I saw this at the Jam Factory in Melbourne on the weekend and at least 6 people walked out during the first half of the movie.
I personally found the movie too disturbing. While I understand the subject matter demands that the film be dark and confronting I also believe that the movie makers wouldn't want people walking out in disgust and horror half-way through.
I saw it at the Cinema Nova and like your screening, we had about 12 people walk out by the half-way point. I totally agree with you about the makers not wanting people to walk out, but I believe the decisions they made in telling the story were correct and everything they put on screen was based on fact, none of this was made up for pure shock value. I can totally understand how it might be too much for people but I personally wasn't offended by the movie, it definitely is a film that stays with you though. I saw it four days ago and haven't been able to get it out of my head since then.
I also watched it at Nova and had about 6 people walk out. I found it annoying as what were these people expecting, a picnic? Everything you read about the movie warns you clearly that it is confronting and the content will (not might) be distressing to viewers, so if you cant handle it why bother paying for admission in the first place. Personally i found it quite unnerving but it wasn't worse than some other things ive seen in films. The psychological distress and tension that builds is more overwhelming than the visual violence.
Agreed. The scene where Jamie's half-brother is beaten and mutilated is very graphic, but what is even more upsetting is the portrayal of Jamie's own distress, helplessness, vulnerability and the sense of his world becoming a prison. I thought the shot where he is sitting outside, unable to continue watching the torture, and the kids cycle on by on the other side of the street was a very nice visual and aural brushstroke.
I can understand that some people might find the film dull, but I was gripped the whole way through. It takes sensational subject matter and makes it distressingly human. It has the strength of it's own convictions and the sensitivity to carry them (and the audience) through.... if the audience can stomach it.
Agreed. The scene where Jamie's half-brother is beaten and mutilated is very graphic, but what is even more upsetting is the portrayal of Jamie's own distress, helplessness, vulnerability and the sense of his world becoming a prison. I thought the shot where he is sitting outside, unable to continue watching the torture, and the kids cycle on by on the other side of the street was a very nice visual and aural brushstroke.
PEOPLE, PEOPLE, PEOPLE . . . THERE'S A 'SPOILER!' TAG FOR A REASON ... USE IT, PLEEEEEASE!!!!
I don't ruin your movie experience, so please don't ruin ours! Thank you!
No probs. I get your point but it's always handy to know just in case people like me are in another country and/or don't look up too much info before seeing the movie first.
that's the truth! just that one scene is enuff to get to you forever!
i just finished watching snowtown and as someone above said, this is gonna be one that stays in my head for days. very impressed with this movie, which i thought was tastefully done, nothing put in here for glamour or shock
Just because it wasn't made up doesn't mean that it wasn't included for pure shock value. This movie is all about shock value. It's all it has, and all it is.
Yeah, if you bother to read up on the actual crimes you'll find that the movie really shied away from the gruesome and potentially exploitative stuff. I think the one murder scene is in there because the story is mostly told from Jamie's perspective and that is his introduction to what they're actually doing. That scene is horrific... but the things they did in real life went way beyond what little was shown in the movie. I see the whole movie as a warning about vigilante violence and people who cloak their bloodlust in claims of justice and righteousness.
Yeah, if you bother to read up on the actual crimes you'll find that the movie really shied away from the gruesome and potentially exploitative stuff. I think the one murder scene is in there because the story is mostly told from Jamie's perspective and that is his introduction to what they're actually doing. That scene is horrific... but the things they did in real life went way beyond what little was shown in the movie.
Since it is implied that most (all but one, I think) of the humans murdered were sex offenders I can relate to the outrage at the dog being killed. What was most shocking about the scene was that the dog clearly trusted its master and suffered the ultimate betrayal as a result. Personally, I'd be quite happy to see the entire human race wiped out and the planet left to the animals.
You obviously haven't understood that only two of the victims were really pedophiles (the neighbor and the half-brother). The film clearly shows from the group conversations that the serial killer and his acomplices are delusional and think they have a mission to lead: they suspect anybody to be a potential pedophile. They also make the confusion between pedophiles and gay men. If you think that Bunting did a good thing by torturing men they suspect to be sex offenders, you obviuously missed something. They were killing drug-addicts, intellectually disabled people, gay men, schizophrens, witnesses... and collected their pensions after their deaths. Nothing to be really proud of.
______________________________________ The higher you fly, the faster you fall.
From what I've read he was mostly just choosing people who he didn't care for, for whatever reason he could hang on them to get his accomplices to go along. It's suggested he killed the one guy's wife because she was fat... and the final step-brother because he was too tidy... calling him a 'yuppie'. It's obvious from the torture scene that Bunting is getting off on it... he's not out for 'justice' he's out for kicks... to entertain himself.
