Human Centipede 2 is like watching a crime scene. Besides our nasty, degenerate villain in Martin, there is no character development at all. What is on the screen is just violent act after violent act, culminating in a slightly open ending. I was expecting to see some really horrible acts of violence against bodies, and that's exactly what I got. I didn't enjoy it one bit. However, I cannot deny the effect it had upon me. I had to watch the Simpsons for an hour following this film so I could feel normal again. Physically, this is the most disturbing film I've seen. I have seen worse in extreme cinema when you are actually invested in the characters, but that is impossible here. This movie is not for the squeamish at all, in fact a scene or two forced me to turn away and gag slightly. It sucks to admit that as I consider myself a seasoned genre fan, but yeah, certain parts were really freaking gross. Was there any tension? Well the first one elicited a few genuine scares but here, the fear is for what your eyes are going to be subjected to next. Watch at your own risk.
Add a Review
-
wolverinejmc27 October 2011
-
I never write reviews on IMDb but after seeing this film last night I was compelled to. First off I am a lover of films that push boundaries and appreciate titles such as a Serbian film, martyrs, irreversible, etc. This movie has absolutely no plot except for the obvious: a mentally disturbed man is obsessed with the first film and decides to make his own human centipede. The movie essentially consists of him capturing/killing people, creating a sloppy human centipede, and then killing them all after he is satisfied that the 12 person digestive track works. I enjoy the sensation of being genuinely disturbed by a film or laughing at over-the-top gore but this movie didn't really fulfill either. I attribute this mainly to the pointlessness of the movie in itself, but also just the general look and feel of the movie was not to my taste. There is nothing original or ground breaking about this movie, I feel like there wasn't even any thought put into it except with the goal to disgust people. The first film had an original idea, was executed well, and stayed true to the horror genre. None of these things can be said about the sequel. The only satisfaction I got out of the movie was laughing at how ridiculous it was.
-
skipoc11 October 2015without a doubt the most tasteless and disgusting film I've ever seen. The first movie at least a semblance of a plot but this crude and nasty "movie" has no plot-it's nothing short of torture porn. The first 30 minutes or so passable but the last third was just revolting. There is no motive other than to show people suffering and being mutilated. I couldn't even watch most of it. Why are people so desperate to work in a movie that they would subject themselves to such degradation? As an actor, there i no amount of money or notoriety that would convince me to do something so horrendous. It's just sick for the sake of being sick. It doesn't even make sense. Martin works in a parking garage to find victims yet no one ever notices his actions or him coming to work covered in blood. Sick, vile and disgusting. The first movie is Citizen Kane compared to this garbage. Tom Six should NEVER be allowed near a computer, a camera or any amount of cash EVER. I would give this minus 10 if allowed.
-
sbarden23 October 2011If you've ever wondered, "how disgusting can a movie be?..." well, this film pretty much answers the question. For what it is - and you probably know more or less what it is, or you wouldn't be reading this - it is fully realized in pretty much every aspect. Casting Harvey was pure genius. He carries the film with his amazing performance. There are plenty of little twists to keep you occupied, some of which are actually humorous in a grotesque way.
The odd thing, though, is that the film really isn't scary. Maybe because Martin is so divorced from reality that he seems incapable of true evil. Rather, he is just driven by a single-minded vision to complete his project. Probably the first real success he's had in his sad, sad life.
The effects are spot-on, and the pacing generally good, although I found it dragged a bit about 2/3 of the way through. However, the brashness and oddness of this film have surely earned it a spot alongside cult classics such as Eraserhead. -
Chris_Pandolfi29 November 2011I detested "The Human Centipede 2 (Full Sequence)," and yet I'm well aware that it was made with me in mind – me and anyone else who thought that last year's "The Human Centipede (First Sequence)" was a disgusting, pointless, morally bankrupt pile of garbage. Writer/director Tom Six made a promise as he was promoting the original film, namely that the sequel would "go full force in graphic details, making part 1 look like My Little Pony"; by living up to that promise in spades, he has given his harshest critics the cinematic equivalent of the one-fingered salute. If you're reading this, Mr. Six, let me be the first to congratulate you on telling me off with such incredible flair. Let me also reassure you that you're absolutely right about people like me. We're not persuaded by the "artistry" or "entertainment value" of torture porn.
