jump to last post 1-2 of 2 discussions (6 posts)

The "torture-porn" genre: art or pornographic violence?

  1. rkummer profile image80
    rkummerposted 6 years ago

    The 'torture-porn' genre has it's roots dating to the late 60's/early 70's films like 'Midnight Cowboy', 'Straw Dogs' and 'I Spit On Your Grave'.  The recent resurgence has birthed 'Saw', 'Hostel', 'Wolf Creek', 'Broken', 'Martyrs' and many others. 

    The question raised about the genre has been whether there is artistic merit. Some argue, including myself, that the films violent depictions are more grounded in reality, thus lending to their often-times controversial material. More traditional actions films depict a fictional version which is called "happy" violence: entertainment-based violence that never warrants fear of consequences. Meanwhile, critics of the torture-porn genre may argue that the films are gratuitous and exploitative, containing themes of anti-feminism, sadism and masochism.

    What do you think?

    1. kschang profile image90
      kschangposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Technically those are just "extremely bloody violence". Torture porn is a subcategory of S&M, IMHO of course. big_smile

      The question is... what exactly IS entertainment? It takes all kinds, and critics are worried about becoming NUMB to the idea of violence. People who are imbalanced to start with only need a bit of push to send them off the edge. Is more violence (or depictions of violence) in modern media, exposing even MORE imbalanced people to violence, responsible, at least in part, to mass shootings and such?

      1. rkummer profile image80
        rkummerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        There's a documentary called "The Killing Screens" that discusses violence in entertainment you are touching on.  There is a fear that we are slowly being desensitized to violence and are basically "taught" to use violence to solve problems or get what we want, and are falsely told we won't suffer any consequences as a result. 

        At the same time, and I know this is weak, but the "if you don't like it, turn it off" argument is there.  One could argue these violent images could actually be made extreme and disturbing to entice us out of performing similar acts.  There will always be copycat situations, but the majority of audiences don't go out on mass killing/torturing sprees after watching violent content.

    2. profile image0
      Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I not only think,  I know those films should be banned.  At least the ones I've had the unhappy occasion to review, like "Saw" and the "Hostel" series.   They have no redeeming points.   And there are others that are just as bad, the movies like "Twilight" and etc. that depict the cross-copulation and/or breeding of animals with humans.   Their message is evil too, because it's more subtle, seducing immature minds into calling evil good and good evil.

    3. profile image0
      DoorMattnomoreposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Saw had porn? 

      I think "realistic violence", like a movie about a man who brutally beats his wife, is far more disturbing than "fake violence" like, zombie movies. But that's just me, I believe if a person is violent and going to act on their anger against another person, they will do it. With or without movies.

  2. mega1 profile image80
    mega1posted 6 years ago

    Maybe, if only though, like, there were more men victims - straight men victims, then, it would sorta, kinda, you know - all, like, balance out?

 
working