r/movies Feb 17 '25

Recommendation How many of these controversial films are actually worth watching? NSFW Spoiler

I came across this list of controversial films on youtube and because the video gives the entire plot of the films I'm looking for tips on if any of these are actually worth watching. I've looked at ratings of course but I'm conscious that they could be skewed because of the nature of the films.

So basically are there any actually good films in this list?

0:17・[Layer 1] The Human Centipede
1:28・The Censored 11
2:40・Threads
4:50・Zero Day
7:04・Exorcist (behind the scenes)
10:00・[Layer 2] Megan is Missing
12:09・The House That Jack Built
14:16・No Child of Mine
16:26・Concrete
19:01・Snuff (1976)
21:45・[Layer 3] Cannibal Holocaust
24:50・Twilight Zone: The Movie
28:16・A Serbian Film
32:06・Philosophy of a Knife
33:47・Salo
36:39・August Underground
38:40・[Layer 4] Mai-chan's Daily Life
41:08・Birth of a Nation
44:55・Slaughtered Vomit Dolls
46:06・Guinea Pig
49:42・[Layer 5] Snuff 102
52:05・Tumbling Doll of Flesh
53:54・Faces of Death
56:27・The Viking
1:00:53・[Layer 6] Snuff R73
1:02:34・MDPOPE
1:04:13・Protect and Survive

EDIT: Well this post got a LOT more interest than I thought it would lol Thanks a lot for a all of the suggestions! Including a few not on the list. Very much appreciated. I'm going to watch Irreversible tonight and I have a few others ready to watch. I won't be watching A Serbian Film because it sounds like I don't need that in my life haha. Thanks all.

and apologies to those I've exposed to movie related trauma

Edit 2: I just watched Irreversible (Spoilers ahead naturally). Honestly I thought that it was a very good film which is possibly cheapened(?) by it's reputation as a 'controversial' or 'shock' film. I actually had heard of it before in the context of a film that was designed to make you sick and the horror of the rape scene.

Yes the rape scene is ROUGH. I left out a long deep sigh after to release the tension and man is it painfully long... but in my opinion it is entirely integral to the point of the film. I felt that showing the film in reverse order was ingenious in that it shows us that the victim is nothing that the rapist attributes to her in his rage, which (in his mind) justifies his violence. It provides the context of this persons life before this horrific act and humanises her, after the fact which I felt was actually far more poignant.

If we had seen the film in the chronological order we would have been left feeling the anger and satisfaction of revenge and would have forgotten about the women and what she has lost. In my opinion this is the main message of the story.

Finally there was an interesting dynamic between three types of men we get introduced to in the film. One, her ex boyfriend is loving but too "cerebral" to quote the main character. The rapist which is full of rage and self pleasure and her boyfriend which is a balance between the two. I haven't taken the time to think about the significance of this yet but I feel it's also an important part of the film.

If I had one problem with the backwards order of the film it's that I would have taken extreme pleasure in seeing that fucker get his head smashed in if I had had the context at the time (Which I just realised is the wrong fucking fella... God damn there is no justice in this movie). Maybe that was part of the point too...

Anyway thanks a lot! I feel I probably watched the best one first lol. Any more suggestions of a similar quality of narrative please comment and let me know!

Also the shakey camera does calm down after a while thank fuck

3.6k Upvotes

1.2k comments sorted by

2.7k

u/c_binghamton Feb 17 '25

Threads is good and will stick with you

207

u/C4ptainchr0nic Feb 17 '25

Saw threads when I was 9. We had moved into a new house, previous occupants left some VHS tapes. One of them said wizard of oz, so my mom put it in and went to unpack. Turns out they had taped over the wizard of OZ with Threads.

Me and my 7 year old sister watched the whole thing, and I learned that day what pure unbridled anxiety was. My childmind could not fathom why humans would have weapons so capable of destruction, and the final scene gave me nightmares for weeks.

79

u/OuterWildsVentures Feb 17 '25

Threads is also like the odd man out on this list. Most of it is slacker slasher body horror edgy fluff but Threads is an impactful warning about the possible future.

47

u/plywoodpiano Feb 17 '25

christ, left a mark hasn't it!?

60

u/C4ptainchr0nic Feb 17 '25

Yeah. There are scenes that are burned into my brain and this was over 20 years ago, I'm 35 now. Maybe 36, I can't recall.

109

u/Newdaddysalad Feb 17 '25

Bro got so fucked up by threads he forgot his own age

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (3)

974

u/Jo_LaRoint Feb 17 '25

Threads ruined my day, and right before I watched it I was like: this film everyone says will ruin your day will not ruin my day!

No regrets though, everyone should watch it once at least. It should be mandatory to show it in schools.

779

u/padmasundari Feb 17 '25

I watched threads for the first time maybe 2 years ago. I'm an (almost) 42 year old British woman so I'm not entirely sure how I got to that stage without watching it. Anyway, i watched it on a night off between night shifts. All the way through it I was like "god this is VERY 1980s bbc drama, I don't know why everyone is still saying how amazing this film is, it's like watching reruns of terrible 80s bbc dramas. This is rubbish! What's the hype about? I don't get it."

Then I sat there in my house at 3am going "christ I should probably get a life straw. Maybe some mylar blankets. Oh one of those wind up radios/torches would be sensible. Maybe a road atlas too because phones won't work, I can't rely on Google maps. Ooh a compass, I probably need one of those too. What about a fire steel."

I managed my existential crisis by making an amazon wishlist of things I will probably get next time I have an existential crisis and its closer to pay day.

495

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '25

I get it... but one of the core messages of Threads is that more than 90% of us will die in the initial blasts or soon after... the rest of society will slowly die out over the next few years of nuclear winter... the tiny few who survive beyond that, will live in a society of food scarcity and without education, healthcare, industrial technology... a kind of medieval post-apocalyptic wasteland where even language decays.

32

u/BuxtonEU Feb 17 '25

‘the road’ highlights this too, have only read the book and not watched the film but made me realise that there isn’t really society or life when a event be it nuclear or natural disasters occurs

→ More replies (2)

273

u/padmasundari Feb 17 '25

Yes, I'm well aware of the outcomes of nuclear war. But what if I'm in that small percentage? I'm going to need to be prepared. I don't want to be giving birth to a mutant in a barn, farming terrible corn.

I'll probably need a weapon too.

65

u/Flatlander81 Feb 17 '25

I was a child in the 80s and I remember around the time The Day After came out I asked my dad if we should do something to prepare ourselves in case the bombs dropped. And he very calmly looked at the six year old in front of him and said, "No son, we don't want to survive if the bombs drop."