They needed to show how disturbing it was because it was like no other standard murder if there is one. I watched a documentary on what Bunting did and what you see in the film is seriously about 10% of the messed up things he did. He ised Car batteries to gentitals, lite sparklers in genitals. Pliers on toes and removed finger and toe nails. He making every victim call there loved ones and tell them they were leaving and hated them. It was such a harsh murder and I couldnt think of a worse way to die
Exactly! I thought the acting was bad too, only finished it as it was on DVD and I had a snack. I could not like any of the players, a bunch of white trash, no one had a job. The guy killed at the end I felt sorry for tho.
The acting was spectacular, but you sound like you're complaining about the characters. You do realise this was based on real life events and the whole film is essentially about a TRUE STORY about small community full of degenerates who actually kill one another right?
First of all I think its a great movie. I've seen it one week ago and still can't get it out of my head. Disturbing and thought provoking. Certainly it's not a movie that one can have "fan" watching. I can't understand the people walking out with disgust half way through, did they expect romantic comedy??
Im pretty sure they walked out because they were bored to death. U have to admit its a very...very slow movie. There is a fine line between slow and boring and this movie crossed that line. I dont understand how can anyone find this movie disturbing? Maybe people who watch disney cartoons.....? If u want to see really disturbing and depressing mobie try to watch gaspar noe's I stand alone. As much as i love to like australian movies...this was boring and wouldnt buy dvd
i dont think the whole movie is slow. there were definatly a few scenes that i thought dragged on but iv sat through more boring movies. if you cant sit down for 2 hours and watch a movie dont sit down to start with! if you dont like graphic movies dont watch movies about serial killers!
The problems not the length it's that you're watching a film with no idea of what's happening you just see random people killed every now and again with no idea why, so what's the point? the film was just a mess.
I skipped through it because it was so drawn out and artsy-fartsy. It was just so boringly unpleasant. I am all for fictionalized account of a real-life nutjob's mayhem. Hell, and I am even up for a good documentary on true crimes. But this was neither. I could hardly care that some white trash Aussie fatwad manipulated about five different morons to help him get rid of some perverts and lowlifes. That is not really an interesting serial killer premise, even if it was factually accurate and shot on gritty film stock. There is a huge difference between a entertaining movie and plodding re-enactments. This was the latter not the former.
It really happened. Did you want some Hollywood happy ending? Bunting is a psychopath who accused people of crimes with no proof, murdered them and stole their property, even having their pensions directed to his gang. Did you expect him to be sorry for what he did?
Not too different from what I've read of 'witch hunters' in Medieval Europe... feeding off of public fears to persecute certain groups and take their property. Only thing is they kinda had official backing from the church, kindasorta... so weren't exactly vigilantes.
... I walked to the candy bar, then walked to the bathroom, then I went outside and walked around the block. Then I forgot what I was doing in the city anyway so I walked home.
Sorry, but hearing about all these people walking out on this film is just a joke. This is a film about the most brutal murders in Australian history, comitted by the worst serial killer to walk our land. Seriously? You really weren't expecting that? At the end of the day, that is how it happened. It makes no effort to romanticise or glorify John Bunting or what he did, which is what I respect about this film, and something you cannot say about most films these days. I saw this as ballsy, gutsy filmmaking, taking its viewers to places they don't want to go, but ultimately, do exist. I could not imagine a film about Snowtown being depicted in any other way, and really, who could?
Last movie - Snowtown 8.5/10 Last DVD - The Truman Show 9.5/10
Exactly. This movie succeeded where, in my opinion, Hollywood has always failed in their serial killer films. This movie was unflinchingly brutal and dark, and yeah it was uncomfortable as hell to watch but that was because it was so real.
'Henry: Portrait Of Serial Killer', while not exactly a 'Hollywood' film is an example of a U.S. film that felt somewhat similar in its brutality and lack of 'entertainment' regarding the subject. Unlike 'Snowtown' though it's only kindasorta based on true events... and it does have a lot more violence/gore in it. What was striking, to me, about it was how random and pointless Henry's crimes were... there was none of the usual Hollywood bunk that tried to explain him or create sympathy for him... he's just a mad dog... kinda like Bunting but not as smart/manipulative.
I regret not walking out of this. I only stayed because I thought my partner was enjoying it. I didn't even want to talk about this film after I saw it. I'll never watch it again, and I think the makers of this ought to be ashamed of themselves.
While I personally thought the movie is very good, I can understand walkouts. Movies don't really disturb me, at the very least not after the credits start rolling, but I definitely felt uneasy throughout and for quite a while afterwards. I'm not sure if I have seen a movie as bleak, detached and heartless as this one, but either way, it definitely goes beyond what the average person would call entertainment. Like many others I assume, I also had no idea that I was about to watch something as intense and extreme, and being caught off-guard like that amplifies the initial impact.
Well put. I find it odd that there are people posting their annoyance over walkouts. Everyone has their own levels of curiosity and thresholds for anxiety. It's certainly not a difficult concept to grasp.