I've just been made aware that Six is currently working on a third chapter, which, according to an interview with Empire.com, he promises will "make the last one look like a Disney film." That's a pretty tall order considering the imagery he subjects us to in this film, including (but not limited to) a man masturbating with sandpaper, people defecating into other people's mouths, and the head of a just-born fetus being crushed under the gas pedal of a car. Incidentally, are these supposed to be symbolic of something? I'm asking this because I tend to overlook symbolism when I'm actively trying to keep myself from vomiting in sheer revulsion. Earlier this year, when I had to endure the wretched "A Serbian Film," a reader happily explained to me the meaning behind a newborn baby being raped, which, I admit, went completely over my head. I expect that same person will tell me how I've failed to see the genius in "The Human Centipede 2."
What a sick, depraved, repugnant movie this is. Why do producers, writers, and directors believe such films need to be made? How is it that they actually gain a following? I'm greatly disturbed by the fact that there's a demand for them. We don't need movies like this in our lives, not even for the purposes of entertainment – which is a funny word to use, because it's inconceivable to me how anyone could possibly find this kind of trash entertaining. If stories like this appeal to you, if you get some kind of dizzy thrill at the sight of degrading, pointless exploitation, you inhabit a world I officially want no part of. There are enough screwed up people in the world without their sadistic perversions being gleefully celebrated in a movie theater.
The film is not a sequel in the strictest sense. Six adopts a metafictional approach, telling the story of a British security guard obsessed with the first "Human Centipede" film. His name is Martin (Laurence R. Harvey). He's short, overweight, asthmatic, and by all accounts, mentally ill. Apart from some groans and a good deal of maniacal laughter, he says not a single word throughout the entire film. He lives with his mother (Vivien Bridson), who verbally berates him at every available opportunity. She blames him for putting her husband in prison, apparently in denial or completely unmindful of the fact that he sexually abused Martin on a regular basis. A psychologist (Bill Hutchens) has frequent sessions with Martin in his living room. Are we supposed to find it funny that this doctor is a pervert who lusts after Martin?
When he's not at home, he's either brooding in his parking garage toll booth or targeting victims. You see, he wants make his own human centipede, only he wants to outdo the Dr. Heiter character and increase the chain from three people to twelve. And so he beats unsuspecting people senseless with a crowbar (how they survive this is anyone's guess), piles them in a van, drives them to a secluded (and conveniently abandoned) warehouse, and leaves them to lie naked in filth and darkness. He lures in Ashlynn Yennie, who played Jenny in "The Human Centipede," by pretending to be Quentin Tarantino's casting agent. We eventually have to endure Martin surgically joining his victims mouth to anus, which in this case involves such needlessly graphic imagery as knives slicing through flesh and vital parts being attached with a staple gun. We then have to bear witness to an ambiguous ending that cheats.
Six's cinematographer, David Meadows, photographs all this in black and white, arguably in the least artistic way possible. Did anyone making this movie honestly believe that, by employing a cinematic device as dreamlike as black and white, the material would somehow be elevated? No amount of technique would have made this movie work. Like the film that preceded it, it shouldn't have been made at all. "The Human Centipede 2 (Full Sequence)" is not only one of the year's worst films, nor is it merely one of the worst movies ever made; it represents all that we as human beings should strive to evolve against. Under no circumstances should we be amused by cruelty, suffering, and exploitation. The sooner we realize this, the sooner we can make that next step.
-- Chris Pandolfi (www.atatheaternearyou.net) -
bayareamike22 April 2012First of all, I think Tom Six, the director of this film is apparently not a mentally well individual and probably needs help. Please don't get me wrong, I can enjoy a good horror movie. Devil's Rejects, A Serbian Film, Saw, Hostel, etc. Those kind of movies are a cakewalk (except maybe 'A Serbian Film') compared to this. As hard as I try, I can't even think of a film to compare this to. I have seen the first Human Centipede and was appalled. When Human Centipede 2 came out, I suppose I was curious and wanted to see how Tom could utilize feces for his next 'masterpiece'.
This is a film has very little plot. It is all about feces. Do we really need a movie with feces involved? I know people have fetishes, and Tom Six seems to have a feces fetish (which is fine, I suppose), but why share it with the world? Sure, I could sit here and bash the director, Tom Six, but after researching his background, he seems to get a thrill over peoples reaction to this kind of subject matter, and he isn't afraid to say so. This also confirms his his need of therapy or confinement to a mental institution. If you enjoy watching people forced to consume feces, this film may be right up your alley.
So I ask myself...... Who would finance this kind of vile? What kind of company would distribute this? Who would pull out their checkbook and pay for movie props, actors, camera equipment and rent movie locations for this kind of film? Who is in charge of making the fake fecal matter in the film? That must be a rewarding job. What kind of actor would look at this script and say "Oh yes - I really wan't to be a star in this movie."? How can you look at yourself in the mirror after being an actor/actress in this movie? I have more respect for actors in porno movies.
