• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

The Human Centipede

Ronson8 said:
locussolus said:
This film needed that kind of humor...........
Seems to me, what it needs is burning.

lol. I guess what I'm trying to get at is that it's bad because it's made badly, NOT because of the subject matter. (Which yes, is disgusting, but it's just so ridiculously bad, what is so gross about the movie pales in comparison to films like Driller Killer or Don't Go in the House)
 
Roger Ebert famously said it's possible to make a good film about anything. Sounds like Mr Six failed.
 
gncxx said:
Roger Ebert famously said it's possible to make a good film about anything. Sounds like Mr Six failed.

Did you read Ebert's review of the film? It's pretty funny

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100505/REVIEWS/100509982

I am required to award stars to movies I review. This time, I refuse to do it. The star rating system is unsuited to this film. Is the movie good? Is it bad? Does it matter? It is what it is and occupies a world where the stars don't shine.

some tongue in cheek humor for ya.
 
I don't know if that is humour, he seems genuinely saddened! I'm a horror movie fan too, but by this stage innovation in the field is becoming a distant memory, so I suppose Mr Six was trying to do something different if I give him the benefit of the doubt, but everything I've read sounds as if he doesn't have the talent to back up the wild ideas. I'm in no rush to see his movie.
 
gncxx said:
I don't know if that is humour, he seems genuinely saddened! I'm a horror movie fan too, but by this stage innovation in the field is becoming a distant memory, so I suppose Mr Six was trying to do something different if I give him the benefit of the doubt, but everything I've read sounds as if he doesn't have the talent to back up the wild ideas. I'm in no rush to see his movie.

Yeah, I thought his ending words were a little tongue in cheek, but he does seem disheartened right?
Given how open minded Ebert is, this is a pretty profound review though. I don't think Mr. Six has the talent to back up the idea, as you said. It isn't, in my opinion, really and idea that merits backing up with talent anyway.

I wonder if this is the first time Ebert has refused to give stars to a film? It says a lot that he doesn't state hating it outright.

I wouldn't recommend seeing this film at all. Unless your morbidly curious as I was.

Most films that are really frightening have some sort of conceivable plot, or motivation. Especially for the villain. There may even be some sympathetic character traits in the villain's portrayal that makes things interesting. If not, at least give the audience some attachment to the other characters in the film. Tom Six came across as a film director that had a really gross idea and not much else.

The German Doctor was horrible. I should stop talking about this movie now, as I am being hypocritical since I am agitated by the attention it is getting already! :D
 
lol I think that means you could care less about seeing this? Ha ha, forgive me if I misinterpret.

lol referential to 'scargs comment about having a free pass to watch the movie online but she might be busy... just musing about other alternative and potentially more entertaining 'distractions'.

god knows i love a good horror movie, but i think with torture pron the bottom really fell out of the genre for me. probably in a very unpleasant prolapse kind of way. :?
 
Lordy, just LOOK at that pile of ironing. Where DOES it all come from? :lol:
 
locussolus said:
I think that means you could care less about seeing this?...

On a totally off-topic note, and this is a genuine question / comment I'm not being xenophobic or owt like that but....

Would I be right in saying that you are from the USA? I've always wondered how a phrase can hop across the Atlantic, get completely reversed, yet still mean the same thing!

UK " I couldn't care less."
USA " I could care less."

I love the phenomenom, I just don't understand it!
 
I interpret the phrases thusly -

UK 'I couldn't care less' - 'if I tried. Really. Couldn't give a toss.'
USA 'I could care less' - 'but actually I don't.'

Last week in Geneva my son and I found a long wall of tall mirrors set at slight angles, which gave lots of reflections of each person crowded together.

We tried using them to re-create the Human Centipede (by bending over so the reflections merged into each other) but were laughing too hard to do it properly. Shame. :lol:
 
CarlosTheDJ said:
locussolus said:
I think that means you could care less about seeing this?...

On a totally off-topic note, and this is a genuine question / comment I'm not being xenophobic or owt like that but....

Would I be right in saying that you are from the USA? I've always wondered how a phrase can hop across the Atlantic, get completely reversed, yet still mean the same thing!

UK " I couldn't care less."
USA " I could care less."

