Posted on 04/24/2004 10:17:45 PM PDT by weegee
To show the extent of the brutality of the Hitler regime.
Saddam Hussein videotaped executions too (there is some footage in the documentary Uncle Saddam).
Document it so that those who weren't there cannot deny it down the line or try to explain away the horrors.
Think it won't need to be done? Red Asner asked about Uncle Joe Stalin. He was interested in making a biopic about him. "Sure he killed millions more than Hitler but what else was he like?"
Did the Pearl video show his actual murder? I remember watching a video with him in it, but for the life of me I can't remember what was on it. I think I've repressed it. The only thing I remember is clicking on the link and wishing I hadn't. I'm sitting here right now trying to remember the details, but can't.
The mind is a wonderous thing.
I also did not agree with the after-the-fact censoring of the film of the WTC, and those who were forced to jump from it. The American people, again IMHO, NEED to be fired up with rage over these things.
The nastiest of all nasty porn films is the snuff film, where the actress is murdered during orgasm.
There is no need for "orgasm" (most in porn are fake anyway, why should it be a requirement of a film that's primary focus is death?).
...with titles such as Cannibal Holocaust
Actually Cannibal Holocaust is animal snuff. Real animals are tortured and killed on camera for the movie. The footage of people being raped and killed is faked although there may be some genuine execution/death squad footage in the film.
Two men in Germany were recently sentenced to life imprisonment for committing murder while producing a snuff film. It's the first such conviction ever. The men filmed themselves sexually assaulting and torturing a 21-year-old woman for a snuff film they had hoped to sell in America for $16,000. Frankfurt-based prosecutor Job Tillman says there's a ready market for films depicting violence against women and children -- especially in America.
One of the things about snuff film lore that never gets discussed is that it is always made in "another country" (where life is cheap) or for viewing in another country (where people have perverted tastes and lots of money). Xenophobia and projection always are masked in tales of the snuff trade.
They also discuss animal snuff "squish" films (which I first took to be a variant urban rumor).
In another, a 22-year-old blonde called "Michelle" is shown talking about her hatred of worms, snails and bugs before being shown "squishing" them into the floor.
NBC has been guilty of making the same type of programming and airing it. I seldom watch the alphabet networks and could not believe what I was seeing. On FEAR FACTOR, a blender was filled with live roaches, worms, beetles, and assorted crawling things. It was switched ON until the mess was a fine puree. Contestants who lost a challenge then had to drink a glass of the pulpy mess. Odd that PETA who protests things like Nicholas Cage eating a roach in Vampire's Kiss did not voice outrage to the media about this.
Underground film-makers in Britain and Germany were often less discriminating, he argued. "In Germany there's a big black market for these films and there seems to be no limit to the size of the animal," he said. "They use cats and dogs and also, I'm told, have filmed different kinds of films with horses, which are ridden bareback until they are exhausted then shot dead on camera. I would not do that."
It can get worse than that. Much worse. This example (a text synopsis only) dates back to Belgium in 1974. http://members.aol.com/shockcin/wedding.html (no I have not seen this movie). While some of the footage is reportedly fake, I think one account I read said that the pig is gutted afterwards.
British police have banned a home video of a recent public execution by the Taliban in Afghanistan which shows a man having his head hacked off with a blunt knife. The video, which was smuggled into Britain by opponents of the Taliban and given to the Afghan ambassador in London, has been classified as "obscene". Police are worried that the graphic film, which spares the viewer no detail of the killing, could achieve cult status as a "snuff movie".Wali Massoud, the Afghan ambassador, had intended to show the film to Government officials, human rights organisations and the public to increase opposition to the Islamic fundamentalist army, which controls nearly two-thirds of Afghanistan. But last week he was warned that if he allows anyone to watch the video, or circulates any copies, he would be breaking the law.
I wonder if this ban extends to the mosques that use such videos to recruit Islamofascists. Or do they get an exception on "religious" grounds? And England does permit "film club" screenings of banned films.
I believe I know the one you're talking about. To the best of my recollection, it was, in fact, fake.
The technique is to use an "exploding" bag of "blood" and other materials attached to the back of the head, and a squib of "blood" on the front, normally covered by fake skin and/or hair. Sometimes, the gun fires a small blob of fake blood as well, to simulate the "hit". Quick editing and clever lighting completes the illusion.
It's probably fair to say that such things would be investigated to the nth degree by the FBI.
Witness the famous "bathroom suicide" in the movie Full Metal Jacket. It LOOKS completely real.
There reportedly is a "making of" Guinea Pig that shows how some of the effects were accomplished.
Photographer Joel Peter Witkin has claimed that he uses limbs and cadavers in his photos (allegedly even being sued by a family that saw a former member's head used as a flower pot). I have seen sketches that purport to show how he achieves this effect with living people (resin casting can also be used when a body must be mutilated).
Whether "snuff" films exist (and to me the animal torture/killing footage and Islamofascist murders and serial killer documenting their own work ARE snuff), there IS a growing subculture (S&M, postmoderns, outlaw culture, etc) that is jaded enough to demand more realistic "product". Near childporn (computer generated images) was criminalized because it makes prosecution confusing (have to prove it was genuine first). If a rape video is graphic enough, does it matter if the actress "consented" to being raped on camera? Some libertarians are of the mind "anything goes"; obscenity laws disagree. Scatalogical activities are not illegal but films of them are illegal in some areas. By the same argument, homosexual sodomy was illegal in some areas (such as Texas) yet videos of such acts were not illegal under obscenity statutes. S&M porn can be declared obscene/illegal even if the act is permissible. Another double standard: you can pay a woman to have sex with you on camera (you are making a porn film) but if you just pay her to have sex with you that is soliciting prostitution and a crime.
We could probably have quite a discussion about Britain's famous "video nasties" list, which really only increased interest in the films thereon.
Cannibal Holocaust was one of them, and it is now legendary in the annals of shock/horror films. Its website, for those interested, is here. Rumors still surround that film...one has it that actual cadavers were used (false), and that the director was charged with murder in Italy (true), untill he produced the "victims", alive and well, in court. Nonetheless, he was charged and fined with animal cruelty. His claim at the time was that the native extras used the animals for food.
In both the "reality shows" and in such movies as CH (and there were several like it in the 70s, though none as violent), the effect being sought was shock, not sexual.
The Guinea Pig films also have their own website, and those with a strong stomach can view it at that link. Remember, it's ALL FAKE.
The "squish" films make me wonder just what sort of individual would pay to see such things.
You bring up some good points about obscenity laws, and the confusion surrounding them.
I tend to come down on this side: as long as the actors are of age, and not forced to perform in any way (that is, "mainstream" porn), I have no problem with it. Erotica by itself is not harmful, and in fact goes back way before film was even invented. Certainly, watching attractive people have sex is not in and of itself evil.
However, the "squish" movies and the other forms of "snuff" you mention are most definitely beyond the pale. I'm not as certain about that which is faked...while those who prefer to watch it are probably worth keeping an eye on, no person or living thing is actually harmed. I don't think it wise to go after what amounts to clever special effects...quite a few mainstream movies would be affected, like Saving Private Ryan or Black Hawk Down.
I have also seen the film of the Russian soldier. Bangedup.com had it for a while. The Soldier in it could not have been more than 19 years old. The memory of it reminds me what we are actually fighting against, and also what I could expect if I am ever captured or survive a shootdown. Therefore, I take appropriate precautions.
The Navy's Survival, Escape, Resistance, and Evasion school, which I have attended, also keeps these clips around for obvious reasons.
More like ridden hard and ain't put away yet.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.