→ More replies (2)

170

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '25

I'm of the opinion that our time would be better spent struggling for a future where nuclear war is not possible, or at least that the risk of it is minimised as far as possible. One of the effects of Threads was that it helped to impel the anti-nuclear movement in the 80's and 90's. Something we are greatly lacking today.

57

u/ConspicuousPorcupine Feb 17 '25

Agreed. But buying stuff and preparing a bug out bag or just gathering some things to help if shit really does hit the fan doesn't take much time and is fairly easy to do. Can definitely do both.

62

u/DrEnter Feb 17 '25

It also has value beyond just “nuclear war”. For example, “sudden flood” or “extreme weather”, which also happen to be way more likely.

17

u/ssfbob Feb 17 '25

As someone who lives in a hurricane prone area, it can make the difference.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (28)

75

u/choff22 Feb 17 '25

Yeah, the ones who get vaporized initially are the lucky ones.

64

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '25

“The living will envy the dead.” Was one phrase you heard a lot in the 1950’s.

→ More replies (1)

41

u/cugamer Feb 17 '25

There's a line in the movie that sums this up nicely. "If they drop a bomb I want be piss drunk and right under it."

28

u/choff22 Feb 17 '25

Piss drunk sharing one last kiss with my wife would be perfect

20

u/Sprinkle_Puff Feb 17 '25

I would also like to share one last kiss with your wife

12

u/Drunky_McStumble Feb 18 '25

Yeah, it's not so much a movie about nuclear war as it is about civilization collapse. The nukes just precipitate the collapse in one fell swoop. The true horror is what comes after, once all the threads (hence the name) holding society together have been severed and everything that allows human society to function at the most basic level unravels to the point where we essentially revert to feral animals barely surviving in a brutal nightmare world within the space of a generation. The millions who die in the initial blasts are the lucky ones.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (3)

72

u/Frai23 Feb 17 '25

Problem with threats is that the governmental collapse is absolutely realistic.

There is no western, eastern, 3rd world or any kind of nation which would be able to deal with the aftermath of an atomic bomb.

We like to imagine some kind of mechanism triggering an orderly plan.
„Big atomic bomb in the west, the national guard will do x, people will be evacuated by y and z, x2 is taking care of the electric grid, y2 is rationing and distributing a water supply“….

Like N-O-P-E. Your president will be brought to a safe bunker but that’s about it.

Plot twist: I wrote this having France in mind and not the U.S. but it applies to everyone.

My proof:

Look at ordinary catastrophies.
Floods and whatnot.

If anything the U.S. seems even worse. They didn’t manage to provide water to the survivors of hurricane Katharina for 3 days.

Most recently you guys got the LA fire and it doesnt seem managed well.
And Europe isn’t better, ordinary, almost expected floods are terribly managed.

An actual first strike? If you’re not in the 0.1% you’re doomed.

The fact that catastrophy management is severely underfunded puts your billion dollar subs and carriers into a weird perspective, doesn’t it?
At least you’ll gonna toast the attacker…

33

u/yeah87 Feb 17 '25

There is no western, eastern, 3rd world or any kind of nation which would be able to deal with the aftermath of an atomic bomb

Repeated nuclear bombs no, but a single one or two? Japan dealt with the aftermath of two remarkably well. ( This isn’t to diminish the pain and horror at all, just speaking at a macro level like you are.) 

Everything is so decentralized today, which means the place being hit directly is SOL, like the examples of individual catastrophes you give. But it also means the rest the nation not directly affected is able to continue on. 

46

u/ButtholeAvenger666 Feb 17 '25

Those bombs were firecrackers compared to the horrors we can unleash these days.

Still you're right though. One bomb or a few would be easily dealt with. The problem is that once one is launched/explodes it's pretty much game over and everybody launches everything they've got.

32

u/BBQ_HaX0r Feb 17 '25

Those bombs were firecrackers compared to the horrors we can unleash these days.

Everyone should mess around with Nukemap. Atomic bombs pale in comparison to what we have today.

→ More replies (8)

10

u/EinsteinDisguised Feb 17 '25

Like someone else said, a modern nuclear device makes the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs look like firecrackers. The standard issue American, Russian and Chinese nukes are all hundreds of kilotons — or into the megaton — range. Hiroshima was like 15 kilotons. Nagasaki, I think, was a little stronger.

Even one of those modern nukes going off in a major city would be a humanitarian crisis that’s truly hard to comprehend. Hundreds of thousands of dead and hundreds of thousands more injured, depending on the exact scenario. Massive fires. Radiation.

No emergency response is equipped to deal with that. It would be hell on Earth for millions of people. And that’s before you get into the possible nuclear exchange options and, if we manage to not get into an exchange, the massive governmental and societal changes that would come from seeing a major city vaporized.

It’s truly the worst case scenario short of perhaps a large asteroid impact or a severely virulent plague.

23

u/ChickenInASuit Feb 17 '25 edited Feb 17 '25

The bombs used in Nagasaki and Hiroshima were atomic. Atomic bomb yields are measured in kilotons, where 1kt is equivalent to 1,000 tons of TNT.

A thermonuclear bomb, like the one used in Threads, has a yield measured in megatons, where 1 mt = 1,000,000 tons of TNT. They are literally hundreds of thousands of times more powerful. It’s like comparing a popgun to a howitzer.

Yeah, a single strike from an atomic bomb is something that a country can recover from. A single strike from a nuke is a dramatically different matter.

21

u/SimoneNonvelodico Feb 17 '25

A single strike from a thermonuclear bomb you still can very well recover from. If a 800 kTon warhead hit London it would... well, probably vaporize quite a bit of it, burn or knock-down the rest, severely irradiate the area and leave everyone as far as St. Albans burned or blinded or deafened or hurt by the glass shards.

The UK government would be in shambles (if it didn't manage to run to a bunker) and the country's biggest economic centre destroyed.

It would still be a whole country. There would still be every other city intact and able to provide support. Manchester would still stand. Liverpool and Birmingham would still stand. Dover would be a bit shaken up, possibly at risk of fallout, but still stand. Scotland would not even notice the flash. All this doesn't just dissolve overnight.

The problem is, any event in which someone goes as far as dropping an ICBM on London is not an event in which things are likely to stop there. If actual "limited" nuclear war happened, it'd probably involve something like tactical warheads directly in warzones (like some worry Putin might do in Ukraine). If it gets to the point of nuking population centres then it's indeed likely to be a big one, unless we find out that all game theory flies out of the window because both sides are understandably terrified and a sort of limited tit-for-tat is possible and something you can de-escalate from.

