Explore
Forums
Join Listal
Movies
TV Shows
DVDs
Music
Books
Games
Lists
Reviews
Images
Controversial movies I haven't seen
 352  6.5  7  What is it about? Two brothers, Phil and Ted Stoneman, visit their friends in Piedmont, South Carolina: the family Cameron. This friendship is affected by the Civil War, as the Stonemans and the Camerons must join up opposite armies. The consequences of the War in their lives are shown in connection to major historical events, like the development of the Civil War itself, Lincoln's assassination, and the birth of the Ku Klux Klan. Why is it so controversial? 1. The black actors are actually white guys with black make-up. 2. At the end of the movie, the North and the South unite themselves to fight against the black 'oppressors'. 3. Basically, the whole thing is a recruting movie for the Ku Klux Klan. Do I actually want to see this? Since it is a major milestone in movie history, I will definitely watch it at some point but I'm pretty sure I won't enjoy it... 
214 7.4 7.5  What is it about? A legendary propaganda/documentary of the Third Reich's 1934 Nuremberg Party Rally. Featuring a cast of thousands as well as, of course, Hitler, Himmler, Goebbels, Hess, Goering and other top party officials. Why is it so controversial? It is basically 2 hours promoting the 'Glory' of the Nazi party starring Adolf Hitler and his demented buddys. Do I actually want to see this? From a cinematic point of view, it is said to be an awesome flick so I will definitely check it out when I get the opportunity. Plus, it must be a really valuable history lesson. 
78 6.5 6.2  What is it about? The original "shockumentary" consisting of a collection of mostly real archive footage displaying mankind at its most depraved and perverse, displaying bizarre rituals, cruel behavior, and animal violence. Why is it so controversial? Even though certain parts in the film are either staged or manipulated in order to enhance their effect, the intention here was to shock Western film audiences with scenes such as the ritual slaughter of a bull, tribal dances and other rituals, and a visit to an ornate pet cemetery. Eventually, they were so succesfull that they created a whole new genre. Do I actually want to see this? Originally, I wouldn't be interested but since it is on the '1001 movies you must see before you die' list, I will eventually watch it but it is not a priority. 
164 7.7 7.6  What is it about? Cardinal Richelieu and his power-hungry entourage seek to take control of seventeenth-century France, but need to destroy Father Grandier - the priest who runs the fortified town that prevents them from exerting total control. So they seek to destroy him by setting him up as a warlock in control of a devil-possessed nunnery, the mother superior of which is sexually obsessed by him. A mad witch-hunter is brought in to gather evidence against the priest, ready for the big trial. Why is it so controversial? It combines sex, violence and religion which is always a controversial mix. Plus, the scene where some crazed naked nuns sexually assault a statue of Christ didn't help, I guess. It is notorious that the original cut has actually never been released. Do I actually want to see this? I'm definitely intrigued by this one and it is one of the few movies on this list that I really want to see. There is a top cast and it seems to be a really good flick. 
16 3.3 4.1  What is it about? A serial rapist stalks and murders prostitutes. Why is it so controversial? Event though the combination of porn with horror was nothing new, it was always rather humoristic than shocking. However, this time, the humor is gone and they pushed the limit to such an extent that they created something rather unsettling with some really realistic rape scene(s). And, of course, the insertion of authentic footage from the Vietnam War was rather controversial as well. Do I actually want to see this? It sounds like a really weird movie but I'll pass on this one. 
544 6.6 6  What is it about? Four fascist libertines round up 9 teenages boys and girls and subject them to 120 days of physical, mental and sexual torture. Why is it so controversial? It is a truelly awfull and confronting depiction of sadism with some gruesome rape and scenes of various kinds including torture, graphic violence and sexual depravity. Do I actually want to see this? I have seen a couple of movies directed by Pasolini and they all really impressed me so I will definitely watch this one whenever I get the chance, even though it does seem pretty hardcore. 
