As for the last part, well, firstly "Irreversible" is a FRENCH film, not a Hollywood one.
Secondly, "that subject" has been part of cinema for nearly all eternity. Hollywood is obsessed with violence including plenty of killings in general or is sexual violence REALLY an exception here? And why? Also, did you think THIS movie's "r-scene" was in itself overdone, and not JUST by virtue of its depiction of the act itself, but the way it was filmed and particularly with its horrific dialogue spoken by the perpetrator and its 9-minute length etc?
Also... I understand where you're coming from "stick man" but... That's overall a little besides point. I simply wondered if the rumours people have stated about this film's "Cannes film festival" (I'm sure you know what it is, and yes it is in France and mostly closed to the general public) were true ESPECIALLY about the audiences FAINTING in the auditorium and requiring medical assistance?
As extreme as certain films are and CAN be, and this movie WAS in segments and even overall, have they really made audiences including adults literally FAINT including either in the cinema or Cannes film festival and require to be taken to hospital?
reply
share
stickman38 (3346)
2 years ago
I know it's a foreign/french film, that's why I included "other filmmakers" in that line.
And yes, films in general can be violent but I think it's a bit creepy that we've seen so many rape scenes in movies. I find it difficult to watch acts of violence towards women. But yes, violence in movies can be over-the-top and very 'in your face' type of stuff.
I don't think filmmakers should necessarily omit violent scenes but surely they could be a little more creative when making movies... no?
And yes, I did kind of go off-topic from your original post, I just wanted to mention that walk-out on TND. I really couldn't tell you if people were passing out and whatnot after watching the r-scene in this movie.
reply
share
TheMan18 (13015)
a year ago
Also, I didn't necessarily imply that all or even most of the audience fainted during the viewing of this film exclusively because of its r@pe scene (sorry, that word I feel a bit uncomfortable to type these days), but rather, the film in general. It COULD have been because of that scene alone for SOME ,but, unless we get to know all the details, we can't be sure.
Not to mention, we wonder if this was even partially true OR if it was merely an exaggerated publicity stunt.
reply
share