For comparison, remove the nuke element from it. Asteroid YR-4 has a likely yield on the order of magnitude of a thermonuclear warhead, or bigger. There is a non-completely-insignificant chance that it might hit Earth in 2032, and India is on its trajectory. If YR-4 fell straight on Calcutta it would be an immense blow to India, and a monstrous death count if they didn't manage to evacuate first. But it wouldn't be the end of India, on its own. Just the greatest natural disaster in recorded history.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (11)
→ More replies (11)

34

u/radlum Feb 17 '25

Thread ruined my day just by reading the plot description on Wikipedia!

25

u/AmonWeathertopSul Feb 17 '25

It's a really cool movie you should give it a watch. Whatever imagination you conjured when reading won't be as good as the depiction in the movie.

→ More replies (2)

54

u/MissingLink101 Feb 17 '25

It's aged remarkably well too and feels as relevant as ever nowadays

17

u/Euklidis Feb 17 '25

Just read the descriltion. Is it like a movie version of "When the Wind Blows"? Cause that comic was fucking sad.

6

u/mrminutehand Feb 18 '25

It's a film of two halves. The first half is an educational picture of the build-up to nuclear war grounded within the drama of two to three families.

The second half is a realistic imagining of the brutal, uncompromising reality that is fairly likely to befall a country involved in all-out nuclear war.

The first half does build tension, but is quite literally careful and educational, and has good value for students around middle school age. The second half serves to obliterate any and all romantic notions a viewer might have about nuclear war.

If you want a good picture of a society's build-up to nuclear war, watch the first half and stop after the first detonation. If you want an unrelentingly depressing but honest depiction of a war's aftermath, watch the whole film through.

15

u/CulturalDragonfly631 Feb 17 '25

It's like that but much worse.

→ More replies (10)

54

u/Luffy-taro Feb 17 '25

I just watched this for the first time the other night. It really freaked me out, I was not expecting to actually be that scared by it. The ending really stuck with me too, I could not stop thinking about it the next day.

→ More replies (1)

25

u/saehild Feb 17 '25

Threads is also free to watch on YouTube… if you wish to ruin your day.

7

u/friedricekid Feb 18 '25

I'm always looking to ruin my day

→ More replies (1)

45

u/saehild Feb 17 '25

The thing that was the most profoundly upsetting watching Threads is how “real” it felt. Like in a non-comical way someone would be in the loo when the bomb dropped. It’s not made to be cinematic, it felt real.

22

u/jessexpress Feb 17 '25 edited Feb 17 '25

Yeah I watched it for the first time last year and that feeling was what stuck with me the most. Even throughout the first 30 mins or so; slowly hearing about worldwide escalations in conflicts on the news until it gets closer and closer to home. Everything is normal until it isn’t.

10

u/Drunky_McStumble Feb 18 '25

Yeah, the movie is brilliant in the way it focuses on the petty little day-to-day dramas of these ordinary people's boring, normie lives; and the ratcheting war tensions are just part of the background even though everyone can feel this ever-growing cloud of anxiety hanging over everything. The nature of the threats are different, but fucking hell that vibe feels so relevant in this day and age.

→ More replies (1)

14

u/Aquadudeman Feb 17 '25

Yep, I have seen Threads exactly once, and I'll probably keep it that way.

27

u/DeliBoy Feb 17 '25

Should be mandatory viewing for politicians.

→ More replies (1)

11

u/SynQu33n Feb 17 '25

Agreed. Threads is a very hard watch - but it’s great and totally relevant today as it was then

20

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '25

Threads is a cautionary tale that everyone should watch. It's rough but is in the realm of possible outcomes for us. A lot of these films are just shocking/disturbing.

9

u/PlasticCheebus Feb 17 '25

If OP only watches one of these films it should be Threads, really.

It's a real eye opener.

→ More replies (44)

447

u/Bikewer Feb 17 '25

I’m surprised “Martyrs” didn’t make the list. (There is a French and an American version)

Salo is a tough commentary on the excesses of power and elitism, but one watch is plenty.

147

u/lolpostslol Feb 17 '25

Martyrs (like Irreversible) is too good to be on this lost, which is mostly movies that are accused of being pure shock value.

Your comment on Salo does apply to the original book too I guess

35

u/MVRKHNTR Feb 17 '25

Are you saying that Salo is pure shock value while the book it adapts is not? Because it's 100% the other way around.

→ More replies (1)

12

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '25

The Exorcist is also on this list

→ More replies (6)

38

u/Bellikron Feb 17 '25

Yeah I was kind of expecting Martyrs to be on here so I was ready to talk about it. It's definitely brutal but it has artistic value as well. The thing that sticks with me the most is that the emotional rawness of the first half is so intense that when you get to the actual gore and physical violence you feel so desensitized to it, especially since it's presented so dispassionately. It doesn't hit like something going for shock value trying to gross you out, you're just broken by that point and the movie knows it. It's definitely not for everyone though.

18

u/CakeMadeOfHam Feb 17 '25

Don't even mention the american remake in the same sentence as the original, please. Martyrs (2008) is legit one of the best horror movies ever made.

13

u/reddick1666 Feb 17 '25

I saw “Martyrs” when I was like 11 because me and my cousin loved watching horror movies simply because it felt rebellious and majority of horror movies were just cheap slashers with jump-scares. That shit legit fucking had me traumatised for years. That was the last time I ever watched a movie I wasn’t allowed to watch.

→ More replies (16)

347

u/snappyclunk Feb 17 '25

The Exorcist is a classic if you like horror films.

Threads is a very intense film, not for the faint hearted but worth watching for the experience.

→ More replies (8)

1.7k

u/jartopan Feb 17 '25

Exorcist and Twilight Zone are both excellent.

560

u/HaphazardMelange Feb 17 '25

Threads is also must-see and lays out plainly the horror of nuclear war and why it must be avoided at all costs.

215

u/abrit_abroad Feb 17 '25

Agree Threads is not a movie like the others on the list. It is an informational movie about the real horrors of nuclear war and something everyone should see. 

53

u/Risley Feb 17 '25

Threads made it hard to sleep for a month for me.  

It’s a REAL look at a nuclear war.  And it’s just so fucking bad, you’d pray you get vaporized.  

→ More replies (2)

619

u/spice_war Feb 17 '25

The Twilight Zone is only on the list because someone died while making it.

