A Serbian Film has been making the rounds in the festival circuit the last few months. This past December, the film was cut by 4 minutes and 11 seconds by the British Board of Film Classification due to acts depicted in this film before it could be released.

I have yet to see this film, but know a lot of the details about this film. Reviews have stated among things that this is "the worst viewing experience of the year" to being "soul raped" to "quite intelligent".

Has anyone seen this yet or have anything further to discuss regarding the issues with this film? I think this could be a fascinating topic for varying opinions.

Rob

What's the name of it?


Phil

Quoted from dogglebe What's the name of it? Phil

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1273235/

"A Serbian Film"

E.D.

oh.


Phil

Yeah, Phil, sorry about that. Not the first time I have been asked the title after calling it A Serbian Film :)

Ray,

Thanks for the trailer link.

Rob

I saw this couple of weeks back...

An overlong, poorly worded synopsis written by me would go something like this:

A once successful, now retired porn star lives the family life with his (very sexy) wife and young son (10-12 years old). He still watches his own films from time to time but reassures his wife that he doesn’t regret giving it up...it’s clear he does.

A former co-star tells him about this filmmaker whose developing a new kind of “art” porn and really wants him on board. He resists at first but meets the director anyway and of course decides to do with the temptation of a big pay up that’ll set him and his family up financially for the foreseeable future.

From the start its clear this is a very different kind of shoot, things get weirder, twisted(er) and violent(er) as he’s dragged down into a sick, depraved world via the process of the film’s production...I won’t say anymore.


Believe the hype, its extensively violent, gruesome and pornographic becoming increasingly morally reprehensible as it progresses in its content, implications and depictions. The second half of the film are where things really kick off, relentlessly outrageous and brutal. I mean, I can't really go into specifics about certain scenes on a public forum like this, it just wouldn't be in good taste.

Its very well shot and put together with strong performances all around, for anyone into their extreme cinema they need to check it out. Personally I have never seen anything as perverted, balls out (forgive the pun) or "envelope pushing" as this...that I can remember anyway.

As tailbest said in his original post, the BBFC excised over 4 minutes from the film which is the second most cutting they've ever had to do, so that should give you an idea. Also, you have to use IMDb’s advanced title search engine to find it, presumably because of the pornographic material.

Did I like it? Needless to say, it's not comfortable viewing, the allegorical aspect pushed by the director is a bit stretched, seems like phony justification but technically it’s a worthy accomplishment. This is the director's first film so I give him credit for getting the thing made (a miracle in itself) for its slick production values, craft and having the bravery to maintain his twisted vision.

It all really comes down to the sensibilities of the viewer, I'm not easily offended and can step back and just take it a slice of extreme exploitation, shock cinema, others will take offence and despise everything about it. I will say though that I was pretty gripped for the whole thing; shocked, disgusted, amused, entertained and shaking my head during the 90 minutes so at least it was an experience and I can appreciate that. I certainly won't be forgetting it in a hurry.

I will quote one line from it which ranks as one of the most memorable I’ve heard ever on screen...and should tell you how one scene transpires...

"Newborn porn!"

That is all.

I'm skeptical about this one. I'm well aware of the scene that's garnered the majority of the film's controversy and have to say the act it depicts has to be the worst in film history.

...And yet, people (including you, col.) seem to have made it out of this one like it ain't no thing, which leads me to believe that the film is more about the most outrageous shock tactics imaginable than it is anything truly deep, powerful or disturbing. And the trailer, while intriguing, definitely seems more straightforward horror than the more ambitious, politically motivated art film the director seems to suggest it is.

In other words, it sounds shallow.

And... it's ridiculous! I mean the idea presented is so deeply disturbing. almost inconceivably repulsive and will shock people more than most people have been shocked in their lives. But I feel like no director could have conceived of the idea without knowing that it would ultimately become the face of the film, eclipsing any message it might want to convey.

Like with Antichrist, there's probably a smidgeon of facetiousness to be found here. If it were An American Film, I think it would be completely illegitimate. Just the product of someone who wanted to hit the "disturbing movie" high score.

I had a vague idea of what I was getting into this with film.
I deliberately stayed away from details, wanting to see the film with a clean slate.
A screener came across my desk a few months ago.
This was prior to the British Film Board controversy, so I assume it's an uncut version.

Ultimately, I was seduced by the film. I could not take my eyes off of it.
Shocking. Disturbing. Perverse. Grotesque. Heinous. It's all of these things.
There's the phrase, "A watched pot never boils."
At the center of this film, there is a believable well drawn central character.
Every time he could have veered off into cliche, they kept him real.
I was fascinated with an ex-porn star struggling to keep his family afloat.
He's a beast with a soul that found a way to make money by indulging the beast.
Now past his prime, he forged a family, thinking that it would change him.