19 5.3 4.9  What is it about? An American journalist travels throughout the world in search of a good story by joining a modern-day harem and traveling to Venice to see what really goes on at diplomatic parties. While trying to expose a corrupt government official, Emanuelle stumbles upon a group that uses kidnapped girls to make and sell snuff films. A brush with death leaves Emanuelle wondering if it is perhaps time to hang up her camera for good. Why is it so controversial? The Emanuelle series, also known as 'Black Emanuelle' and not to be confused with the original Emmanuelle series, are movies combining soft-core action with some creepy elements. However, this time, they pushed the envelop with a scene when Emanuelle comes across a fantasy retreat owned by a very wealthy fan of snuff films and she finds a torture room in which women are being sexually attacked with all sorts of murderous sex toys, violated and murdered at the same time; big spiky shafts are used, and whips and chains and racks, and at the very end a woman's breast is carved off with a large blade… Do I actually want to see this? I'm getting too old for those soft-core flicks so I'm pretty sure I will never watch this. 
303 5.8 5.5  What is it about? An aspiring writer is repeatedly gang-raped, humiliated, and left for dead by four men whom she systematically hunts down to seek revenge. Why is it so controversial? In this so-called 'feminist' exploitation flick, you will first witness one of the most excrutiating rape scenes ever put on film and then some really sadistic scenes (including emasculation) during the vendetta by Camille Keaton, Buster's granddaughter (yeah, I'm serious...). Do I actually want to see this? According to Roger Ebert, it is one of the worst movies ever made, referring to it as "a vile bag of garbage...without a shred of artistic distinction,". So, no I won't see this trash which seems to be the lowest representation of sexploitation ever put on screen. Same thing for the remake which seems as worthless. 
86 5 3.7  What is it about? A collection of death scenes, ranging from TV-material to home-made super-8 movies The common factor is death by some means. Why is it so controversial? As said before, it is solely composed of death scenes, some fake but also some real ones including suicides, napalm bombing in Vietnam, some fatal car accidents and also animals dying like seals being clubbed to death. It is also infamous for its tagline 'Banned in 40 countries'. Do I actually want to see this? Come on! How low can you get?!? I don't need to see some real people like you and me really f*cking dying on my screen. This must be the worst kind of voyeurism ever. No way... 
522 6.3 5.9  What is it about? A New York University professor returns from a rescue mission to the Amazon rainforest with the footage shot by a lost team of documentarians who were making a film about the area's local cannibal tribes. Why is it so controversial? The tone is rather merciless with some (fake) cannibalism, sexual assault and some (real) animal molestation including a huge turtle, a monkey, a snake and a pig. The horror was so realistic that the makers had to bring the actors in court to make sure that they were still alive. Do I actually want to see this? It is a classic so I think I will watch it in the future but it really sounds pretty heavy... 
55 5.5 4.8  What is it about? A woman walking home late at night is attacked by an unknown assailant who knocks her out with chloroform. When she regains consciousness, she finds herself tied to a bed in a blood- spattered dungeon, at the mercy of a white-faced man in a samurai helmet who wants to turn her into a "flower of blood and flesh." He then proceeds to slowly dismember and disembowel her as the camera records it all. Why is it so controversial? There are some major sadisctic torture scenes with a woman being dreadfully dismembered. After viewing a part of this film, actor Charlie Sheen was convinced the murder depicted was genuine and contacted the MPAA, who then contacted the FBI. FBI agent Dan Codling informed them that the FBI and the Japanese authorities were already investigating the film makers, who were repeatedly interviewed by the Japanese police and eventually summoned to court to prove that the special effects were indeed fake. Do I actually want to see this? It seems to be a movie made solely to push the envelop even further, to see how much a viewer can take before being completely grossed out. Sorry but I'm not interested... 
112 5.7 5.1  What is it about? Graphic, low-budget gore-shocker about Rob and Betty, a couple of ordinary necrophiles who apparently don't mind if their dead sexual partners are not so fresh. Rob's job affords him the opportunity to bring home corpses and the odd body part; when he loses his job, he loses Betty, and Rob's life gets REALLY bizarre. Why is it so controversial? First of all, it deals with necrophilia which is obviously taboo. It is a little bit like 'Sunshine Cleaning', expect that here, they take the corpse home and have a threesome with it. And I also heard some stuff about the woman replacing the corpse penis with some stainless steel and there is also some animal molestation. Do I actually want to see this? It sounds like a really weird flick and, even though I must say I'm intrigued, I will probably never watch it. 