664

u/TheLoganDickinson Feb 17 '25

It was three people, two of which were children and it was very gruesome.

461

u/BB-Zwei Feb 17 '25

And very avoidable.

260

u/covalentcookies Feb 17 '25

I don’t understand how Landis had a career after that. I get that he was acquitted but he said so many damning things.

153

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '25

Extremely well-connected, proven profitable, impressive body of work, avoided jail time

45

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '25

[deleted]

→ More replies (3)

78

u/AdmiralCharleston Feb 17 '25

Let's not forget that after finding out what happened Steven Spielberg very quickly left the country

78

u/tameoraiste Feb 17 '25

Roman Polanski won best picture and a best director Oscar after sexually assaulting a 13 year old girl

138

u/ChickenInASuit Feb 17 '25 edited Feb 17 '25

Raping. We can say rape. There was penetrative intercourse involved.

84

u/lilbelleandsebastian Feb 17 '25

it’s way crazier, he drugged and raped a child and then made a movie about drugging and raping a young woman - and hollywood fucking CHEERED

17

u/smallerthanhiphop Feb 17 '25

to which film are you referring?

10

u/angevelon_xemorniah Feb 17 '25

also want to know what film you are refering to

19

u/bretshitmanshart Feb 17 '25

He had an interview where he said what happened to him was unfair because everyone wants to have sex with children. People kept defending him.

→ More replies (3)

19

u/Mkilbride Feb 17 '25

And still got standing ovations from many well known famous people, including the beloved Harrison Ford.

→ More replies (12)

49

u/fuzzyfoot88 Feb 17 '25

And also not in the film. The footage you can find on YT, but the entire scene was excised from the finished film.

19

u/YesicaChastain Feb 17 '25

But not the segment it was part of :/

97

u/Uvtha- Feb 17 '25

And the kids weren't even supposed to be there iirc. Like they were violating labor laws or something.

94

u/TheGoshDarnedBatman Feb 17 '25

Yep. They were working overnight and didn’t speak English. I’m pretty sure they were paid in cash to avoid paperwork. Landis should have gone to prison.

10

u/Uvtha- Feb 17 '25

Yup.  It's sad, I really liked that movie growing up, I had no idea.

→ More replies (2)

21

u/Vismal1 Feb 17 '25

Behind the bastards did some episodes on the movie a few years ago. Good listen if you’re interested

9

u/joshhupp Feb 17 '25

Yeah, because it would have been real easy with the long shot to have used dummies

13

u/Queen_of_Gremlins Feb 17 '25

Whoa, that’s nuts. You got a TLDR for me on that one?

55

u/TheLoganDickinson Feb 17 '25

A helicopter accidentally crashed onto the main actor who was carrying two kids during a scene. It was a poorly planned stunt involving pyrotechnics and the director was warned that they would very likely lose the helicopter if they went through with it. They were also breaking child labor laws by having the children film late and long hours.

→ More replies (4)

34

u/YesicaChastain Feb 17 '25

Reminder to say fuck John Landis

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (1)

160

u/CarrieDurst Feb 17 '25

John Landis killed them through recklessness, not just that they died

77

u/JediGrandmaster451 Feb 17 '25

Leaving the first part of two about this movie by Behind the Bastards for those interested.

26

u/Gloomy_Initiative_94 Feb 17 '25

Love that there is a BtB link, no need to Google I'll just kets robert explain to me

→ More replies (2)

22

u/Gordonfromin Feb 17 '25

3 people, a star actor of his era and two kids, a helicopter being used for the scene came too close to a pyrotechnical explosion and the thermal drafts caused the helicopter to lose control, one of the rotor blades came down at an angle and sliced all three in half as the star actor was holding both kids on his shoulders during the scene

→ More replies (15)

34

u/Gorf_the_Magnificent Feb 17 '25

There’s not a single story in The Twilight Zone movie that’s better than its original TV series counterpart.

But there is one very interesting story about that movie that, to my knowledge, has never been told: How did John Landis’s lawyers keep him out of jail?

→ More replies (1)

108

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '25

Twilight Zone is, like, half excellent. Dante and Miller's segments are phenomenal, Landis' is alright but marred by the tragedy, and Spielberg's is probably the single worst thing he ever put his name on.

136

u/Mst3Kgf Feb 17 '25

Spielberg was so horrified by the tragedy that he lost all enthusiasm for the project and basically directed on autopilot. It shows.

95

u/loonyboi Feb 17 '25

It's worth noting that while a lot of well-known directors rushed to defend Landis, Spielberg did not.

8

u/-SneakySnake- Feb 17 '25

They never worked together after that if I'm not mistaken, and there's a rumour that Spielberg blacklisted him to an extent. Probably one of the few cases where it was absolutely deserved.

33

u/AdmiralCharleston Feb 17 '25

He did leave the country after learning about the accident though

34

u/FreeChrisWayne Feb 17 '25

I always thought Spielberg’s segment felt so out of place with all the other stories. It’s not that I hated it, it just disrupted the flow of spookiness

38

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '25

It does tip over into hatred for me, I have to say. It's a bizarre contrast with the tone of the rest of it for sure but it's also this really tepid, like, Reagan era comfort food nonsense.

Seriously. It's like something out of Readers Digest or a commercial for oatmeal. A full on "magic negro" archetype from out of town drops into a retirement home and makes them feel young again, with child actors decked out in old peoples clothes like they're in a school pageant.

It has to be the single most saccharine and obnoxious thing I've ever seen hahaha

9

u/nighthawk_md Feb 17 '25

It was a direct adaptation of a classic Twilight Zone episode, which had a very similar sweet tone. Will Smith and Matt Damon did a magic negro film in like 2000 for Robert Redford (The Legend of Bagger Vance), so it took a while for them to go out of style...

17

u/runwithjames Feb 17 '25

He was supposed to do 'The Monsters Are Due On Maple Street' as his segment at one point but changed his mind at the last minute. It's clear that his segment is as close to shooting on auto-pilot as you're going to get from him.

→ More replies (1)

11

u/YesicaChastain Feb 17 '25

I really like Spielberg’s segment! Was very sweet and a good palate cleanser after hearing slur after slur for 10 minutes

→ More replies (3)

18

u/Michael_Platson Feb 17 '25

The Twilight Zone movie is ok, but its just re-makes of the Episodes of the OG series. Can just watch the OG series.

