Human Centipede 2 director defends movie as art

[Jim Tigwell]

"Art is the product or process of deliberately arranging items (often with symbolic significance) in a way that influences and affects one or more of the senses, emotions, and intellect." - Wikipedia

This movie disgusts me and clearly disgusts others on this forum, so it has affected our emotions.
So... yeah it is art. It's just terrible, terrible art.

By that definition porn is art.

Also my breakfast was art. And my vomit is art as it's coming up. Everything effects at least one sense. The wind is art, teen violence is an art. see where I'm going with this? Trolling is a art.

No because if you actually read the definition you would have seen that "Art is the product or process of deliberately arranging items (often with symbolic significance" and thus your suggestions do not fit under the banner of art.

Which makes that a poor definition of art, rather than the examples invalid (though I do doubt that the wind is art. Things blown over by the wind could be, though). By that definition, freestyle rap and oral history are not art, unless words are considered "items". Also, except for wind, every example involves the deliberate placement of items, so I'm not sure what you're getting at.

 

[Mad1Cow]

They most likely refused HC2 because of the bad reception of the first one. I heard people that I know who are hardcore horror nuts had to be close to a vomiting bucket, but that may have just been the concept, I mean I saw the trailer and I had that horrifying thought in my head for weeks, but then again I couldn't sleep for a month after seeing Nosferatu (LOOK IT UP).

Anyway I'm opposed to horror sequels anyway, they're all just cash-ins riding on the same plot and while most young directors make horror films early on in their careers to get the ball roling (since they're usually cheaply made and are some of the easiest ways to show off directing flair) I really hate it when they don't know to get off the train asap and move onto something more interesting like a lovecraft movie, I dunno...

 

[Wintermoot]

it might not be art but people have the right to see it.
same with games not all of them are art but people still have the right to play them and governments have to stop with all this prudish bullshit!

 

[Casual Shinji]

We have to tolerate it regardless.

It's absolute shit, sure, but it should be up to the public whether or not they want to see it, not to the British Board of Censors.

Still, I'm kind of embarrassed that Tom Six shares my nationality.

 

[Wintermoot]

the fact that Human centipede is being considered art is just the biggest LOL ive had in a while!!!

allot of people responded the same way when they classified games as art.

 

[Torrasque]

"Human Centipede 2 director defends movie as art"

BWA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!! HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!! HA AHA HA HA HA!! HA HA HA!! HA! HA! *snort*

A lot of people had the same reaction when video games were called art. Just saying.

There is a world of difference between, say Silent Hill 2, which is honorific and this, which is also Horrific. You know what makes Silent Hill 2 art, but not this? It's because it's an actual story with brilliant atmosphere and real people. Not just a shock/porn video full of mindless torture and rape and populated solely by caricatures.

Not all video games are art. Not all films are art. This one definitely isn't.

Pretty much sums it up for me.

I'll just throw in that while what one considers old peanut butter on the floor art, or a stupid girl opening a can of beans and pouring it on herself before masturbating in front of a large group of people, art, not everyone does.
Does that mean X is considered art if enough people consider it so? Or is it considered art if at least one person considers it so?

I've seen random blurs on a canvas fetch hundreds of thousands of dollars and be called "amazing art", so I think anything could technically be considered art.
All that aside, I still think this movie shouldn't be censored. Its stupid and sick, and I won't watch it, but I don't think it should be censored.
I'm not surprised that the director calls it art...

 

[Bloodlover]

Well it depends very much on what one would call art in a movie. I would definitely not call art the first movie but I did like the original idea behind it. Unfortunately some movies really have a great artistic value but are still looked over because of the controversial manner in which they are exposed. Just remember the movie "Antichrist". It had a deep philosophical theme and the camerawork was amazing but the masses still hated it.

 

[42]

the fact that Human centipede is being considered art is just the biggest LOL ive had in a while!!!

allot of people responded the same way when they classified games as art.

dude, i wasn't directing it at games or people who believe it is art, i was aiming the Lols at the director who thinks that Human Centipede, and i am assuming you've watched it, is art, which it's not.

and i must say nice troll sir.

 

[Gigano]

Sure doesn't look like it.

Though I suppose it could always surprise. It's not like exceedingly dark themes of horror, wanton brutality, and depravity automatically precludes the ability of a work to be an artistic masterpiece. Would have to deviate pretty far from its predecessor though.

But as long as there's horror and gore, I doubt audiences going to see it will be disappointed anyway.

 

[Venjamin]

the fact that Human centipede is being considered art is just the biggest LOL ive had in a while!!!

allot of people responded the same way when they classified games as art.

dude, i wasn't directing it at games or people who believe it is art, i was aiming the Lols at the director who thinks that Human Centipede, and i am assuming you've watched it, is art, which it's not.

and i must say nice troll sir.

People responded with your words here, too. "I was aiming the lols at the creators who think that video games, and I am assuming you've seen it, is art, which it's not."

He wasn't trolling. You are.

 

[Twilight_guy]

Sure its art. That doesn't make it not crap though. It doesn't need to be rated to get released (most store will just not stock it) so all this means is a nice little NR to signify that the movie was so bad that nobody even wanted to rate it.

