by jc » Fri Jul 14, 2006 11:19 am
<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>A study in sexual violence… by Alex Cox<br><br>… the issue is a real one, apparent to anybody whose cinemagoing extends beyond Harry Potter and cartoons. Sexualised violence has become a staple element of Hollywood entertainments and art cinema alike over the past few years, and a new expression - "extreme cinema" - has been coined to describe the films that feature it…<br><br>…half the reviews I read of low-budget art films by new filmmakers refer, en passant, to "the gruelling but thematically-essential rape-and-torture scene". Cannes, in particular, seems to seek out such films…<br><br>…From my own experience, I think filmmakers are often encouraged, by their financiers, to include these things. Once, the studios or foreign sales agents were happy with a glimpse of a woman's breasts. Now that nudity is old hat and porn ubiquitous, directors are being jostled to provide something "a bit harder". In 2001, while we were editing Revengers Tragedy, the producers and I received a request from the Film Council to "make the rape scene more violent and explicit".<br><br>…Perhaps the New Cinema Fund genuinely believed a more brutal, visible rape would add to the artistic quality of Revengers…<br><br>…Perhaps the New Cinema Fund genuinely believed a more brutal, visible rape would add to the artistic quality of Revengers: the film was based on a pretty extreme and demented play, and it needed a certain shocking aspect. Equally possibly, the Film Council may have reckoned a more explicit rape might get us into Cannes, or pick up a few more foreign sales. <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>In other words, this was a pragmatic rape, a money thing</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->.<br><br><!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://film.guardian.co.uk/features/featurepages/0,,1819900,00.html">film.guardian.co.uk/features/featurepages/0,,1819900,00.html</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--><hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>of course we all know that these things are done for one entirely trivial and benign reason only, to promote consumption: a progressive wasting of body tissue [and the soul] right? <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=jc@rigorousintuition>jc</A> at: 7/14/06 9:22 am<br></i>