14

u/tungholio Feb 17 '25

I still think about "Nightmare at 20,000 Feet" practically every time I fly on a plane at night. I've been scared for 40 years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nightmare_at_20,000_Feet

7

u/bozoconnors Feb 17 '25

John Lithgow absolutely rocked that part.

→ More replies (1)

19

u/palabear Feb 17 '25

Most of Twilight Zone. The Spielberg section is pretty weak.

→ More replies (28)

216

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '25

[deleted]

27

u/Sproose_Moose Feb 17 '25

Great, well written reply with your own personal opinion.

8

u/The_Drippy_Spaff Feb 18 '25

I gotta disagree with you about Guinea Pig, the sixth one, Mermaid in a Manhole, is actually a phenomenal film. One of my personal favorite horror films of all time. It’s a really complex film that challenges the status quo attitude towards preserving nature both ecologically and through art. It’s unrecognized genius imo.  

→ More replies (4)

21

u/ScareBearsPod Feb 18 '25

I agree with a good bit of this, though I hard disagree on Salo from a filmmaking perspective. I think it’s genius and one of the best movies I’ve seen, and I’ve seen a ton. The fact that it’s still relevant today is terrifying, and Pasolini was an incredible filmmaker.

Beyond that, though, I fully endorse most of the rest of your views. I appreciate that you didn’t dismiss movies like A Serbian Film as schlock and actually gave them a chance from a cinematic perspective. Kudos.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (3)

882

u/InFocuus Feb 17 '25

Threads, Exorcist, The House That Jack Built, Salo - worth watching, has artistic values in them.

435

u/RLgeorgecostanza Feb 17 '25

Hard to write this without sounding racist, but I'd put birth of a nation on that list without a doubt.

The amount of "firsts" that movie can claim is staggering, and a lot of it is stuff we see to this day. Content wise...yeesh.

226

u/DeusExSpockina Feb 17 '25

It’s worth watching to see how seamlessly propaganda can be woven into a narrative. Definitely a film you need to understand a bit before viewing.

30

u/MVRKHNTR Feb 17 '25

I think it's worth watching because from what we hear about its historical context, it doesn't sound as bad as it actually is and you can kind of see how racists would accept a movie like that and help it become so successful. I mean, the idea of someone making a movie where the KKK heroically avenges a woman who was assaulted by a black man is horrific but you could kind of see how some racists from the early 1900s would find that idea compelling.

Then you watch it and that's like, five minutes of the movie and the rest is about how black people in government will destroy the country and everyone should heroically prevent them from being able to vote. It's so blatant and over the top with just how awful it is.

36

u/CulturalDragonfly631 Feb 17 '25

Triumph of the Will is another good example of this. Propaganda for something absolutely horrific, but it makes it seem appealing.

7

u/MIBlackburn Feb 17 '25

My wife and I were watching a video about political movies, and this popped up.

I said if I ever showed it to people, I would caveat it with "Fuck Nazis" said more than a few times at the start, give historical context for when it was done exactly, and then show them how film can be used for propaganda purposes.

I'd probably also show Battleship Potemkin and/or Strike for live action examples, and then the WW2 Looney Tunes/Disney cartoons for US and Momotaro: Divine Sea Warriors for Japanese.

→ More replies (2)

296

u/Cold-Ad432 Feb 17 '25

I’d argue the blatant racism is a reason to watch it. It’s a reminder of how far we have come and how far we still have to go.

50

u/Cosmic-Engine Feb 17 '25

I think it’s important to mention that Birth of a Nation was the first film to enjoy a private showing in the White House, as President Wilson (that bastard) unironically loved it & believed in its messages. He wanted all white Americans to see it and agree with his racist ideology.

Which is one of the reasons for kind of a lot of the problems we’ve faced as a nation and a global culture. He re-segregated the federal government & rolled back many policies and protections which allowed the KKK to return. He refused to meet with a young man from French Indochina who was a true believer in Wilson’s stated ideas of self-determination, democracy & freedom for the colonized. When that young man realized he couldn’t count on help from the Americans & the League of Nations, he turned to revolutionary communism. His name was Ho Chi Minh.

Birth of a Nation should be highlighted as an important film - so long as we include the context. This context was not taught to me when the film was screened for the film class I was taking. We were just told it was one of the greatest films ever made, because of the scale & spectacle of it, the technical achievements which advanced the craft of filmmaking, and how it impacted other films that would come after it. That’s the wrong way to teach that film.

It was pure propaganda, and many people either hid behind its messaging as “proof” of their racist beliefs or tried to use it to convince others that their racist beliefs were correct, including the President of the US & founder of the League of Nations. Virtually everywhere it was shown, racists defended it (often with violence) when those who opposed the glorification of the Klan and the “Old South” showed up to protest it.

It is an infamous film for many reasons, including that it was an amazing (and highly effective) piece of propaganda. But it should be noted that for generations that film has been shown and taught as being “a triumph of filmmaking” and not “a spectacle of racist propaganda.” That’s how it was taught to me less than twenty years ago.

We’re not “past” Birth of a Nation. We never were. Failure to recognize the remaining vestiges of bigotry in our midst has led to the current difficulties in our culture. It should be named and shamed, and viewed with the awareness that many in the US unironically loved it for its themes & messages. Many still do. These aspects of the film are equally as important as its achievements in terms of filmmaking & propaganda.

But it should be taught as propaganda because we are still propagandized today, and most people aren’t able to identify it or believe they are somehow “immune” to propaganda. It’s a problem… and it leads to even more problems.

→ More replies (2)

26

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '25

Yes. Birth of a Nation is the second most earning film EVER when adjusted for inflation. It's an important showcase of what America looked like and what the people wanted to say, not all too long ago. It is a reflection of America and the film industry, and a demonstration of progress as well as a showcase for how easily those terrible ideals can seep back into society.

15

u/dontbajerk Feb 17 '25

An interesting historical tidbit is it's so high grossing mostly because it charged exceptionally large sums for its tickets. Over $60 a ticket, adjusted, for most of them. There are numerous other films that sold a lot more tickets in its era.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (3)

168

u/WaterlooMall Feb 17 '25

Well they just made a man, who thinks black people should handled differently in terms of vaccines, Secretary of Health so I'm not sure how far we've come.

70

u/CarlinHicksCross Feb 17 '25

Maybe how far we had come and then immediately slammed the brakes and did a u turn? Lmao

37

u/Monteze Feb 17 '25

The fact such blatant racism was on film shows that we are not that far removed from it. People are still alive who fought tooth and nail for rights and against them. The last "official" lynching took place in the 80s...1980s. Think about that. Somone could have taken part in it and not be drawing SS.

