|
Post by Johnlprobert on Aug 21, 2010 8:20:33 GMT
I rarely post my movie reviews on here but this film is such a Vault Production that I suspect there may be a fair few on here who might want to seek it out and I'd hate for them to miss it so here you are:
This is getting a limited release in Bristol solely as a midnight movie, which is actually something of a novel concept down here - in fact I can't remember it ever having been done with any other picture.
Anyway, we were first in the queue last night to watch this, having seen the advertisements at FrightFest, the refusal of Roger Ebert to give it any stars at all, and the general hoopla the film has conjured up. Besides, how could I not watch a film with such a premise that claims to be "100% medically accurate"? Admittedly that claim made me want to watch it more because it's a delight to see a movie once again employing the sensationalist chutzpah of the drive-in Z grade movies of the 1930s-1950s than because I was expecting scenes of accurate surgery but there we are.
And the verdict?
I absolutely loved it. And so did Lady P.
I suspect everyone knows the plot by now: Dieter Laser plays a surgeon who is famous for separating Siamese twins. Having gone a bit bonkers and with his 'Beloved 3-Dog' experiment buried prominently in his front garden he now intends to repeat the procedure using humans he's kidnapped - two girls and a boy, cutting the ligaments in their knees and stitching them together to form 'one long glorious gastrointestinal tract'. He explains this in some detail, we then get to see the procedure and its outcome. The last half an hour sees the police coming round and everything ending in satisfyingly splattery Grand Guignol manner.
In many ways this film is what I would call 'proper horror'. The whole concept is horrible, the mad scientist does what he does for no other reason than because it's going to cause suffering, which it does, in spades. It's a lot like a penny dreadful or a lurid 1930s horror comic brought to life. Think of some of the nastiest of the Pan Horror stories and that will give you a good idea as well.
This is a nasty, lurid, sensational, exploitative film in all the RIGHT ways. There isn't a single moment of the exasperating 'hip trendy coolness' of Hollywood product. It exists almost purely to shock and horrify its audience. It's also very well made and with a couple of very suspenseful and cruel chase sequences that I thought were excellent. It's not dull, it;s not boring, it looks fantastic (the photograpy is as appropriately crisp and clinical as it should be) and as for the "100% medically accurate" bit?
Ask me at FantasyCon.
If you dare.
|
|
|
Post by dem bones on Aug 21, 2010 9:58:34 GMT
what the ...? Click on image to play trailer Thank goodness i'm not going to FantasyCon because .... i'd have to ask, and i've a horrible feeling you've footage of a fellow in a crushed velvet surgical gown proving that it is, indeed, "100% medically accurate"! Please, someone, ANYONE, hurry up and hack out a novelisation of this one!
|
|
|
Post by Johnlprobert on Aug 21, 2010 15:44:18 GMT
Please, someone, ANYONE, hurry up and hack out a novelisation of this one! If anyone can put me in touch with the relevant people I'd be delighted to do it
|
|
|
Post by Jojo Lapin X on Aug 21, 2010 15:53:14 GMT
I am sure the film is indeed 100% medically accurate, but the project itself could not work. Most of the "centipede" would not survive very long.
|
|
|
Post by Dr Strange on Aug 21, 2010 17:09:29 GMT
100% medically accurate? I think respiration might be an issue (or maybe that should be ) Is body horror making a come-back? Anyone seen Splice? I was going to but somehow never got round to it, and I think I may have missed it now.
|
|
|
Post by Johnlprobert on Aug 21, 2010 18:06:54 GMT
I am sure the film is indeed 100% medically accurate, but the project itself could not work. Most of the "centipede" would not survive very long. It's accurate in what it explains, but the actual technique is pretty unfeasible for a number of reasons. Plus, there's a shot of a surgical incision that's very inaccurate indeed!
|
|
|
Post by dem bones on Aug 21, 2010 19:38:56 GMT
They should have drafted you in as "technical adviser". In many ways this film is what I would call 'proper horror'. The whole concept is horrible, the mad scientist does what he does for no other reason than because it's going to cause suffering, which it does, in spades. It's a lot like a penny dreadful or a lurid 1930s horror comic brought to life. Think of some of the nastiest of the Pan Horror stories and that will give you a good idea as well. Having taken in a number of reviews and been further intrigued, i'd say you've called it exactly right. Strikes me as though we've a maniacal surgeon straight out of Seabury Quinn The House Of Horror/ The House Where Time Stood Still territory, or indeed, any number of 'twenties & 'thirties Weird Tales/ Not At Night's, just that the crucial perversity of it all has been updated to satisfy current morbid tastes. i'd have guessed The Human Centipede would appeal to the fiendish Lord & Lady P., but how did the oiks in the cheap seats react to it?