I felt shocked and horrified right along with our protag, but also compelled to continue.
All the controversy is wrapped up inside a strong character study.
Through that filter, I felt the intense scenes were not simply gratuitous.  
As he struggles with his identity, I struggled with my desire to watch.
Was there something beastly within me for wanting to see this through?
It's rare that a film challenges my sensibilities and morals this much.
Being faced with these tough disturbing questions, was fascinating for me.
I was repulsed to the point to feeling numb by the end of the film.

The film itself looks fantastic and is framed beautifully.
This was one hell of a debut film, I can't imagine what he'll follow up with.
I'm not sure if I will ever watch the film again, but I kept it.
As a reminder of the dark journey it pulled me through.
It's not for everyone, but if you open yourself to it, the film will mark you.

E.D.

Quoted from Electric Dreamer I had a vague idea of what I was getting into this with film. I deliberately stayed away from details, wanting to see the film with a clean slate. A screener came across my desk a few months ago. This was prior to the British Film Board controversy, so I assume it's an uncut version. Ultimately, I was seduced by the film. I could not take my eyes off of it. Shocking. Disturbing. Perverse. Grotesque. Heinous. It's all of these things. There's the phrase, "A watched pot never boils." At the center of this film, there is a believable well drawn central character. Every time he could have veered off into cliche, they kept him real. I was fascinated with an ex-porn star struggling to keep his family afloat. He's a beast with a soul that found a way to make money by indulging the beast. Now past his prime, he forged a family, thinking that it would change him. I felt shocked and horrified right along with our protag, but also compelled to continue. All the controversy is wrapped up inside a strong character study. Through that filter, I felt the intense scenes were not simply gratuitous.   As he struggles with his identity, I struggled with my desire to watch. Was there something beastly within me for wanting to see this through? It's rare that a film challenges my sensibilities and morals this much. Being faced with these tough disturbing questions, was fascinating for me. I was repulsed to the point to feeling numb by the end of the film. The film itself looks fantastic and is framed beautifully. This was one hell of a debut film, I can't imagine what he'll follow up with. I'm not sure if I will ever watch the film again, but I kept it. As a reminder of the dark journey it pulled me through. It's not for everyone, but if you open yourself to it, the film will mark you. E.D.

Phew, I'm not alone.

Well put, Brett.

Quoted from Colkurtz8 Phew, I'm not alone. Well put, Brett.

Heh heh, it is a relief to know that.
I've been reticent to discuss the film with others.
It's not something I recommend or freely discuss.
But if someone brings it up, I too am intensely curious as to their thoughts.
I admit, I waited a bit before I weighed in.
I didn't want to be the only one either. ;)

E.D.

Quoted from Electric Dreamer Heh heh, it is a relief to know that. I've been reticent to discuss the film with others. It's not something I recommend or freely discuss. But if someone brings it up, I too am intensely curious as to their thoughts. I admit, I waited a bit before I weighed in. I didn't want to be the only one either. ;) E.D.

Yeah, it has circulated between a few of my friends thus far with all of us being, like you, reluctant to widely share it or discuss it among certain acquaintances. It was given to me by a mate who is well into his dark, fu?ked up stuff so he loved it so much so that he ranks it has his third favourite film of 2010 and he's seen the most of last year's releases out of us all...He is a sane individual by the way, a good up-standing citizen ;)

While I can't vouch for it as much as he did, like I say in my post above, I appreciated the intense viewing experience, the acting, direction and courage of the director without getting too worked up over the director's supposed noble intention or the film's underlying "message".

In fairness, James make a fair point (like another friend or mine who couldn't get behind it for the same reason) about the director knowing full well that the explicit content would surpass any social commentary, I reckon he's just chancing is arm so to have something to spout about in interviews.

As I started the this thread, I feel it's only fair that I check it out as well and weigh in with everyone else.

This movie, really, is hard to describe. It takes you on a very dark odyssey with the main character, Milos. As has been stated, major details of the story should not be mentioned as this movie is an experience, good or bad.

The story has been mentioned above, but the acting was good overall. A bit of overacting here and there, but when put in the situations of this film, who knows how you may act? The director and his ideals were stretched thin and a bit heavy-handed at times and filled with the most overacting.

As this is director Srdjan Spasojevic first film, it is a very impressive debut. Shots are established and the film looks very well made. It is an well made film considering the subject matter along with this being his first feature.