I love the phenomenom, I just don't understand it!

Hi there! I don't see you as being xenophobic at all by asking this question. When I asked mine, I did so with the mindset that I could be misinterpreting things because I am from the US and sometimes don't understand the context of certain phrases.

Ironically, I see that the US colloquialism "I could care less" is understood here, but is actually grammatically incorrect. Interesting indeed.

And Escargot, you are too funny! (And your interpretation of the phrase as understood in "US English" is correct in my opinion/understanding)
 
locussolus said:
Ironically, I see that the US colloquialism "I could care less" is understood here, but is actually grammatically incorrect. Interesting indeed.
And of course there's the new phrase "am I bovered"

:D
 
Ronson8 said:
locussolus said:
Ironically, I see that the US colloquialism "I could care less" is understood here, but is actually grammatically incorrect. Interesting indeed.
And of course there's the new phrase "am I bovered"

:D

:D

I just looked that up, and saw that it means, I don't care a fig, which just made me hungry. :oops:
 
escargot1 said:
locussolus said:
I thought his ending words were a little tongue in cheek
Somewhat. :lol:
At least he can put his tongue in cheek - probably he's grateful, after seeing the film, that said cheek isn't sewn up someone else's arse.
 
Look your most bespoke with a new necklace this season.....

humancentipedenecklace.jpg



Cinematical.com
 
God that freaked me out for a couple of days when I first saw the trailer. The medical aspect of it was why I was freaked at the thought of it!:shock:
 
MaxMolyneux said:
God that freaked me out for a couple of days when I first saw the trailer. The medical aspect of it was why I was freaked at the thought of it!:shock:

Even in the movie itself this is the "worst" of it.... btw the BBFC have just passed this uncut for cinema and home.
 
MaxMolyneux said:
...The medical aspect of it was why I was freaked at the thought of it!:shock:
Last weekend, at a soiree with medical types, I actually asked a GI surgeon whether it really is possible. Funnily enough, he's been asked this rather a lot of late. His response?

"Bollocks, is it."

Apparently, there's about 40 overt reasons it wouldn't work, the most obvious being that you can't do it without killing the patients in the process, and even if they did survive the op (which they wouldn't) a multitude of definite side-effects that would kill them anyway, and within minutes, let alone days.
 
sherbetbizarre said:
MaxMolyneux said:
God that freaked me out for a couple of days when I first saw the trailer. The medical aspect of it was why I was freaked at the thought of it!:shock:

Even in the movie itself this is the "worst" of it.... btw the BBFC have just passed this uncut for cinema and home.

Yeah just the thought of being sown together that way weirded me out. It made my mum laugh when I told her about the movie and she thought there was something wrong with the director! :lol:
 
stuneville said:
Apparently, there's about 40 overt reasons it wouldn't work, the most obvious being that you can't do it without killing the patients in the process, and even if they did survive the op (which they wouldn't) a multitude of definite side-effects that would kill them anyway, and within minutes, let alone days.

You can't leave us dangling like that. More detail, please. :lol:

I'm guessing that for a start, the 'patients' wouldn't be able to breathe during the operation. Afterwards I'd assume they'd still find breathing difficult because of tissue swelling at the operation site.
 
Catastrophic blood-loss, instant septicaemia, as you said asphyxiation, their respective livers would all pack up within hours, even if they could get enough blood into them to keep them alive their circulatory systems would all be compromised as the only way to perform the op would basically involve virtual evisceration of at least two of the bodies, the one in the middle would be a goner first, then the third, then the first, but it would be minutes if that.
 
Well I decided to download the film and it's amazingly dull for a vast majority of it's running time as it desperately tries to be an art film for most of it's running time. However the mad doctor is a great mad doctor and the whole thing is frankly too ridiculous for anyone to be taking it seriously as anything else but a bit of schlock that tries to be a wee bit more than it actually is.
 
I saw this on another forum and came here to try and 'ground' myself after thinking that I had reached the highest shock I could.
(I suffer from IBS I hasten to add). Oh well, I did try!!
 
Newbie, eh? :?

Please report to the Human Centipede Pre-Op Room! :lol:
 
And don't speak with your mouth full. :lol:
 
Back
Top