98 6.5 6  What is it about? Japanese troops round up Chinese and Russian prisoners of war and take them to a place called Squadron 731, where they are grotesquely tortured and experimented on to test new biological weapons. Why is it so controversial? There are some very excrutiating torture scenes (a male test subject put into some kind of pressurized air chamber, in which his entire gastrointestinal track is forced out; and a poor old woman's hands made completely frostbitten in the camp's wintry surroundings until they are frozen like a popsicle, whereupon she is forced to dip them in boiling hot water with really unfortunate results) and some (real) animal molestation (a mortified cat dropped into a cage of starving rats). Do I actually want to see this? They try to legitimate all this gruesome stuff by providing some kind of legitimate historical background but I don't buy it. I'll pass on this one... 
88 6.1 6.1  What is it about? When the others leave for the night, the last mortician begins to fondle the corpses. He quickly moves to the corpse of a young woman who died in a car crash, tearing her clothes off and mutilating her body. He then mounts her and rapes her corpse while taking pictures with a camera and timer. He brings her heart back home to his dog to eat it. Why is it so controversial? Some of the most realistic looking dead bodies you will ever see in a film are cut, sawed and pried open, organs are removed, blood and gristle is drained into stainless steel basins, brains are removed from head, and skin is peeled back. And then, you have one of the most revolting sex scenes ever witnessed with one of those corpses... Do I actually want to see this? It is said to be rather impressive from a technical point of view but, a part from that, I don't think it has any artistic, educational or entertaning value so I probably won't watch it. 
113 5.2 4.2  What is it about? A surgeon becomes obsessed with the seductive woman he once had an affair with. Refusing to accept that she has moved on, he amputates her limbs and holds her captive in his mansion. Why is it so controversial? Following the foosteps of her notorious father, Jennifer Chambers Lynch basically had to produce something rather shocking with her directing début. Basically, it is a weird love story about a guy dismembering the love of his life. Do I actually want to see this? Why not? I don't really think it is any good but I'm really curious to see if David Lynch's daughter does come even near his level of weirdness. 
8 7 5.7  What is it about? While the leader is in jail, his leftist group is controlled by his girlfriend, but her leadership lacks conviction and perspective. When the leader commits suicide in prison, despair and confusion rule the group and revenge and violence erupts in graphic way. Why is it so controversial? You have here some major mutilation and dismemberment, a forehead is blasted by a shotgun in front of the camera with some really gross sound effects. According to the ones who dared watch it, it is simply one of the most audacious and disgusting things in recent horror movie history. Do I actually want to see this? As you may have noticed, there are many Japanese movies on this list and they seem to be expert in the extreme cinema. Even though I'm really fond of Japanese movies in general, I'm not at all interested in those horrific flicks whatsoever and this movie is not an exception. 
200 4.5 4.4  What is it about? Manu and Nadine lose their last tenuous relationship with main-stream society when Manu gets raped and Nadine sees her only friend being shot. After a chance encounter, they embark on an explosive journey of sex and murder. Perhaps as a revenge against men, perhaps as a revolt against bourgeois society, but certainly in a negation - almost joyful in its senseless violence - of all the codes of a society which has excluded, raped and humiliated them. Why is it so controversial? It is a rather violent flick starring 2 French (ex-) porno stars with some explicit sex scenes including a rape. Do I actually want to see this? I was still living in France when this movie came out and I always thought it was intriguing, even though it looks really trashy. 
679 7.3 7.1  What is it about? When a Yakuza boss named Anjo disappears with 300 million yen, his chief henchman, a sadomasochistic man named Kakihara, and the rest of his mob goons go looking for him. After capturing and torturing a rival Yakuza member looking for answers, they soon realize they have the wrong man and begin looking for the man named Jijii who tipped them off in the first place. Soon enough Kakihara and his men encounter Ichi, a psychotic, sexually-repressed young man with amazing martial arts abilities and blades that come out of his shoes. One by one Ichi takes out members of the Yakuza and all the while Kakihara intensifies his pursuit of Ichi and Ichi's controller Jijii. Why is it so controversial? Miike is rather notorious for his violent movies and this seems to his most violent one to date. You have here some major sadism, masochism, torture,... And a few jokes in between (see pic above). Do I actually want to see this? I was really impressed by 'Audition' which is easily the most hardcore movie I have ever seen thus when I hear that this movie is even worse, I think it must be one hell of a ride. Takashi Miike is not the easiest director but I love his style so I will definitely check this one out. 
