Brian, Scott, and I have decided that morals are for suckers. We’re giving into bad taste/immorality/boredom and are going to suffer through some movies that we have previously claimed we never want to see. While we might have been placing ourselves on the moral high ground at some point or other, we have finally decided that all movies might be worth seeing … especially for sensationalist blog posts about sodomy, incest, and AIDS.
So here is my list of the five movies I never want to see, but am going to anyway:
1. I Spit on Your Grave (Meir Zarchi, 1978 ) – Also known as “Day of the Woman” this is one of those films that claims to be an exercise in feminism but is actually just an excuse to show some violent sex and some violent retributions. I’m all about graphic violence in film, but pair that violence with a mentally retarded guy participating in rape, and I think maybe you’ve crossed the line. The entire film seems absolutely repulsive to me. And check out this poster:
This film always seemed like poorly disguised torture-porn. HOWEVER, Carol Clover has some extremely interesting arguments about this film in her book Men, Women, and Chain Saws. Basically she claimed that this film isn’t nearly as offensive as male dominated action cinema that fails to reminisce about the extreme violence and high body count. She said she was more disturbed watching a Rambo sequel than I Spit on Your Grave (although she also makes no excuses for the marketing of the film). So I’m actually looking forward to seeing this Film I Said I’d Never Watch, if only for the detached scholarly approach I might be able to maintain.
2. Russian Ark (Aleksandr Sokurov, 2002) – This one is apparently worth seeing. Blah blah blah All in one take Blah blah blah. Looks as boring as a trip to Cove Fort. I don’t know what I have against Russians and their art, but I have always been reluctant to devote my time to it. OK, I liked Crime and Punishment, but The Idiot is, like, twice as long! Plus, I know nothing about that stupid country and I have heard that the film is hard to decipher without a knowledge of Russian politics. I can only hope that Meg Ryan shows up at some point, I guess.
Basically, I’ve just seen this movie as a bit of a sensationalist scam. It’s neat that they pulled the one-take trick, but is there anything redeeming or interesting besides that one take? We’ll see.
3. Kids (Larry Clark, 1995) – Everyone has told me not to see this film. I’m expecting it to be repulsive, but worse than I Spit on Your Grave? I think Kids‘ hardcore realism comes at me from a bit of a disadvantage because I’ve always been very skeptical of dogme95. It’s like the one-take-trick of Russian Ark. Is there anything interesting in your film besides the fact that you use natural lighting and only found props? I’ve seen The Bicycle Thief and I doubt your more contrived attempt at disturbing realism will measure up. If this film is anything like Harmony Korine’s other work, I’ll be more annoyed than disturbed.
4. Salo, or the 120 Days of Sodom (Pier Paolo Pasolini, 1975) – I’ve neglected Pasolini for so long because, basically, I’m afraid.
Judging by reactions to this film that I have read and heard, he’s a scary kind of guy in regards to the imagery he is willing to delve into. I’m looking forward to this film the most out of all the films listed (which is, naturally, not very much).
5. Gone with the Wind (Victor Fleming, 1939) – 238 minutes??? WTF.
So now I go about watching this babies. Now that I have them all listed I don’t know how good of an idea this was…