
The British Board of Film Classification has refused to grant THE HUMAN CENTIPEDE II (FULL SEQUENCE) a rating, which basically means it cannot be legally supplied in the UK. hence, for all intents and purposes, the film has now been banned in the UK and won't be able to find distribution there. (Take into consideration that the first film, and even A SERBIAN FILM, received "18 certificates".)
With this surprising news comes an idea of what the film is about, as the BBFC said the film's plot tells the story of a man who becomes sexually obsessed with a DVD recording of the first film and who imagines putting the ‘centipede’ idea into practice. Unlike the first film, the sequel presents graphic images of sexual violence, forced defecation, and mutilation, and the viewer is invited to witness events from the perspective of the protagonist. Whereas in the first film the ‘centipede’ idea is presented as a revolting medical experiment, with the focus on whether the victims will be able to escape, this sequel presents the ‘centipede’ idea as the object of the protagonist’s depraved sexual fantasy.
Whoa! Whoa on so many levels. (Who knew that it took place in a world where the first film is just that: a film?)
There's more: The principal focus of The Human Centipede II (Full Sequence) is the sexual arousal of the central character at both the idea and the spectacle of the total degradation, humiliation, mutilation, torture, and murder of his naked victims. Examples of this include a scene early in the film in which he masturbates whilst he watches a DVD of the original Human Centipede film, with sandpaper wrapped around his penis, and a sequence later in the film in which he becomes aroused at the sight of the members of the ‘centipede’ being forced to defecate into one another’s mouths, culminating in sight of the man wrapping barbed wire around his penis and raping the woman at the rear of the ‘centipede’. There is little attempt to portray any of the victims in the film as anything other than objects to be brutalised, degraded and mutilated for the amusement and arousal of the central character, as well as for the pleasure of the audience. There is a strong focus throughout on the link between sexual arousal and sexual violence and a clear association between pain, perversity and sexual pleasure. It is the Board’s conclusion that the explicit presentation of the central character’s obsessive sexually violent fantasies is in breach of its Classification Guidelines and poses a real, as opposed to a fanciful, risk that harm is likely to be caused to potential viewers.
David Cooke, Director of the BBFC said: “It is the Board’s carefully considered view that to issue a certificate to this work, even if confined to adults, would be inconsistent with the Board’s Guidelines, would risk potential harm within the terms of the VRA, and would be unacceptable to the public.
The Board considered whether its concerns could be dealt with through cuts. However, given that the unacceptable content runs throughout the work, cuts are not a viable option in this case and the work is therefore refused a classification.”
There you have it; not much else to say, is there? Just have to wonder now when this flick will see the light of day. In Britain, in any event. IFC still holds the US rights to the film.
What's clear is that director Tom Six kept the promise he made soon after the first film's release: He's made a movie more depraved, more disgusting and, presumably, more controversial.















...a sequel doesnt interest me..theres about 100000 other films id rather waste my time on.
...a sequel doesnt interest me..theres about 100000 other films id rather waste my time on.
Stop this shite...
YES!
Less.........
While I don't particularly mind graphic violence or sex in movies, mixing the two can - if you pardon the pun - leave a bad taste. I've seen the uncut Serbian Film and while i think technically it was a good film in the sense i understood it's point and the certain merits of what story it was trying to tell and the acting was alright, personally i didnt like the film and to
While I don't particularly mind graphic violence or sex in movies, mixing the two can - if you pardon the pun - leave a bad taste. I've seen the uncut Serbian Film and while i think technically it was a good film in the sense i understood it's point and the certain merits of what story it was trying to tell and the acting was alright, personally i didnt like the film and to a certain degree wish I'd never seen it as i'll never unsee those things. Not my thing i'm afraid.
My limits to graphic sex, violence and gore in movies are along the lines of Friday 13th, or if the movie is telling a true or dramatic story soemthing like Monster(there's better examples but i'm going off top of my head) etc.... a completely different type of experience.
That said I'm unsure about the above ban. I get where the BBFC are coming from and think they are right to speak out on their concerns of the movie but I've never been a fan of such censorship and believe the choice should firmly lie with the viewer with what they want to watch as long as they are aware the extent of what they are about to watch.
I do completely agree with MonsterZeroNJ's comments though, filmakers like Sam Raimi, Wes Craven and Tobe Hooper (again top of my head)were daring in pushing the boundaries back in the days of "video nasties" in the 80's and we need film makers like those. But this seems to just be trying to get a shock and reaction for the sake of it rather than trying for any kind of artistic or even just entertainment merit.
All said and done i have no judgement on anyone who wishes to see it. As I've said its your choice.
Piling shit on top of more shit does not translate into a good movie.
Piling shit on top of more shit does not translate into a good movie.