I think the better question is... Why not?

The obvious answer is that he is evil and twisted and stuff like this is what Mad Scientists do! As I have said earlier, this idea seems like something the doctor on South Park would concoct.

You, sir, are dead to me.

Wooty

Anyone in LA going to see this tonight at the Nuart?

I'm probably going tomorrow night in Dallas.

well i just got back from DC, and felt it was worth the hype. There was a general fucked up mentallity making this movie. in terms of blood and gore
Also in regards to the sequel

I ended up not going but I may have another chance next week.

I was expecting more cringe-worthy scene like:
1. actually seeing their mouths on the asses instead of being all covered up with bandages or different camera angles.
2. ass to mouth would have been better if it was at least one dude in the middle, over even grosser, a dude connected to another dude. That's cringe worthy. There is nothing really that gross about a good looking woman going ass to mouth to another woman or dude.
3. going to the bathroom scene
4. trying to disconnect from each other scene.

Concerning a sequel, I think there may just be different versions of one film (like a lot of remakes) instead of something having continuity.

So a woman getting shit in the mouth by another woman isn't gross?

It's gross, but it would be grosser if it was:
1. a dude shitting into the mouth of another dude
2. a woman shitting into the mouth of another dude.
3. an old woman, old man, obese person, or stinky bum shitting into the mouth of anyone.

Going tonight.

So the only way they are attached to one another is through their mouths? If that's the case, they could take a knife and do some surgery to seperate if it's just their lips. Or are their jaws attached?

from what we could see, two external skin flaps connected the face cheeks to the butt cheeks. And from what we would interpret (but never see), their mouths are probably sewed onto the asshole.

That too would have been a great scene, if they tried to messily separate themselves.

You'd think they would have a go at it or the two behind would be forced to swallow shit.

Don't really want to look through the whole thread in case this question has already been asked, but what's the deal with the 1st person? At least compared to the others, being first wouldn't be that bad since whoever is first wouldn't have to eat shit right?

Nope, he is just the shitmaker. The rest are the takers.

Haha. Ebert's the man. He didn't have to review this, but did. He didn't give it any stars. But it was more of a "no star" rating than a "zero star" rating.

The review is at http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/...IEWS/100509982

I liked it but was still disappointed. I would have liked it more if they had shown anything. There's more blood and gore on an episode of Supernatural than there was here.

Every time something cool seemed like it was going to happen, it cut to another scene.

I believe that is dialogue in an alternate take from The Good The Bad and The Ugly

"There are two kinds of people in the world, the shit makers and the shit takers. You dig. And take."

You've put a lot of thought into this.

Shit is shit dude. And it's always fucking disgusting.

It's a natural function of the human body

it's just the smell...once you get past the smell, it taste's great!

Good lord, amazing how many people around here are fascinated with the whole concept of eating shit. Is that all anyone really cares about with this movie? I've heard nothing is really shown, so I am sure you guys can find a website to better service your needs.