Think carefully before watching this movie. Because once you watch it, you can't unwatch it. -
Simon_Says_Movies15 February 2012In my review of the first, umm, segment of Tom Six's "Human Centipede" series, I stated that it was a very difficult film to review as it's inherently meant to alienate and disgust – so how to judge it evenly? I had no such problem with The Human Centipede II (Full Sequence) as not only does it retain (and amplify) the revoltingness of the original, but strips away any twisted charm, tension, good performances and frequent tongue-in-cheek execution that made "First Sequence" better than it had any right to be.
Many haphazardly brand films they dislike as "worthless," but some movies are genuinely without any merit. "Full Sequence" is such a rarity. This sequel is artless, humorless, boring, without style (well, it is in black and white, so it must be high-class), purpose, or cleverness, and is generally off-putting, but never haunting or lasting. The only purpose seems to be in Tom Six's mind, in that he wanted to one-up himself. He succeeded in scope, but failed in every other aspect.
The opening scene reveals to us that the entire first movie was just that: a cinematic endeavour. Cut to Martin, a lonely and infinitely unhinged parking lot attendant who becomes obsessed with the film and further obsesses over creating his own humanoid monstrosity with twelve victims – an addition of nine. You see, these unlucky folks will be surgically attached mouth to anus, thereby connecting the gastric system, giving birth to a human centipede. His plan involves shooting his targets in the leg, bludgeoning them with a crowbar, tossing them into the back of his van and driving them to a grungy warehouse to await their fate. This drawn-out portion of the movie slogs along as Martin collects his subjects in a rythmic, monotonous pace with no sense of impending dread or sympathy for his victims. The camera seemingly just rolls for the hell of it.
While the original benefited from a deliciously deranged performance from Dieter Laser as the mad doctor, Laurence B. Harvey's Martin never speaks, is grotesque in his appearance and mannerisms and has no interesting motives or backstory except that he was apparently sexually abused by his father. In fact the entire second half of the film contains no dialogue, as by this point all the characters' mouths are otherwise full (I apologize for that imagery). When the poop did flow, I was both bored and otherwise desensitized from the previous grotesque events and simply wanted the experience to end. A backhanded aim of Six may have been to craft a movie that nobody could sit through, and he did succeed, but not in the way he likely intended. I felt my time was being wasted, not that I was being shocked to new extremes.
The only people I could recommend this movie to would be those like myself who enjoyed the first and are curious about the follow-up, but I would have to tack on the disclaimer that they will be disappointed and viewing could even diminish the bizarre appeal of the first. But I suppose if you truly love fecal matter, back-room surgery, blood, torture, infanticide, profanity, child abuse and (of course) centipedes, you will be in cinematic bliss. Six already plans to finish his vision with a third movie entitled Human Centipede (Final Sequence) and after fulfilling the worries I had that he would one-up himself to a fault with this movie, I quiver at the load of dung he has in store for us to cap the trilogy.
Read my review of the original: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1467304/reviews-40 -
jboothmillard22 January 2012It's not often that you get the original film featured as part of the sequel, i.e. the film within the sequel to the film, but this is what happened with this one to the very controversial original, and I heard that this one was much worse (taste wise), it sounded worth watching, from director Tom Six, who apparently worked on the Dutch version of Big Brother, where it first began. Basically Martin Lomax (Laurence R. Harvey) is a mentally disturbed lonely weirdo who lives with his Mother (Vivien Bridson), he loves and is obsessed by the cult horror film The Human Centipede (First Sequence). Martin works as a security guard during the night shift in a grim underground parking complex, to escape his dreary and almost worthless existence he watches the film with delight, he even masturbates to it, and also has his own pet centipede. Martin fetishes to have the same surgical skill as the film's leading antagonist Dr. Josef Heiter (Dieter Laser), with his knowledge for the human gastrointestinal system, of course Martin has no surgical knowledge whatsoever. But his obsession for the film has become increasingly extreme, to the point where he dreams of making his own Human Centipede, but not with three people like what he has seen, but with more. Martin's mother sees this obsession, in anger she rips up his scrapbook full of photos and articles about the film, in retaliation Martin smashes her skull in until dead, he puts the corpse in a chair and props it up at the dinner table. So Martin starts finding and kidnapping random people to start the process of his sick dream, stripping them all of their clothing, tying them up and gagging them with duct tape, he hopes to create "the full sequence" of twelve people. Martin even manages to get his hands on one of the actors who became part of the film Centipede, the