Human Centipede 2 director defends movie as art

[StrangerQ]

As industry movie side has made some interesting pieces and while names escape me i can take example from our very own game industry.

Lets take CoD series as an example and state that there is nothing that i would classify as art in game itself... Well except ability to make brown fps to produce money *zing*

But for example The path
is barely a normal game in traditional mind and is quite deep piece and something that i would classify as art.
http://tale-of-tales.com/ThePath/

The part of HC2 in this? Has the bloody movie anything meaningful to offer except gore,gore and more gore with overall disgusting base idea?

No so i shall not call HC2 as art but will classify movies as art form.
And like i stated above I will not call CoD series as art but does not mean i wouldnt refer games as one art form.

 

[slackbheep]

Is HC2 art? Well most things are considered art these days, and anyway, how can i judge if i can't see it?

Quote has been snipped for emphasis.

I don't care for gore/torture porn, but even less do I want a group of stuffy old men deciding what is and is not fit for my consumption.

 

[Nickolai77]

Is HC2 art? Well most things are considered art these days, and anyway, how can i judge if i can't see it?

As a principle i oppose censorship, so i'm pissed that they banned it in my country- the state doesn't have a right to tell mature adults what they can and can not see, so long as the act of seeing does not cause harm.

You know, i've never seen HC1, but i'm tempted to go to the continent and get HC2 just to give two metaphorical fingers to the BBFC ruling.

Um, two fingers? Is that the Brit way of saying "the finger"?
And while I've never felt so inclined to read up on British laws (as I am a proud American), from what I've heard they're pretty similar to American laws. So wouldn't "freedom of speech" be in effect here? Christ, it's not like I'm going to see it, but one of my friends on XBL is a Brit and he loves horror movies, so why would he be denied to right to go and see it?

Yeah it's two fingers in the UK, although you sometimes see the American one finger as well. Two fingers is my accurate lol. During the 100 years war, the French would cut off the shooting fingers of any English longbowmen they captured. It became something of a tradition to wave your fingers at the Frenchies to show that you still have your shooting fingers.

Also, Britain doesn't have a codified constitution, instead whenever a new law is passed that becomes part of the states constitution, so British law isn't simply a case of checking that laws cohere with the constitution, it's far more complicated. I myself don't know which laws are being applied here.

 

[Shio]

snip

You're right. I see now that I misunderstood your extremely ambiguous post, the reason being that I would have expected you to concede defeat when those other posters proved you wrong, rather than arrogantly claiming they "missed the point." You made an extremely broad and false statement implying that if people talk about something, it qualifies as art. You never said "the fact that this is a creative endeavour that has gotten us to talk about it proves it is art." How many people have quoted you to contradict you so far? Maybe you should take that as a hint to write more clearly.

The people who have quoted me haven't had your issue -- theirs is issue with the truth of what I said. In fact, you're the only one who missed the sardonic point.

Maybe you need to read posts more clearly?

 

[dietpeachsnapple]

Seeing some good points in this thread:

Almost anything can be classified as art, given the correct perspective. I would agree. The confines of a rectangular canvass should not constrain the vision of an artist.

Because something is called art, does not mean that it is art. I agree again. There are several things within our world that are considered mundane (thus garnering no attention), or obscene (thus being heatedly ignored or given too much negative attention.)

I feel that HC2 is something obscene. That does not mean that it should not be shown, or censored in anyway. I feel this way because it is, in many ways, also artistic. What I DO think should be done, is that the movie should be allowed to pass completely unnoticed. I won't be lining up to pay these producers money for the viewing of this movie.

 

[WarCorrespondent]

The trailer for this movie just screams "Look at me! Look at me! I'm making movies!"

This is a trolling movie, just a flash in the pan, he's doing it for attention, like how that school shooter mod creator started to say "This game is for people who want to shoot up their school, but don't have the guts to do it".

 

[manic_depressive13]

The people who have quoted me haven't had your issue -- theirs is issue with the truth of what I said. In fact, you're the only one who missed the sardonic point.

Maybe you need to read posts more clearly?

Now that's not true. Everyone seems to be missing your points. Even the people who disagreed with your initial post:

Because both of those things are creative endeavors the same as film?

Way to miss the point. I didn't think it could be done so well.

That's another point missed. Why, it would seem that the only person who knows what you're talking about is you.

 

[remedyX]

The fact we are talking about it proves it is art.

What?

No it doesn't. I could start a thread about bricks. Does that make bricks art?

The fact we are talking about it proves it is art.

If I took a dump on the sidewalk people would be talking about it. That doesn't make it art.

Because both of those things are creative endeavors the same as film?

Way to miss the point. I didn't think it could be done so well.