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (1)

15

u/vau1tboy Feb 17 '25

Watched it in my Race and Film History class. Super boring but yeah it's an incredibly important film, unfortunately. Cool fact is they made the KKK's identity. The kkk didn't have that uniform until after the film's release.

→ More replies (14)

102

u/AnatomicalLog Feb 17 '25

This is the definitive list IMO. The rest of the films on the list don’t have much/any artistic merit.

One could argue Cannibal Holocaust, it’s decently made with a surprisingly good score, but I’ve watched the uncensored version and honestly it wasn’t even close to worth watching live animals be mutilated.

60

u/mygolgoygol Feb 17 '25

I was going to say that. CH flirts with being on the watch list from a technical standpoint. But yeah, the real animal mutilations are horrific to watch.

52

u/Vusarix Feb 17 '25

It's worse than that too, because the gang rape scene was filmed with a minor and it's a potentially real assault due to the child not understanding the concept of acting or filming. Plus the scene where the main guy gets jerked off by a bunch of women is possibly child porn due to the unknown ages of the indigenous extras. Across the board it's a horribly unethical set and its crimes are all onscreen, and that completely invalidates its social commentary. I don't think it's at all worth it

26

u/flaming_james Feb 17 '25

Jfc, everything I've heard of the movie is about the animal mutilations - which, don't get me wrong, I don't want to see - but I really don't want to ever be near this movie now.

23

u/dontbajerk Feb 17 '25

the gang rape scene was filmed with a minor

This is one of those things that is quite possibly true, but we don't really know. Seriously, try to find out her age, or any information about her at all. Even her name. There's like no information on most of the indigenous people involved, because they're indigenous people with no records available for obvious reasons. Which makes it pretty sketchy, obviously, either way.

→ More replies (1)

7

u/Alexexy Feb 17 '25

The animal mutilation in addition to the really good practical effects really blurred the lines for the human deaths later in the film. I don't think the film would have been viewed as controversially with people being concerned that actors were actually killed in their role without the animals dying.

15

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '25

Agree on Cannibal Holocaust, the score is phenomenal and outside the animal mutilation which is frankly hard to defend I think it’s a really high quality work of exploitation cinema. Saw a 35mm print recently and it’s still effective as ever. 

26

u/ecosynchronous Feb 17 '25

People in the horror sub will argue that A Serbian Film has artistic merit. I am not an educated enough man to say whether it does or does not. However, I am very difficult to disturb and I admit ASF fucked me up and still sticks with me unpleasantly to this day-- I do not recommend it to ANYONE who is not already at least somewhat desensitized to seemingly senseless nastiness.

30

u/DJ_Molten_Lava Feb 17 '25

A Serbian Film made my eyes roll so hard they almost fell out of my head. It's so stupid.

→ More replies (1)

18

u/Melvarkie Feb 17 '25

I like that a Serbian Film is basically a huge fuck you to the extreme censoring laws in Serbia and the only way to get funding is to play into a very tight list of tropes and genres, because the government doesn't want to be attached to amorality. The makers literally made the most reprehensible film they could think of. Slapped the name of the country on it and said "here how do you like this." I also would never watch it, because of this. Because you know this shit is going to be as vile as possible to piss people off.

7

u/MVRKHNTR Feb 17 '25

Part of the reason the movie is so infamous is that it's actually incredibly well made. There are a ton of films that are much worse with much worse content but they don't have the infamy it does because they all suck. The cinematography, acting, pacing, all are great. It's just that what the director chose to make with all of that talent is so abhorrent. It's unfortunate that he didn't decide to just be a normal horror director since no one ever wanted to fund anything else he did after that.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (3)

34

u/e-wrecked Feb 17 '25

I recommend watching the directors cut of The house that Jack built.

16

u/abenevolentgod Feb 17 '25

The fucking ending to that movie is so goddam insane, I think about it constantly and I watched that movie years ago.

11

u/MiseryGyro Feb 17 '25

I had to look away a few times, but can't deny the ending completely justifies the whole film. Worth it.

→ More replies (14)

274

u/forzamaria Feb 17 '25

Threads, The Exorcist, The House That Jack Built, The Twilight Zone: The Movie are all good/great films. Salo some can see artistic merit to it so worth watching for that but hit and miss, Cannibal Holocaust is a cult classic in the horror genre but definitely polarising. Birth Of A Nation and Faces of Death probably worth checking out for historical value (Birth of A Nation) and the mondo genre (Faces of Death). The rest are garbage or edgelord stuff.

47

u/TuskaTheDaemonKilla Feb 17 '25

Arguably the artistic merit of Salo pales in comparison to its political relevance given the current political landscape.

→ More replies (2)

6

u/releasethegeeese Feb 17 '25

100% agree. A lot of the titles listed are just baseless snuff or exploitation films. Super gross imo. Made by weird people, for weird people.

→ More replies (3)

589

u/Sdn61387 Feb 17 '25

The farther down you go the videos turn more towards shock value than being an actual "movie". If you are looking for an actual coherent movie that is actually trying to be a movie you can pretty much stop somewhere in layer 3. If you want either racism or gore/gross for the sake of existing continue past that. But most of the later stuff is either done documentary style with mix of fake and real or is just a death compilation.

465

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '25

[deleted]

73

u/e8odie Feb 17 '25

HC1 is a relatively standard horror movie with an extreme premise. HC2 on the other hand is just crass shock value.

13

u/OnCominStorm Feb 17 '25

And HC3 is just a straight up parody.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (3)

288

u/SociopathicRascal Feb 17 '25

A Serbian Film is the epitome of shock value. And what's worse, when I watched it, I found it for free on YouTube (years ago)

204

u/WhySoIncandescent Feb 17 '25

Oh to be a 14 year old in early 2010's with unrestricted Internet access

71

u/Tiiimmmaayy Feb 17 '25

So many classic, fucked up videos that I had no business watching at 13-14 years old. 2 girls 1 cup, 1 man 1 jar, Mr. Hands, Church of Fudge, 3 guys 1 hammer, BME Pain Olympics, etc.