There will be those who feel this movie is just sick for sick's sake. Others will feel that this is truly a piece of art.

Where do I stand? I was hooked while watching the film. I was willing to follow Milos through his journey to the end. Like Kurtz, I am not easily offended and I wasn't really taken aback by the acts as most people. Does this make the film good? Opinions will vary, but I liked the performances and the style from the director. The story and acts within the story were needed to push Milos and his journey along. I am glad I saw the film, as not many films are an experience like this one.

Obviously this film is not for everyone. Those who do experience it, though, will not soon forget it.

Rob

From the available reviews, as I'm not likely to watch this myself, I gather that this is a fairly well executed debut.
Looks better than it talks and acts but those aren't too bad either.
It's largely the taboo subject material that really makes this movie "chattable".
(I don't for a moment believe anything new exists under the sun, even in cinema.)

I wonder how SS Aronofsky fans compare the continuous string of dysfunctional decisions Spasojevic' (co-writer & director) "Milos" makes in SERBIAN to those of Aronofsky characters in REQUIEM, WRESTLER and now BLACK SWAN?

I'm shooting more for the contrast between thematic subject, dialog and story than acting and cinematography.

I'm wondering if the dysfunctional morass Aronofsky taps into is just more generally well accepted (not that DA's films are blockbusters, but certainly appreciated by an almost semi-cult following) than that of Spasojevic.

What are the differences and why?

Ray,

In my personal opinion, I don't feel A Serbian Film offers anything new. It just shows a lot more (granted I feel I saw the uncut version) and pushes over the top ideas. There is no subtlety in A Serbian Film.

Actually, Milos pretty much makes one decision, to do the "art film". The director requests that he accept the film without reading the script (never a good idea). Once he finds out more about the film he attempts to leave.

I am a big DA fan and this does have some similarities to his films, Requiem especially. Both characters do something for money and end up in bad situations. I enjoyed Requiem more as a film. I was more invested in the characters and cared about what happened to them.

That's not saying I didn't care about Milos and his journey, but this film has 3 writers on it. I don't believe the writers, the director included, executed a script well enough for me to care as much versus DA and the scripts that he directs. With the topics at hand, it's almost impossible to relate with Milos due to the situations and circumstances. Besides curiousity, the major asset of A Serbian Film was how the director shot the film.

Rob

SPOILERS

Haha...mildly enjoyable, highly laughable, certainly attention-grabbing.

No matter how you look at it, the director's an idiot.  If he was trying to make an art film, he totally undermined it by including such graphic content.  If he was trying to make a shock film, all he succeeded in doing was making me laugh -- not that I didn't feel uncomfortable, but come on...this film is far too poorly made and far too over the top to elicit any strong reaction.  

I think he really was trying to make a "good" film...I just don't think he's a very good filmmaker.  The first half of the film has a bit of promise in that it sets up its story and character reasonably well, but as soon as the film tries to gut-punch you, it just becomes a complete joke.  As soon as the director gets into the nasty stuff, he forgets about his story and wallows, and it shows.  When violence this extreme doesn't have a point, all you can do is laugh at it.  

It's a shame because the acting for the most part was pretty strong.  Don't be fooled though...there's no art to this film.  Anytime people are confronted with extreme violence and depravity, they can be tricked into believing that there's more content in a film than there actually is; I believe that's this film's saving grace.  Dreamer, I like what you have to say about the way the film engages its audience ("...something beastly within me?") but I think that that's to your credit, not the director's.  I don't think this guy knows what he's doing.  The first half of the movie is well enough constructed, but largely uninteresting and certainly unoriginal; the second half is a complete mess, but at least you get to see a dick go into someone's eye socket.

Long story short, nothing interesting to see here, but good fun for sadistic violence hounds who are bored with rape and murder and want to see some kids getting blanked in the blank.

Oh also the second half of the movie is poorly photographed and annoyingly edited, which is a shame, because the first half is just the opposite.

Based on ^^^, I think I might see this. The more I hear about this one, the more it sounds like The Human Centipede and the less it sounds like Irreversible (consequently, I saw Irreversible for the second time last week; that one might hold the prize for most disturbing film). Indeed, I think the guy was thinking something along the lines of "what's the one thing horror directors would still hold universally in bad taste... of course!"

In any case, I might check it out. The visuals from the trailer definitely present a different aesthetic than most horror movies, even if it seems like more of the same.

How are people seeing this anyway?

Quoted from James McClung How are people seeing this anyway?

Dunno about the others but I found it in my hardrive on Christmas morning...that's old Claus and his (not widely known) penchant for twisted, pornographic, exploitative cinema for ya!