Bricklaying is more of a creative endeavour than this. I take it you've never seen the amount of manufacturing, inspection and design that goes into building a house.

At the end you've built somebodies dream. What do we get here, a few grossed out teenagers and a movie everyone will forget.

The movie isn't art. A good hint is that it has a number in the title and its about peoples faces being sewed to rear-ends. It doesn't appear to make any purposeful statement and it does nothing to create or push any envelopes.

Smearing faeces on an envelope doesn't count.

I suppose perhaps, PERHAPS, it toys with social boundaries and audience participation but that's as much as I can see.

 

[omega 616]

"I'll be right back, I'm going on a creative endeavour."

Best one liner of the day! Thank you for that gem. It sounds so business like, if you were in a very important meeting but need to fire one out you just say "I'll be right back, I'm going on a creative endeavour".

The director has one twisted sense of the word art.

 

[the7ofswords]

I'm certainly not about to actually sit through it to prove anything to myself one way or the other, but from my (admittedly self-limited) knowledge, I would say he has a point. It probably IS art. (Self-limited because, "Eww! Eugh! WHY?")

I'd also like to add that it's probably very BAD art.

It's vitally important to remember: art≠good.

 

[LostintheWick]

The fact we are talking about it proves it is art.

What?

No it doesn't. I could start a thread about bricks. Does that make bricks art?

The fact we are talking about it proves it is art.

If I took a dump on the sidewalk people would be talking about it. That doesn't make it art.

Because both of those things are creative endeavors the same as film?

Way to miss the point. I didn't think it could be done so well.

I'm sorry, but taking a crap is a creative endeavour now? Ridiculous as that is, I'm definitely using that line in the future.

"I'll be right back, I'm going on a creative endeavour."

Some Artistic Advice for your future "endeavors":

When you go on to produce these creative endeavours, try to do it with INTENTION to mean something (doesn't matter what, just something). Then, to help maximize your artistic intentions, try putting it on display for at least one other person to see. Emotions must be communicated here. It's important.

 

[silent_noir_67]

...I've read about this guy and he seems a bit too fascinated with the whole "human centipede" idea...

actually on topic...
I think that calling this art is just a way to try and get the film rated. I doubt that ANYONE who watches this movie will consider this a Citizen Kane, Godfather II etc. The director just wants to provoke the argument that it IS art so that everyone will start debating about it and eventually agree with him.

 

[Xanadu84]

"Art" as a definition seems to do nothing but make people *****. It's all art, okay? Feces smeared on a wall is art. Its all bloody well art. Now that that's out of the way, lets talk about the thing that matters, namely, is it GOOD art? You can talk about that in a meaningful way without trying to weasel in a cheap shot through a Websters definition.

 

[TheAceTheOne]

The fact we are talking about it proves it is art.

What?

No it doesn't. I could start a thread about bricks. Does that make bricks art?

I'd actually like to see that. Please, please start a thread about bricks.

OT: Yep, whoever said Gore Porn, you're right. This stuff... it's just... Get me the MIND BLEACH!

The video, from what I can tell, is sick, shock-factor exploiting, and a whole host of other stuff.

 

[Greatjusticeman]

I just read the plot of it on Wikipedia.


What.The.Fuck.

They are taking it to an entirely different level with this one. And no, I wouldn't consider it art. Movies like The Dark Knight and Schindlers List are art. This is not.

 

[Internet Kraken]

...I've read about this guy and he seems a bit too fascinated with the whole "human centipede" idea...

He's fascinated by it because he jerks off to it. Somehow he got paid to make what amounts of his own personal porn fantasy. And now he's getting paid to do it again. I'd laugh at the guy but it's kind of pointless when he clearly has no shame. He's most likely proud of the fact that he's getting big wads of money to make creepy wank material.

Anyways, art is very subjective and I guess you could consider it art. However there's nothing that ever said that all art is good, so that doesn't make his creepy little movie any better.

 

[fenrizz]

This is not art, it is simply trash.

 

[Fursnake]

There's going to be a sequel to it...seriously? FFS...It kind of trivializes the shock factor of it by having a sequel hehe.

It's still fuck-all disgusting and I won't bother with either movie.

 

[silent_noir_67]

from what I've read of the second film its going to be extremely more sick and twisted than the first one...Tom Six, the guy who conceived of the whole idea, has said that it'll be more graphic becuase "everyone is desensitized from the first one"...

that explanation right there just shows that he wants to make a shocking and controversial film instead of actually contributing anything positive and for that reason I would say that no, the film is not art. Six is not trying to comment on anything in society except possibly for his own perverted thoughts.

The human centipede only made 10% of its budget back. No one wants to see this stuff...yet he insists on making it anyway.