Eh? You mean to say that time skipped forward at that point? I saw no real indication of that. The way I saw it, time was still going backwards, and she was sitting on the couch contemplating a possible pregnancy, before having her boyfriend over. Then before that, she was sitting in the park reading the book she mentions later on, when discussing destiny in the elevator. No bruises on her face, no bulge in her belly. What's more, when the antagonist is raping her in the ass, he casually mentions that he thinks she's starting to bleed. In other words, I saw no indication at all that she kept the baby.
"Any film that causes half of the theater audience to leave and the other half to remain transfixed in a state of awe stands out as something remarkable, in my opinion. Bravo!" Remarkable? Certainly. That's not the same as, "worth seeing". When the lights came on at the end (and yes, several people did walk out before that), there was no buzz of conversation. I saw one girl who looked really unhappy, and an older couple that looked angry, but that's about it.
I think this film irks me on a personal level, because about a dozen years ago I found myself entirely desensitized to violence, and I didn't like where it was leading me at all. Since then I've been re-training myself -- to let these things effect me as they should -- by taking a more active role in choosing what I expose myself to. Because of that earlier time, though, it's still something I can turn on and off, like a light switch. So I shut it off, and watched the movie. And it struck me as mediocre. Shock value just doesn't move me. Been there, done that. I know the world is nasty a lot of the time already.
On the other hand, since this film is out there and playing, I'm glad that others have had the capability to come away from it with something. If it was enlightening, more power to ya! You know what I think -- I think the film is a really good argument against a sexually repressed, and especially homophobic society. I think it's a wry statement that the villain picked the basement of a gay sex club to hide out. Not even the cops would bust in there. Nobody even knew where it was ... not the cross-dresser, not the taxi driver. And yes, raping a woman in the ass is a degrading act to perform on her, but would an ostensibly straight man prefer the ass so strongly? Or is he in the basement of a gay club for reasons more direct than hiding from the law? Perhaps he was lashing out at the society of breeders that has criminalized his sexuality. Would this explain his preference for a she-male whore? ... Or was he angry at the she-male because he didn't know? ... Or is that why he let her go, and instead brutalized a 'real' woman?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Re: But I must disagree!
Date: 2003-03-26 08:49 pm (UTC)"Any film that causes half of the theater audience to leave and the other half to remain transfixed in a state of awe stands out as something remarkable, in my opinion. Bravo!"
Remarkable? Certainly. That's not the same as, "worth seeing". When the lights came on at the end (and yes, several people did walk out before that), there was no buzz of conversation. I saw one girl who looked really unhappy, and an older couple that looked angry, but that's about it.
I think this film irks me on a personal level, because about a dozen years ago I found myself entirely desensitized to violence, and I didn't like where it was leading me at all. Since then I've been re-training myself -- to let these things effect me as they should -- by taking a more active role in choosing what I expose myself to. Because of that earlier time, though, it's still something I can turn on and off, like a light switch.
So I shut it off, and watched the movie. And it struck me as mediocre. Shock value just doesn't move me. Been there, done that. I know the world is nasty a lot of the time already.
On the other hand, since this film is out there and playing, I'm glad that others have had the capability to come away from it with something. If it was enlightening, more power to ya! You know what I think -- I think the film is a really good argument against a sexually repressed, and especially homophobic society. I think it's a wry statement that the villain picked the basement of a gay sex club to hide out. Not even the cops would bust in there. Nobody even knew where it was ... not the cross-dresser, not the taxi driver. And yes, raping a woman in the ass is a degrading act to perform on her, but would an ostensibly straight man prefer the ass so strongly? Or is he in the basement of a gay club for reasons more direct than hiding from the law? Perhaps he was lashing out at the society of breeders that has criminalized his sexuality. Would this explain his preference for a she-male whore? ... Or was he angry at the she-male because he didn't know? ... Or is that why he let her go, and instead brutalized a 'real' woman?
Eeh. Too much analysis.
Back to the hack.