51 3.3 3.1  What is it about? Two deranged friends bring along another guy to go on a random murder rampage. They kidnapped lesbian lovers, couples and they torture them in any way that the viewer can imagine. Your worst fears will come true in this shocking account of a killing spree. Why is it so controversial? It is notoriously known as the most hardcore and violent movie ever made. There is no real plot here, just pure mayhem and this is the closest you will get to watch a snuff movie, except of course, watching the real thing. Rape, sadism, pedophilia, necrophilia, infanticide,... You name every sick thing in the world and it will be displayed here. Do I actually want to see this? This is the most striking example of 'Watch it if you dare'. It is disgusting, not entertaining whatosever and may traumatise you until the day you die.... Why on Earth would I be interested in the most realistic fake snuff movie ever made?!? I have only heard bad things about this 'movie' and I will never watch it. 
205 5.8 4.9  What is it about? Professional motorcycle racer Bud Clay heads from New Hampshire to California to race again. Along the way he meets various needy women who provide him with the cure to his own loneliness, but only a certain woman from his past will truly satisfy him. Why is it so controversial? There is not much really controversial here except that Chloë Sevigny is said to have given an unsimulated blowjob to Vincent Gallo during one of the scenes. Do I actually want to see this? It is now pretty much forgotten but Vincent Gallo's previous movie, 'Buffalo '66', was actually pretty good so I'm still curious about his next flick, even though it doesn't seem to be good, I''m afraid. 
263 4.8 4.9  What is it about? In London, England, love blooms between an American college student, named Lisa, and a British glaciologist, named Matt, where over the next few months in between attending rock concerts, the two lovers have intense sexual encounters. Why is it so controversial? According to The Guardian, 9 Songs was the most sexually explicit mainstream film to date. Basically, you have 9 songs but also 9 unsimulated sex scenes involving the 2 leads. Do I actually want to see this? I'm a huge fan of Michael Winterbottom who is, in my opinion, one of the most underrated movie directors on Earth, so I will absolutely watch this one. 
468 4.4 4.6  What is it about? A mad scientist kidnaps and mutilates a trio of tourists in order to reassemble them into a new "pet"-- a human centipede, created by stitching their mouths to each others' rectums. Why is it so controversial? You have some major torture and sadism here with Dr. Josef Heiter who literally joins 3 people together. According to Roger Ebert, the film had been "deliberately intended to inspire incredulity, nausea and hopefully outrage." Do I actually want to see this? Another puke inducing piece of trash... Next... 
1141 6.9 6.5  What is it about? A couple lose their young son when he falls out the window while they have sex in the other room. The mother's grief consigns her to hospital, but her therapist husband brings her home intent on treating her depression himself. Why is it so controversial? Even though Lars Von Tries has always been a challenging movie director, this must be his most relentless movie to date. It is utterly depressing and violent with some testicle crushing and clitoris getting cut with some rusty scissors. Do I actually want to see this? Even though I'm not a fan, Lars von Trier is and remains one of the most interesting directors around (expect, obviously, when he starts to make some really stupid Nazi jokes...). So, I will definitely check this one, even though it looks pretty heavy. 
376 5.7 5.5  What is it about? An aging porn star agrees to participate in an "art film" in order to make a clean break from the business, only to discover that he has been drafted into making a pedophilia and necrophilia themed snuff film. Why is it so controversial? It deals with a snuff film with child rape and necrophilic themes. This flick is notoriously known for its sexual representation of children and extreme violence and has been subsequently banned in various countries like Spain. Do I actually want to see this? It seems intriguing but I'm not really keen on the whole child molestation thing... The ones I still ended up watching
459 6.6 5.9  What is it about? A pair of teenage girls are headed to a rock concert for one's birthday. While trying to score marijuana in the city, the girls are kidnapped by a gang of psychotic convicts. Why is it so controversial? It is (in)famous for his very violent scenes and sadism and was subsequently banned in the UK for about 30 years. Do I actually want to see this? I have a weak spot for Wes Craven's work so I will definitely check this one out as soon as I have the opportunity. My verdict: I'm pretty sure it is one of the least hardcore movies on this list. I mean, it was definitely pretty nasty and I can imagine that it was quite controversial back in those days but even though it was indeed rather unsettling, it was nothing I couldn't handle. Basically, it is one of those cheap-ass horror flicks they used to make back then. johanlefourbe's rating:
 |
People who voted for this also voted for
Even worse is 'The Exorcist' which I found one of the most overrated movies ever made and which I also found rather comical than scary.
