easily redirected to the thought processes they desire and condition the proper responses. The individual who proves he is willing to die for the "greater good" not only is kept, but is reinforced in that thinking- He was willing to die for the greater good, so that allowed him to live. The thought 'dying for a greater cause' is reinforced.


Another trait that appeared to get the test taker through was his need to follow the rules. "I just want to do what they tell me", "Let's follow the rules", etc ... showed that he was compliant and willing to take orders, even in life and death situations. Once again, this desirable attribute was not only identified in this individual, but was reinforced by again, being selected for survival. In that first room alone, they not only identified the traits they were looking for, but also reinforced them.

Many countries before us have realized the application of fear in individual and population control and have utilized them a great deal. Trying to say our country is exempt simply because this is the country we live in is foolish. It does not matter what country you come from, the same kinds of people are attracted to power, therefore, are affected by the power they gain in the same manner. Just because this country has been better at hiding what they are willing to do to even their own people does not make them exempt from the same tactics. It just makes them better at exercising them.

Now, as for the experimenters:

Sociopathic behavior stems from ASPD- Antisocial Personality Disorder. Individuals could range anywhere from being those with lingering traits of Oppositional/Defiance disorders to full blown completely dissocial individuals (those who are truly full blown Sociopaths). Sociopaths are unable to stick out anything long, their attention spans short and their need for gratification immediate. They don't believe in serving a greater good, rather, only in serving themselves. Calling a doctor sociopathic is nonsense- they wouldn't be able to get through the courses before drifting. The doctor was willing to follow the rules of his organization and was willing to wait for however long it took to get the results desired.

Morally Bankrupt? Certainly. Sociopathic? No.

If anything, the behavior is extreme narcissism. The beliefs he holds are absolutely right and should be forced on others, no matter the cost. He himself states it's not easy to kill another, but he feels he must. His idea of not easy is certainly different from that of a normal person- he can justify it is his own mind and pull the trigger. After repetitious uses, it becomes easy to the extent that it is a part of the everyday job. The initial killing may have been a little harder, but once he cloaked himself in his grand reasoning spelling an absolute need to fulfill this grand scheme, than the lives of others are a worthy cause. Narcissism is another cluster B trait and by definition comes with blunted empathy. He can switch it off with relative ease, so long as what he sees as absolutely important will be fulfilled. An extreme narcissist sees themselves akin to god and therefore, able to make decisions like that.

Sociopaths on the other hand, while having high levels of narcissism, come with even further blunted empathy, impulse control, lack of ability to withstand delayed gratification and overt criminal tendencies.



So, in short:

Fear = Behavior modification
Behavior Modification= Control

With the gained control, predisposed personality types can be made to elicit and exact desired response.

In this case, a suicide bomber.

Why use them over a normal bomber? Again, we come back to fear and the control gained from it. With an airplane bomber, you know it's coming, you see it before it hits. With a suicide bomber, you don't know. It could hit when you go shopping. It could hit while you are at home. It could hit anywhere, anytime and can be used to cause less in the way of property destruction and death, but to make larger gains in control.

Think about it.

reply

Unless, of course, that the rumored plan of inciting Cubans to overthrow Castro by portraying him as the anti-Christ actually existed.

you should read the Northwoods Documents. Same philosohpy.

reply

This method of killing people would be useful in so many ways. How could you use a smart bomb, or UCAV against an american city? By creating these suicide bombers, they can attack a target in a packed restaurant etc, without the media fallout of killing many civilians in the process. Also when they need more U.S. support for new restrictive laws, or support for a war on terror they can detonate one in an american city.Seach for 'human experimentation in usa' on wikipedia or google an discover the tip of probably a very large iceberg. Radiation tests on unknowing civilian cities, tampering with water sources, testing on mentally ill, on pregnant women to determine effects on foetus, and on children. These are just the proven ones

reply

No need to tell me twice. But another 9/11 would be more useful than a targeted attack, methinks.

,Said the Shotgun to the Head--
Saul Williams

www.myspace.com/ohhorrorofhorrors

reply

Research American history. The American government has performed all kind of tests on civilians, whether it be dropping radiation on an unsuspecting town or feeding it to retarded patients.

Let's not be naive, here. This is definitely plausible. While we are focusing on waterboarding of prisoners, there are more sinister things going on. Waterboarding is a red herring. Do you think people would so willfully admit to it?

reply

Ah grand-scholar. I am sure your lil rant, dabbling in human psychology will bring about a second wave of Enlightenment. The scholarly world couldn't do without you.

-==-
Life's too short for mediocrity
Best shows:http://www.imdb.com/list/n9h_caKA-ZU/

reply

It is pretty stupid. If Al-Queda had the same resources as the US does, they wouldn't be using suicide bombers, the whole fight fire with fire premise is comical.

reply

[deleted]