Horror films ignite controversy on both ends of political spectrum While much of the furor over extreme movies
last year rained down on the necro-sexual ex- cesses of Srdjan Spasojevic’s A Serbian Film, 2011 has already seen controversies erupt in three countries over three different movies. And for the first time in recent memory, attacks came from both sides of the political divide. In April, Dead Hooker in a Trunk, the debut
feature from Vancouver-based twin filmmakers Jen and Sylvia Soska, had its premiere at the Dark Bridges Film Festival in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, cancelled and its posters de- stroyed in response to an anonymous call to the Roxy Theatre. The problem? The title was deemed offensive in light of a rash of Aboriginal prostitutes who’d gone missing in Western Canada. Jason Eisener’s Hobo with a Shotgun received similar treatment from the Roxy three days later, with the theatre citing a lack of inter- est, despite 90 attendees confirmed for the screening via Facebook. The nearby Broadway Theatre welcomed both movies with open arms. Dead Hooker in a Trunk was subsequently re- leased in Australia and the UK in May, and hit the latter’s Horror Channel in July. “The only negative feedback has sadly been
from our own country. I love the Brits,” says Jen Soska. Yet two months later, the British Board of Film
Classification effectively banned the release of The Human Centipede II (Full Sequence) by re- fusing to give it the minimum R18 rating neces- sary for sale in the UK. (R18 restricts movies to eighteen-or-older theatres and licensed sex shops.) The last movie to get that kind of treat- ment was the 2009 dissection drama Grotesque from Japanese director Koji Shiraishi (RM#96). The sequel to Tom Six’s 2010 mad science gross-out movie reportedly depicts a man raping a human centipede caboose with barbed wire wrapped around his penis. The ratings board suggested that the film “poses a real, as op- posed to a fanciful, risk that harm is likely to be caused to potential viewers.” In an email response published in Empire
magazine, Six stated, “Thank you, BBFC, for put- ting spoilers of my movie on your website, and thank you for banning my film in this exceptional way. Apparently I made a horrific horror film, but shouldn’t a good horror film be horrific?” A few days later on the opposite side of the
Atlantic, Tennessee Gov. Bill Haslam signed a bill into law that makes it a crime to use the web to “transmit or display an image” that could “frighten, intimidate or cause emo- tional distress” to anyone who sees it. Those found guilty face a maxi- mum of one year in jail and a $2500 fine. The American Civil Liberties Union has already promised a law- suit on free speech grounds. Also in June, the world premiere
of The Life Zone took place. It’s a $1 million, Saw-like thriller about a mys- terious man (The Sopranos’ Robert Loggia) and a physician (The Girl Next Door’s Blanche Baker) who kidnap a trio of reluctant mothers from abortion clinics and force them to carry their babies to term. The flick – penned in eleven days by former judge, novelist and re- cent New Jersey Republican state senate can- didate Kenneth Del Vecchio – riled up the pro-choice masses. Though only approximately 50 people saw the film’s premiere at the Hobo- ken International Film Festival in June, a trailer for the movie had racked up more than 100,000 views on YouTube a month after its only screening. Comments on that site, as well as those found on the IMDb and
movieline.com, both vigorously attacked and defended the movie.
Jen and Sylvia Soska (top), makers of Dead Hooker in a Trunk, are among the latest filmmakers to incite controversy with a horror movie, and Nina Transfeld (left) and Lindsey Haun star in The Life Zone.
“I like to have films that have controversy
surrounding them because that’s the best way to effectuate change and get people talking,” says Del Vecchio. “And nobody’s making a pro- life movie in mainstream Hollywood.” Jen Soska says the reactions incurred by all
four films could potentially set a dangerous precedent. “What unites all of these cases is the ease
with which movies can be targeted and ha- rassed by public servants and private activists, compared with the real-world horrors that they represent,” she says. “You can’t just cut some- thing bad out and pretend it doesn’t exist. How are we ever supposed to deal with real horror in our lives if it’s completely foreign to us?” A.S. BERMAN
D R E A D L I N E S
9 RM
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72