Quote:
Originally posted by Mike AI@Aug 9 2003, 11:12 AM
You are right... and while I have no seen the videos in question, I doubt they are things we would consider ok.
|
What? You mean you're judging something you haven't seen? ;-)
The reason hitlercroft and his mery band of stormtroopers haven't gone after anymore than Extreme is that they have been embarassed in the past by fucking up the kiddie porn crackdowns/sweeps. They figure this is a bit more of a slam dunk. What REALLY makes you think if they get these guys that they aren't going to come after everyone. Let's be honest, we all have things on our sites that are considered obscene somewhere.
While I'm not a fan of simulated rape and snuff myself, where do we draw the line on FICTIONAL depictions. Have you seen the movie "Irreversible"? How about "Ken Park"? Are we solely to judge these movies based upon how pretty the cinematography looks or how good the acting is? "The Accused" earned an Academy Award nomination for Jodie Foster. Are we talking about quality?
Why is Rob Black's fictional depiction of rape any more obscene than Gaspar Noe's ficitonal rape in "Irreversible"? Because it shows the penetration? Becasue Rob Black's movies are shot on a video camera while Gaspar Noe's are shot in 35 mm?
This isn't directed specifically at you, just questions in general ;-)
How is Rob Black's fake snuff any worse than the Guinnea Pig films that I can rent from my local video store? How are they any worse than a "Friday The 13th" film? If it's sick to revel in the dead body aspects of Rob Black's films, why is it not so sick to revel in the dead bodies of the latest rapper or pop actress getting skewered by Jason, Freddy or Leatherface?
I've seen some sentiment on boards about being happy towards this problem Extreme had, yet I wonder if these same people would have told Larry Flynt to stop pushing the envelope in the 70's had they been around?
Last edited by SykkBoy at Aug 9 2003, 03:43 PM