people in those pies rather than those puppies. Even though of course it was fake, but puppies! i love puppies!
share Please consider this message as both an introduction,and a response to your comments regarding the film "heatre of Blood."
i found that whole sequence with the poodles not only to be totally gross,but also unforgivably disgusting.
And the puppies weren't at all evil.
Most people that I know who enjoyed this movie thought that particular sequence to be the high point of the film.
[deleted]
Sure, it's gross and disgusting, it was the goal of the scene. The fact that the puppies were or were'nt evil has no importance at all.
I'm no Shakespearean expert, but I don't think that the two babies of the queen were evil. It was something important to them.
Also, you won't tell me that someone eating two babies isn't gross or disgusting...
That scene is one of the great moment of the film, I would say that it is the turning point for Lionheart, where he become more of a madman than the vengeance-seeking artist.
If you've every seen the production done for TV in 1985,starring Trevor Peacock and Eileen Atkins,or the monstrosity with Anthony Hopkins and Jessica Lange,you'd see that the purpose of the cannibal dinner is to dispose of a gang of jeering sadists and monstrous villains.
Chiron and Demetrius,the Empress's 2 evil sons,were the type of overgrown juvenile delinquents who give psychopaths a bad name.They murder Titus' son-in-law;rape and mutilate his daughter; help frame his 2 innocent sons,resulting in their unjust executions,and assisted their mother in an insane blood feud.Titus captures them,murders them,mutilates the cadavers,and prepares the pie.After Tamora eats,he informs her of the contents,stabs her,and is,in return,stabbed by the Emperor.Saturninus,is then,in turn,stabbed by Lucius.
So,in this over the top potboiler,we have a pair of innocent toy poodles who were guilty of no more than making a lot of noise and causing messes in the house,to be killed,mutilated,and end up in the "Queen's "throat.Nowhere even approaches the insane type of "justice'from the original.
Well if he would alter the "pound of flesh", to remove a heart, I don't think he would be too concerned with anything except that the critic feels the dogs, not puppies, are his "children."
I love my dogs very much and I think the scene is gross. That's the point!
It is no more real than any of the murders but people react more strongly to animal deaths.
Isn't that an interesting thought.
Right, they were toy poodles, not puppies, and all that Linoheart wanted was the plot device of the queen being fed her children. None of the deaths were exact, literal recreations of the scenes in the plays, only a madmans twisted devices for what HE felt were appropriate revenges.
shareUgh, I always skip this scene.
shareJeez, take it easy people. The point was to get revenge by forcing tubby to eat the things most important to him. Get it. It wasn't about punsihing poodles. Although I don't really like poodles, but maybe they wouldn't look so evil if their owners didn't always give them these poncey haircuts.
shareI love puppies, too, but they were the closest thing this particular critic had to children, and they were necessary to complete Lionheart's fantasy. I didn't particularly like this part.
shareHmm . . . personally, I hold human life in a bit higher regard than the life of dogs.
Plus, dogs probably taste better. :)
At the end of the day Theatre of Blood is a horror film. The scene obviously horrified people, and so it did what it set out to do. To all those saying "But the dogs were innocent! They committed no crime!", exactly what crime are you suggesting the critics committed? Apart from giving Lionheart bad reviews and not offering him the Critics Choice award, neither of which are against the law, they did nothing wrong.
"Groovy"
Hmm . . . personally, I hold human life in a bit higher regard than the life of dogs.That's a common misconception. Dog is actually much tougher and much less tasty than human, which if prepared properly tastes like por....
Plus, dogs probably taste better. :)
The scene was pretty awful, I knew what was coming already and still cringed throughout the whole thing (and I'm usually pretty strong-stomached when it comes to horror movies).
shareWell, you do realize that the Vincent Price character is supposed to be a villain of sorts.
shareOh god, lighten up, people. The "puppies" (adult toy poodles) weren't actually harmed for the scene and besides it's a movie where the main character kills about a dozen people in extremely gruesome fashion -- you're upset because he offed a few dogs?
share