 

[Stick Antolini]

snip

That's why I referenced the symbolic significance part because although he may have placed the objects there, he did not give them any special meaning and if he did well then yes it would be art.

snip

Yea I really should have made that more clear in my original post, sorry.

 

[Kargathia]

"Art is the product or process of deliberately arranging items (often with symbolic significance) in a way that influences and affects one or more of the senses, emotions, and intellect." - Wikipedia

This movie disgusts me and clearly disgusts others on this forum, so it has affected our emotions.
So... yeah it is art. It's just terrible, terrible art.

By that definition porn is art.

One or more of the senses: check, it's visual.
Emotions: check, lust.
Intellect: No way.

Wiki isn't exactly the source for foolproof definitions, but even following this one we can declare porn to not be art.

There actually is quite a bit of discussion on where the border between erotic art and porn is. Generally speaking the line is drawn at intention. If it tries to turn you on it's porn.

OT: this thing can probably be classified as art. It'll even have some use, because actually good art will seem even better in comparison.

I am feeling sorry for the review board to. Just imagine yourself having to watch disgusting crap like this for a living.

 

[42]

the fact that Human centipede is being considered art is just the biggest LOL ive had in a while!!!

allot of people responded the same way when they classified games as art.

dude, i wasn't directing it at games or people who believe it is art, i was aiming the Lols at the director who thinks that Human Centipede, and i am assuming you've watched it, is art, which it's not.

and i must say nice troll sir.

People responded with your words here, too. "I was aiming the lols at the creators who think that video games, and I am assuming you've seen it, is art, which it's not."

He wasn't trolling. You are.

to that i can only respond, Problem?

 

[KosherKrackers]

The problem with such a broad definition of 'art' is that is utterly undermines talent, skill, ability, or practice.

When something as rich in poetry and metaphor as Jabberwocky, or The Raven is compared on equal terms to some shut in telling us how awful his life is through non-rhyming verse that might as well be a disjointed monologue, it undermines the detail and ability of those writers.

When something as vivid and surreal as Salvador Dali's work, or Escher's pieces are compared on equal footing as Tracey Emin messing her bed up and putting it on display, it makes their talent seem insignificant.

If anyone can create a masterpiece, then where is the pride or notoriety? Where is the recognition or respect due?

I would not say that this is art, it's an expression certainly, but I wouldn't say that makes it art in any way shape or form, I express my opinions on a daily basis, we each express how we feel through facial expression, body language, vocal tone and choice of words, none of the above are art, so why is it automatically such when it's put on paper, or, in this case, film?

I don't believe in censorship, if people want to watch this, they undoubtably will, personally I'll probably get ahold of it at the first opportunity, it sounds rather intriguing in a macabre and gruesome way, but it is nothing more than make believe, and shouldn't be granted the level of power it's being afforded by being banned.

My moral standards and ideals are mine and mine alone, they should not be the territory of faceless beauracrats, or ignorant bigots who feel themselves superior because of an idea they hold.

 

[CommanderKirov]

I agree that Human Centipede 2 "Let's see how much we can push boundaries of awfulness" is art.

It's foul gory filled with things that could not be called in good taste even by the most mentally ill individuals. But it's still art.

Bad art, the kind that leaves you feeling bad for even considering to see it, but art.


So yes Tom Six, you have created a work of art. Just like the man who put a toilet as an exhibit in Louvre or the woman making hand prints out of her own blood. You can proudly call yourself an "Artist".

 

[nbamaniac]

'Art' is a very subjective term. People should understand that.

While I find the movie to be distateful, again it's my opinion. I don't view it as art, but other people may. It all comes down to em taste buds.

So whether the director really saw this as art, or just saving his ass, I pretty much just go 'meh'.

 

[Anaklusmos]

Didn't the BBC refuse to classify the movie because they didn't consider it Art? They said that the movie does not provoke thought or empathy, all it does is provide a way to show victims being brutalized. The guy who directed it himself said that the first film was going to be like My Little Pony compared to HC2, which shows that he himself was not trying to achieve anything just make his audience sick.

 

[Siddin]

A lot of people had the same reaction when video games were called art. Just saying.

They should. Video games aren't art either.

*cough* Braid *cough*

 

[Jim Tigwell]

@Stick Antolili

Your definition says that they often have symbolic meaning. That means that there are cases in which the arrangement of objects may not have symbolic meaning (say, in the classic still life painting of a bowl of fruit), and it would still be art. Often is not always.

@KosherKrackers
I'm not sure how that definition undermines skill, talent, ability, or practice. Let's look at an analogous definition. "Food". If we're each making food, and we use the same ingredients, but I measure mine improperly and burn the crap out of my finished product, my finished product is still food. It's edible, it won't kill you, but it probably tastes terrible. If you, using years of practice and a flair for cooking, combine all of your ingredients in perfect proportions and heat it at the proper temperature for the proper time, you have also made food. But your food is better than mine. Similarly, a painting by Dali is going to be better than Human Centipede 2, but qualifying the latter as art doesn't ruin anything about the former. We have standards by which we can judge good and bad art, and while we can review and dispute those standards, at the end of the day we'll probably still want to have standards of some kind so that we can differentiate a Dali from a movie made by Tom Six in terms of which is better (which is not the same as which we like more).