|
|
|
Post by Johnlprobert on Aug 21, 2010 20:15:16 GMT
Strikes me as though we've a maniacal surgeon straight out of Seabury Quinn The House Of Horror/ The House Where Time Stood Still territory, or indeed, any number of 'twenties & 'thirties Weird Tales/ Not At Night's, just that the crucial perversity of it all has been updated to satisfy current morbid tastes. i'd have guessed The Human Centipede would appeal to the fiendish Lord & Lady P., but how did the oiks in the cheap seats react to it? Spot on Mr D! It reminded me more of Seabury Quinn's House of Horror than anything else. The audience we saw it with was "modest" but still a better number than I was expecting. The age range was interesting too - very mixed, with two blokes at least 10 years older than myself and Lady P closest to us, discussing Theatre of Blood of all things before the film started. "Do you remember that film where Peter Cushing fed this chap some poodles by ramming them down his throat?" "It wasn't Cushing it was Vincent Price" etc etc. The mood in the cinema was very good, actually - everyone laughed in the right places (eg at the photograph of the Dog experiment at the start) and I think a good time was had by all. I did think of your good self as being one of the reprobates who would make the most of a movie like this and hence my posting of my thoughts here!
|
|
Thana Niveau
Devils Coach Horse
We who walk here walk alone.
Posts: 109
|
Post by Thana Niveau on Aug 21, 2010 20:26:51 GMT
...with two blokes at least 10 years older than myself and Lady P closest to us, discussing Theatre of Blood of all things before the film started. Good lord, I never heard any of that conversation! Beware, folks: nothing - and I mean absolutely nothing - escapes the eyes and ears of Herr Doktor Baron von Probertstein!
|
|
|
Post by dem bones on Aug 22, 2010 11:33:59 GMT
I did think of your good self as being one of the reprobates who would make the most of a movie like this oh stop, i'm welling up! Honest, Lady Thana, it must be like living with Ray Milland in 'X' or The Man With The X-Ray Eyes! i'm sure if you rummage hard enough in the LOCKED ROOM, you'll discover a phial with skull & crossbones markings and "to be taken optically with a glass of absinthe" label. To say nothing of other horrors too hideous to contemplate. I mean, three of Vault's stalwarts have inexplicably gone missing in recent weeks ....
|
|
|
Post by andydecker on Aug 22, 2010 11:51:16 GMT
I did think of your good self as being one of the reprobates who would make the most of a movie like this Honest, Lady Thana, it must be like living with Ray Milland in 'X' or The Man With The X-Ray Eyes! i'm sure if you rummage hard enough in the LOCKED ROOM, you'll discover a phial with skull & crossbones markings and "to be taken optically with a glass of absinthe" label. To say nothing of other horrors too hideous to contemplate. Heh! Never go into the locked rooom, I say I mean, three of Vault's stalwarts have inexplicably gone missing in recent weeks .... But who lured them into the house?
|
|
|
Post by Dr Strange on Jun 7, 2011 11:16:04 GMT
|
|
chastel
Crab On The Rampage
Where wolf? There castle!
Posts: 42
|
Post by chastel on Oct 8, 2011 14:11:55 GMT
These films sound total crap.
|
|
|
Post by H_P_Saucecraft on Oct 8, 2011 21:07:05 GMT
After appeal, Human Centipede 2 has been passed at 18 with about 2 mins 30 of cuts. Oh well, I'll get hold of the uncut version one way or another. The first one was a bit of a disappointment, but I still want to see part 2.
From reading interviews with Tom Six, looks like he'll be going even further with part 3, prepare for another ban ;D
|
|
|
Post by Johnlprobert on Oct 8, 2011 21:39:50 GMT
We'll definitely be giving Human Centipede 2 a watch at Probert Towers. A second viewing of the first film a while ago has merely confirmed what I thought if it at the cinema and I stick by what I said above. That said, anyone who doesn't get a kick out of Seabury Quinn's The House Where Time Stood Still or movies like Jess Franco's Faceless or "Andy Warhol's" Flesh For Frankenstein would be advised to steer well clear. Which is going to be almost everyone, really
|
|