Quote:
Originally Posted by elizabeththefirst  that bit was well made with more of a suggestion than actually seeing anything but the later scene *shudders*
I wish Fulci would have held back on the gore a bit and I'd have loved the film.  |
I disagree - Fulci's trademark (in his horror movies anyway) was the outrageous gore set pieces and therefore you go into it expecting that. I'm not shocked or offended by it, because, primarily, it isn't real. It's fictional and therefore renders it non-shocking. I'm not desensitised to violence either, because real life violence disgusts and appals me on every level. I'm not desensitised, just educated. I know movies are fake and have seen and read enough about them to understand the mechanics of the making of a horror film.
I also dismiss claims of it being misogynistic too. It depicts a misogynistic killer, but the film itself isn't misogynistic - that is to say, for it to be that its sole purpose of existence would be to encourage hatred toward women. It doesn't and I've never felt that that was what Fulci was trying to say. I'm not one to cheer on the graphic demise of women in film, but....I do kind of laugh at what these filmmakers attempt to get away with, it's quite outrageous, really.
I suppose what I'm trying to say is that a film is just fiction and I find it hard to get worked up over them the way the pro-censorship lobby do.
I respect your view, but I disagree that Fulci should've held back on the gore and violence. And, if you get a chance to see the Blu-ray of this film, you'll see the bottle scene in cringe-inducing detail, more-so than on any home video format previous to this.