About The Exorcist.. I donno, it's been a long time since I saw it, needs a revisit.
I'm surprised that The Birth of a Nation gets placed on so many '1,000' to see before you die' type lists because I just can't go there.
Ah but I did watch "Triumph of the Will" but what struck me most about the film was how ideas of aesthetic beauty are one of the foundations of Fascism.
About 'The Birth of a nation' is not really surprising that it is on all those lists since it is a basically the first feature length movie ever made and they invented movie techniques during this movie that would influence ALL the movies that came afterwards. But indeed, that such an influential flick also has to be such an horrible bigotic and racistic feast is quite a tragedy...
Oh yeah, and some friends of mine rented Faces of Death back when we were in high school & brought it to my place to watch. I watched a little & then left them to watch it without me. Waste of time for exactly the reasons you said you don't want to watch it.
The Last House on the Left: Meh. A long, long ways off from my favorite 70's film, I'll tell you that. It's fairly upsetting, but likely won't traumatize you. Certainly see it at some point.
Men Behind the Sun: It's a better film than it ought to be. And it is built around historically legitimate and atrocious and important events. But it's a tough ride and it is also exploitative. Follow your gut.
Aftermath: Stay away. You'll feel dirty and depressed afterward.
9 Songs: I thought it was utter garbage as a film, but it's harmless. Go ahead and see it if you're interested.
Antichrist: Lars Van Trier has never blown me away and I personally think there's a good deal of posturing going on here. But I'd never tell someone who's interested not to watch it for themselves. You will cringe at times.
The Human Centipede: Lousy film. Waste of time. You're absolutely right in sensing that you need not bother.
Off the remaining titles I'm certainly interested in seeing The Devils. Possibly we'll see an original cut emerge in lieu of Director Ken Burns passing last year, but who knows.
I'll certainly catch up with Ichi one of these days. I'll likely see The Brown Bunny at some point. Like you, I enjoyed Buffalo '66, so I'm mildly interested. Salo I think I'm destined to forever go back and forth on the idea, so I'd say it's probable I'll finally see it some day, but it could be a long ways off. The rest are pretty much film that I've already decided I don't care to watch.
Aftermath is a like it or hate it film, but I thought it was really good (Genesis, another short film by the same director, is much better though).
Antichrist is really damn good, IMO. It's very artsy, though.
Mordum made me laugh.
Faces of Death was surprisingly touching at times, describing the fragility of life.
Saló is well-made, but almost unwatchable since I just got disgusted by it. I need to re-watch it.
Last House on the Left is overrated as all hell, but I Spit On Your Grave is great. I wouldn't call it exploitation.
That's about it for the ones I've seen.
It is NOT a brutal, serious movie !
Just relax. I didn't laugh for those reasons... It just a really crappy movie with horrible quality & horrible actors. I thought it was so bad I didn't bother to finish it, but the parts I watched consisted of two people yelling to each other & "cutting" themselves.
If you only see one of the above films make it The Devils, its a masterpiece.
If anyone wants to read a good book about these types of disturbing and controversial/provocative films check out BEYOND THE DARKNESS: Cult, Horror, And Extreme Cinema by Phil Russell. Essential read!
Find it at Amazon US [Link removed - login to see]
or Amazon UK[Link removed - login to see]
Salo is also a must see but almost completely different from most horror films - most of the horror is not depicted - its what is being discussed - only towards the end does it get graphically violent---but the film will last with you forever as its a sick thing
Ichi The Killer is fun and strange - not really scary or disturbing to be honest
Cannibal Holocaust and Mordum are tedious films
If you want to add to your extreme films to watch try Red Room and Melancholie Der Engel
I've not heard of any of them either, except Birth Of A Nation which I so wanna see.
I had the same reaction to The Exorcist that Johanelefourbe had. It struck me funny instead of scary. I guess that is because special effects of the early 70s were not as sophisticated as today, but I saw it in the 70s and still found it so over-the-top that it was actually kind of funny to me.
And oh man, The Devils is so awesome. See it as soon as you get the chance. One of my favorites from the 70s. And hey, A Serbian Film is good too. If you ever run across it, it's so worth it.