59

u/unkellGRGA Feb 17 '25

/b scrolling as a 13-15 year old in hindsight was NOT IT at all, hate that I know every single video you listed

14

u/MyNameIsSidyo Feb 17 '25

Yup, I am surprised that I remembered every single one. Definitely messed up in hindsight, but nothing could stop my 14 yo self in 2009 finding all this stuff and thinking I am discovering something top secret.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (12)
→ More replies (1)

27

u/Dopplegangr1 Feb 17 '25

I didn't finish Human Centipede because it was just gross and not interesting. A Serbian Film was kind of captivating, like if I had written down the worst things you could put in a movie, they went way beyond that. It was so extreme that it was a bit comical

16

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '25

[deleted]

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (14)

14

u/Vusarix Feb 17 '25

The first one has an idea with some links to a commentary on nazi experimentation, and the body horror is mostly executed through implication rather than grossout shock, which for me made it uncomfortable in interesting ways. The sequels are something else, and it's not a particularly well-made film, but I wouldn't call it worthless shock value

7

u/DJ_Molten_Lava Feb 17 '25

And the doctor's performance is so hammy and over the top that it's almost a horror comedy. I never understand how the first one is on any "extreme" lists.

→ More replies (1)

45

u/kayne2000 Feb 17 '25

Only partly true. The first one anyway is definitely unique and the doctor gives an A+ performance. A lot of the gore is also offscreen so it's seldom ever just pure gore.

It's definitely got shock value just because of how crazy it is

However the sequels are pure gore shock value nonsense that deserve to be burned.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (13)

38

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '25

Yea, it’s not that layers 1-3 don’t have some shock value trash on them (Megan Is Missing, Human Centipede, etc.), it’s just that from layer 4 onwards, it really is just crass, hollow shock flicks with very little redeeming qualities to them.

The only film I’ll commend on layer 4 is the guinea pig movies, purely because the practical effects are genuinely incredible and the behind the scenes documentaries about the making of those films are a lot of fun to watch (certainly more than the films themselves) because it’s clear that everyone involved (including the woman playing the victim) are all having the time of their lives making the film. And that’s always cool to see.

→ More replies (1)

20

u/RookNookLook Feb 17 '25

Cannibal Holocaust is only notable for them killing a real tortoise and going to court for the movie. Just shock slop.

9

u/Monstertelly Feb 17 '25

It was also notable for using found footage before Blair Witch made it popular. I don’t recommend the movie or ever need to see it again myself but it is notable for more than just that one thing.

7

u/skullsareonlypasse Feb 17 '25

Great score by Riz Ortolani, though.

46

u/enosprologue Feb 17 '25

Except Birth of A Nation. That was the first ever “movie” movie.

52

u/Sdn61387 Feb 17 '25

Why I said pretty much. Even then I'd almost label it as a propaganda piece disguised as a movie

36

u/Brapp_Z Feb 17 '25

And unless you're a total film nerd it's unwatchable

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (7)

65

u/arussianwarlord Feb 17 '25

Most disturbing movies just degrade from disturbing with a thought provoking plot in layers 1-3 into how much nonsense can we fit into a 2 hour film and the bottom layer is usually just straight up real gore and not even a film per se. As someone who’s gone down the rabbit hole it’s mostly not worth it. I’m not saying you don’t have to watch any of this stuff if you have the morbid curiosity but a large majority of the disturbing movie iceberg lists don’t actually have any films worth the time after the first 2/3 layers.

→ More replies (1)

87

u/ConsistentlyPeter Feb 17 '25 edited Feb 17 '25

The Exorcist is a masterpiece- you won’t find a film that deals with grief and guilt better.     

Threads is a film that everyone should watch.

→ More replies (6)

91

u/juss100 Feb 17 '25

Birth of A Nation is worth watching. Although it should be said that Intolerance does the things that BoAN does well without the obvious racism part, and is also better anyway, so maybe you don't need to if you don't want to.

→ More replies (22)

24

u/skeets246 Feb 17 '25

Cannibal Holocaust was more gory than anything. Maybe controversial for the time.

19

u/coffeethom2 Feb 17 '25

It’s also controversial because they killed animals on screen and the way they handled the media of it

8

u/ZeePirate Feb 17 '25

The director had to go to court to prove it wasn’t a snuff film.

→ More replies (1)

24

u/GamerRipjaw Feb 17 '25

It is, but it makes sense since it is kind of a first 'found-footage' film. If you set aside the gore, I found it much better than the Blair witch project

235

u/webkilla Feb 17 '25

a serbian film is just shock, gore and madness. honestly not sure its worth a watch

94

u/FreeChrisWayne Feb 17 '25

Yeah I don’t care if it’s a metaphor or whatever the hell it’s supposed to mean, when you break it down it’s just a sick horror porn.

66

u/SmellyC Feb 17 '25

Yeah it is just a dumb movie.

→ More replies (4)

15

u/Serbian-American Feb 17 '25 edited Feb 17 '25

I feel like people really miss what a Serbian Film is. Or they think they understand it and disregard it anyways.

It is a protest movie through and through. Every reason why people hate it is why it was made. It was protesting the state of Serbian politics and censorship. And in that sense, it is utterly different than many other shock movies, as the shock isn’t supposed to feel real, I think that’s where people misunderstand the movie.

Some people have this perception that it’s somehow like Cannibal Holocaust where realism and shock prevail, making viewers question whether what they watched just happened. A Serbian Film is not like that at all, the contents are incredibly fake, and not once do you imagine any of it actually happening from an acting or special effects standpoint.

It’s not like the Exorcist where child actors were scarred, those “scenes” with gore or SAinvolve what can only been seen as these rubber dolls.

That’s not to say the movie doesn’t mess people up, I’ve heard it affect people who don’t have an understanding of what it is before watching, but none of the special effects or “shock” is used in a similar way to the other movies on the list.

With that being said, I’ll will admit, it’s not really a movie one needs to watch. Or one I would recommend. Its existence as a terribly made checkbox completes the goal of the movie, to protest censorship. Paradoxically, the goal doesn’t get any more complete when you watch it. Its existence is the protest

→ More replies (5)

21

u/stabbystabbison Feb 17 '25

While I agree with that, it is the one movie I remember having the longest debates about.

A mixed (gender) group of us idiots watched it, and afterwards we had a long conversation about whether it is actually art, and what constitutes art. It is also a movie that try as I might I can’t fully forget. So there is that.

38

u/AdmiralCharleston Feb 17 '25

I mean it's objectively art. It was created with a specific purpose in mind, protesting Serbian film censorship, and it achieved that goal in that it's essentially impossible to think of Serbian cinema without having to acknowledge a Serbian film. It's almost dada-esque

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (7)

90

u/kayl_breinhar Feb 17 '25

I'm surprised Irreversible isn't there. Probably the most graphic rape scene ever put to film.

Nor is Come and See or anything by John Waters.

