TimeandTide

Not Webster's.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/defin...m=torture+porn

hapgilmore

the entire Saw series is GARBAGE (with the exception of the original), I am glad it got its ass kicked!

Deftones

why would you need a dictionary for something that's blatantly obvious? it's ok to admit that you are wrong. clearly you are in this case. it's ok.

OldBoy

to like Paranormal Activity is to buy into the fact that this is found, actual footage of a couple being tormented. in 2009 that is very hard to do and am really amazed at the people buying into it. which isn't to say i am criticizing. i just don't get it is all.

writer106

I'm surprised that Paranormal Activity beat out Saw VI especially since Saw VI had about 1,000 more theaters. I do like the Saw series but I decided to wait till next weekend to see it. I do wonder if it or PA will do better next weekend during Halloween. But like another poster mentioned the Saw movies never have big budgets and so if this makes between 40 million to 50 million it will be considered a success. I do hope part VIII is the last one.

naitram

Damn ,these are our Halloween choices this year? Though I do want to see Zombieland, I guess.

Sorry to diverge from the real debate in here...

Only had the unfortunate displeasure of seeing the first Saw.

ChefWinduAZ

Found this on Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torture...orture_porn.22

Jackskeleton

Which leads us back to this great response;

It does explain it. Because hey, one critic called it torture porn, it clearly has to stick? When you boil it down BOTH films have you watching some force slowly torture (graphic or not) the characters on screen.

In other news, Transformers 2 was the ultimate in Torture porn for film studios as it sure as hell slowly tortured viewers.

Dan

Jackskeleton,

Thanks for the spoilers. Especially in a thread where they don't belong.

Mountain Biker

Fixed

Deftones

i love how you have the inability to admit when you are wrong. nothing changes around here, does it?

Gerry P.

I hear ya.

Sunset Blvd = torture porn

BravesMG

Cape Fear = torture porn, good point.

Supermallet

...Suspension of disbelief?

Jackskeleton

I like how you have an inability to have a debate/discussion. :ROTFLOL:

Jackskeleton

Well hey, I'm sure if some critic who didn't like it or didn't like the trend in which movies were going towards and described it like that and decided to label it in such a fashion, then yes. I suppose it would be considered it.

Again, the basis we're defining "torture porn" is as something said by critics who didn't care for it.

You could call PA a Comedy Horror. But if you're going to call it that, then you would have to call SAW the same thing, is what I'm getting at. The idea on calling them both torture porn is because others have the mentality of "Glad SAW was beaten, I've had enough of that crappy horror!, Bring on more PA!"

They're the same. So call it whatever you like, but you have to lump BOTH together. Wasn't THE STRANGERS considered "torture porn" via the critics? So what makes the difference between PA and The Strangers?

http://thisrecording.wordpress.com/2...ngers-for-you/

tylergfoster

The general definition of "torture porn", as I see it, is that an eager audience goes to see said movie, and each of the big setpieces builds to a grand guginol of bodily fluids, allowing the viewers to "get their rocks off" on torture.

There is a similar, but inverse type of reaction to a movie like Paranormal Activity, where an audience goes to see what the fuss is all about. Most importantly, the movie builds not off of drawing out what the audience paid to see but shocking or surprising them with something they weren't expecting.These quotes indicate my key issue with this argument. You're acting as if "torture porn" is an assessment of quality rather than a defining characteristic. I don't like using "torture porn" as a term at all, but if I must, I guess I'll use it to identify the content of a film rather than judge its merits.

Jackskeleton

Though, as the other poster quoted, "Torture-porn" seems to just be a critique that was laid out by film critics who weren't pleased with the new direction that horror films were going.

So your definition of it is that if there's a ton of blood that it's built up to in order for the audience to get a sort of blood lust. Like... say Gladiator? :Insert Crowe screaming "Are you not entertained?" here:

Would Kill Bill be considered Torture Porn? I mean, How about Brain Dead? Both of them are filled with buckets and buckets of blood.

And really, are you saying that the viewers of PA aren't going in to see an eager audience isn't going in to see what the couple will be put through by said villain building up to some sort of moment that was given away in the ads of a character getting tossed into the screen. Yes, sans blood, but still an eager anticipation for said climax.

My original post came from the following posters who felt that PA was better than SAW and were pleased that it was kicking it's butt simply to end what they felt was Saw's tainting of the theater:

But they fail to realize that both films are just different sides to the same coin. The second quote specifically. Do you not see the contradiction in that post alone? Yes, it may not be Torture-GORE, but it doesn't make PA any better on a moral high grand than SAW.

Hell, BOTH are low budget. I mean, seriously. How could you praise one for being low budget and not the other? And the "looks so real" doesn't do anything for the argument that says it's not a glorified faux-snuff film.

Maybe you can't see it, but SAW and PA are both films that are much alike. Yes, Saw VI has more blood, but the idea with PA is you're suspending your disbelief and thinking that it's the found video tape of a couple who had been haunted by some demon.

Notice the bold. And again, both films carry that out. In the case of PA, it's a demon torturing a couple for the 80 minutes or so. Less blood, but it seems that the title of "torture-porn" came about simply to discredit a film as nothing more than something people can go in and jerk off to someone else's suffrage.

J. Farley

This is one of the more inane arguments I've seen in a while. Also, regardless of whether you think of Paranormal Activity as a torture film, that doesn't mean it and Saw VI are of the same quality. To even insinuate such a thing is absurd. I am a fan of the Hostel films and they are full of torture. I like them for a variety of different reasons, none of which I have found in any Saw movie. But hey, if you consider Night of the Living Dead and House of the Dead to be of the same quality because they're both zombie films, I suppose that's your problem.

Fist of Doom

I don't even know what the hell they're arguing about anymore. Seems more like a "who can get the last word in" contest.

I'm just glad Amelia finished outside the top ten. This trend of Biography Porn has to stop.

Jackskeleton

johnglass

Seriously, your posts are like torture porn because I'm in agony reading them. Please stop. It hurts.

Jackskeleton

Ah, I missed the part where you're forced to read every post.

RichC2

This thread went from basic to horrible to redeemed in 3 pages. Well done!

Ash Ketchum

Bio-porn. I like it. How soon before someone at the New York Times picks it up and starts using it? (In fact, I'll e-mail them right now.)