To think this should be banned everywhere? *May be upsetting, sorry.*

[SchrodingersMew]

A couple of nights ago with a few friends we were talking about horror films and how some are going beyond what should be allowed. Normally i love horror films but one was mentioned called "A Serbian Film". This film was shown in cinemas and shows graphically the rape of a new born baby and the graphic anal rape of a 6 year old boy.
AIBU to think that some things should just not be allowed to be shown?

I'm disgusted after reading reviews and seeing many call the film "art".

Yup. People who are working themselves up into a great big pro-censorship lather over a fairly obscure little film released over a year ago are either stupid or have too much time on their hands.

I don't think that it should be banned because I agree with SGB that the line needs to be drawn at actual physical or psychological harm.

But I do wonder at the children used (and I think "used" is probably the right word here) in the film, and how they processed everything. And I do wonder at people who would want to make this sort of art, and the people that would want to see it.

people who would want to see it?

Whilst I agree its horrible, I would be interested in the context... there are some contexts where a scene like that would be valid as part of the story.

If its x rated or unrated, unfortunately it will sell more.

My DH (a lovely man by the way) collects pre-cert banned films (certain ones, not all, there were some very good ones, though mostly the content is disturbing and he certainly doesn't collect them to 'get off' on them). Banned films become much sought after.

I would like to be able to decide if its an incredibly strong and moving piece of cinema, or simply a gratuitous shock exploitation movie... either way, if no one is harmed emotionally or physically in the making of it, I do not believe in prohibition.

I won't be rushing out to find this film, and if I watched it, from what I've heard I'd probably hate it. (I remember watching Cannibal Ferox... hmm, and actually the ideas were valid, even though the ethics were incredibly dubious and if made now I would hope some kind of charges would be brought against the film makers)

I do not like pro-hibition on any level. It doesn't protect the innocent (because the innocent, ie younger audiences) are more likely to want to see it, plus I do not like being dictated to, but mostly, pro-hibition doesn't work, or rather, it has the opposite affect of the intention.

Exactly Beer... the difference between a one shot scene and an editted one is MASSIVE, both in affect on the viewer and the cast.

I haven't seen this but I thought it was about the horrors of genocide and war crimes, inc rape, against women and children in Serbia - or that that was the inspiration behind it.

tbh I'm pretty about people going God, how horrible that a child actor could be subjected to this filth whilst totally ignoring the fact that that stuff was done in real life to loads of women and their children.

Sorry, but it feels like fake outrage. Horrific stuff went on during that war. Why can't someone who went through it make a film about it? Should we also not talk about the Rwandan genocide? Or the transatlantic slave trade? Or are we only allowed to talk about these things in nice cosy Spielberg-style ways that we feel comfy with?

And if I am right about its provenance, then calling it child porn is pretty sick.

BeerTricksPotter,

The baby was a fake baby.

I think the graphic scenes with the 6 year old would have used editing to get the effect.

I can't remember the details as it's a while since I watched it but, IIRC, there was a scene where the father discussed something of a sexual nature with him, maybe masturbation. Maybe it wasn't filmed in sequence.

I also wondered about some of the parts with the teenage girl. I think she would have understood what the sexual dialogue was about. It's possible she was a young looking 17/18 year old.

The point being, this dialogue 'bothered' me more(in respect of how it would affect the child actors), than the 2 graphic scenes that others are up in arms about.

(BTW love your nickname)

revolting : "tbh I'm pretty about people going God, how horrible that a child actor could be subjected to this filth whilst totally ignoring the fact that that stuff was done in real life to loads of women and their children."

the difference is we know some people perform criminal acts.

but using children in some form to replicate this atrocity- in the name of "art"...hmmmmm, it does not sit well