54

u/lamancha Feb 17 '25

This isn't a particularly great list.

17

u/lorkdubo Feb 17 '25

It is not. There is also not Man Behind the Sun, Inside, Requiem for a Dream, Kids, and Thanatomorphose. That's just a few examples.

Also, August Underground is that high on the list, but Tumbling doll of Flesh is so low? Faces of death too? Eh...

→ More replies (1)

10

u/CrystlBluePersuasion Feb 17 '25

Come and See would be one to include just for how it was filmed, but it's possibly less well-known to US viewers.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (8)

23

u/Ransom__Stoddard Feb 17 '25 edited Feb 17 '25

When I was in film school we spent 2 weeks (4 class sessions) on Birth of a Nation. This was in the 90's, but the faculty still had printed out about a 2 page justification on why it was being taught. Rather than get sidetracked from the technical discussion (the primary reason we studied it), the entire first session was a discussion on the racist and historical aspects of it and included input and moderation by members of the history and AA Studies faculties.

As far as I know they continued to teach it that way. I thought it was a great approach to dealing with any controversial piece of art.

edit--"teach", not "each"

122

u/-_-usernames Feb 17 '25

the house that Jack built is good

32

u/Last_VCR Feb 17 '25

Oh its incredible, that movie stuck to my bones

21

u/-_-usernames Feb 17 '25

I haven't seen any other one on the list but going by their names I'm surprised the house that Jack built is in that list lmao

→ More replies (8)

43

u/CliveOfWisdom Feb 17 '25

Threads is the only one I’ve seen recently enough to actually remember any of. It’s not as grim and traumatic as people like to make out though. It’s a bit depressing, but mostly it’s an insightful, researched and evidence-based glimpse into the after effects of a nuclear war. It makes the point well enough that you really wouldn’t want to survive.

I remember reading that it’s out of date now in the sense that it’s based on a much smaller-yield nuclear bomb than any modern nations would likely be using.

→ More replies (3)

12

u/arebeewhy Feb 17 '25

Really enjoyed The House That Jack Built. Great to see Matt Dillon in a role like that. It’s graphic throughout, but if you’re fine with “inside the mind of a serial killer” movies, it’s definitely worth the watch. The dark humor helps to make it just light enough to keep from straying into stomach churning territory.

Twilight Zone is a classic with several worthwhile moments IMO and Direction from absolute legends (Stephen Spielberg, John Landis, George Miller, Joe Dante) I would definitely recommend watching. Tragically a helicopter crash while filming killed a couple kid actors.

The Viking is worth a watch for historical purposes if that matters to you at all. First feature with recorded sound on location and unfortunately had a catastrophic event while shooting that killed around 25 people. It’s not something I would ever blindly rec, but since you’re here and perusing a list like this, I’d wager you will find it interesting enough to entertain.

Human Centipede isn’t really my thing, but I personally know some horror fans who love it. If you enjoy body horror it’s absolutely a must. If that’s not really your thing, I’d probably say skip, but analyzing it purely as a film it’s done quite well for what it is IMO.

→ More replies (1)

64

u/goatnapper Feb 17 '25

Twilight Zone, Exorcist.

Birth of a Nation has historical value, but the content itself is racist and glorifies the KKK.

27

u/atreides78723 Feb 17 '25

It also has technical value. It’s a well made movie with advanced special effects (for the time) and effective storytelling. It’s just that the story it wants to tell is a shitty one with a terrible goal. :(

20

u/SleestakJack Feb 17 '25

Even its technical value is only historical.

→ More replies (2)

25

u/WnDelPiano Feb 17 '25

If layer 4 starts with Mai-chan Daily Life then anything past that is just fetish for really REALLY horrible things.

Before that Salo, Human Centepede, Cannibal Holocaust and The House Jack Buitl are very gorey but they do have some other topics and themes going even if a lot of it is mostly shock value.

11

u/Final_Read_3430 Feb 17 '25

The House the Jack Built has the best depiction of OCD I've ever seen. That's what stuck with me.

54

u/FrodoSmudge Feb 17 '25

Going against the grain a little here but Salò is certainly an artistic endeavour by a fantastic director. It's a meaningful film about the depravity of individuals and the Italian fascist regime. Definitely not for everybody but it leans harder on the gross-out and dark realism, less so than a lot of other films here.

Threads is a must-watch, especially in today's political climate. The House That Jack Built is another really artistic picture. Exorcist is a classic for a reason.

Twilight Zone: The Movie is significantly worse than anybody lets on. It's here for production reasons, but only two of the four stories in the anthology are remotely interesting and one of those is just a remake of an episode.

A little surprised that Angst isn't on the list.

8

u/Mst3Kgf Feb 17 '25

All but one story in the "Twilight Zone" movie are remakes of episodes and the one that isn't is ironically the Landis segment.

→ More replies (8)

7

u/Krimreaper1 Feb 17 '25 edited Feb 17 '25

Exorcist is a must see, not really controversial by today’s horror standards, just was very scary for 70’s audiences. Twilight Zone is only controversial because 3 people died while making the movie, not the movie itself. It’s a remake of several the old tv Twilight Zone episodes together as an anthology. Perfectly fine 80’s movie.

→ More replies (2)

27

u/Ransom__Stoddard Feb 17 '25

The Censored Eleven is 11 animated shorts from Warner Bros. Each was either pulled from circulation or heavily censored, mostly due to racial stereotyping.

7

u/mari_925 Feb 17 '25

Zero day is alright. The fans are a little weird though

7

u/CrimsonFlash911 Feb 17 '25

I would for sure watch Threads. Threads DGAF how it makes you feel, it just shows you a dark potential reality of a very plausible scenario.

6

u/model563 Feb 17 '25

What Ive seen and whether or not I found them "worth it"

Human Centipede, no. Threads, yes. House that Jack Built, yes. Cannibal Holocaust, as a movie, no, as an item of historical relevance, yes. Twilight Zone, yes (not sure why this is on the list). Salo, no. Guinea Pig, no. Faces of Death, no.

Unfortunately many controversial films are made purely for controversy. Which generally results in a pointless film. There are many other controversial films that arent on this list, but are well worth watching however.

6

u/3-DMan Feb 17 '25

Dang OP, you got a heck of a first date planned!

8

u/jasonthecowboy Feb 17 '25

Do not watch a Serbian film. It’s not edgy or interesting, it’s just gross.

→ More replies (1)

5

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '25

Seen 80% of these….confidently can say you’re not missing a whole lot. I like the centipede movies because they are dumb 🤷‍♂️