leading actress Ashlynn Yennie, after pretending to be Quentin Tarantino's casting agent, she is to become his head of his creation. In an abandoned warehouse, Martin begins his building of his own Human Centipede, but instead of using surgical tools and medical expertise, he is having to rely on more duct tape, dodgy DIY tool skills and hideous mutilation, like knocking teeth out with a hammer. One of the twelve victims dies in agony, and the other, a pregnant woman, seems to be dead but is actually unconscious, so Martin has to settle with ten people taped together with their mouths stapled to the previous person's anus, and the leg tendons cut to stop them getting away. Of course part of the process of having the victims connected is having the head eat, passing excrement through from person to person, but to speed this process he gives each victim a sip of laxative, causing them each to have their bowels explode. After seeing a victim or two die from choking on excrement or their own vomit, the pregnant woman wakes up and runs out of the warehouse to the nearest car, in the process of escaping she gives birth to her child, but it dies when she crushes it's skull, she drives away. Martin is extremely angry, and the Human Centipede have managed to split in half, but the psychopath takes a gun and shoots each victim in the head, until Miss Yennie is the last left alive. But she manages to grab hold of the funnel Martin used to force feed her, she shoves it up his anus and throws his pet centipede down it, and he is screaming in agony. The film ends however with Martin waking up while watching his favourite film, leaving you to question whether the events seen were real, just his imagination, or him dreaming. Also starring Bill Hutchens as Dr. Sebring, Maddi Black as Candy, Kandace Caine as Karrie, Dominic Borrelli as Paul, Lucas Hansen as Ian, Lee Nicholas Harris as Dick, Dan Burman as Greg, Daniel Jude Gennis as Tim, Georgia Goodrick as Valerie, Emma Lock as Kim, Katherine Templar as Rachel and Peter Blankenstein as Alan. Harvey gives a most exceptional performance as the non- speaking obese severely disgusting character with the sick fantasy to create something he has seen in his treasured film, it almost mirrors concerns parents have about life imitating fiction. This sequel is certainly much more violent than the first film, so much so that it was banned entirely by the BBFC (British Board of Film Classifiction), who refused to touch it, as it was "revolting", but eventually it was released as an 18 certificate with thirty two compulsory cuts totalling two minutes and thirty seven seconds. From what I have read, this material is very extreme and was right to be taken out, including Martin masturbating with sandpaper around his penis, and Martin with barbed wire wrapped around his penis violently raping a woman, you could almost tell where these moments were meant to happen, from what was left in, it is still a highly violent, and a most interesting to watch horror. Good!
-
I had somewhat high hopes for this movie. Not for it to be the sickfest that Tom Six promised in the early teaser trailer, but for Tom Six to actually create something lasting with the infamy he gained through the previous film.
The Human Centipede itself wasn't all that bad I thought personally. Twisted sure, outlandish definitely. However, aside from the poor show of acting from the American student girls early on in the film, the standard of acting was good. The plot was linear, shocking, and kept you gripped to your seat, or the toilet bowl for as long as the movie was running. The film itself also came in under the radar. My friend came home once and said he had just watched a movie called 'The Human Centipede.' He then asked me to imagine what comes to mind when I think of those words. Of course I was way off, but by this point I just had to watch it out of intrigue alone.
The second film is none of the above. Indeed, it is sick, twisted, and outlandish; and then some. But it just isn't original, clever, or even remotely logical.
I don't want to go into the plot and explain who does what, aside to say that there is no real protagonist, and pretty much everybody in the film is either an antagonist, or deserves to die. There is a moment where you think that one woman will come through as some sort of hero, but then she does the most insane thing I have ever seen in a film. You'll know it when you see it: if you see the uncut version.
Tom Six is taking his audience for a ride, and not a good one. He's laughing at the people paying the ticket price and stupid they were to trust him and his film making ability.
The majority of the movie is shot entirely in black and white except for one part of the movie that has touchings of brown, in a similar fashion to the way blood is portrayed in Frank Millar's Sin City: have a quick guess which part that is. Note: that same scene that lasted a minute in the original lasts for ten whole minutes in this laughable sequel.
I said to my housemate after the credits rolled that watching this movie was like eating an insanely hot curry, or camping out at a festival; neither are particularly enjoyable by the end, but at least you can tell all of your friends you did it. -
HumanoidOfFlesh1 December 2011"The Human Centipede II" by Tom Six delivers repulsive imagery in spades.The main character in this modern sickie is Martin,fat and sweating slob who works as a night-shift car park attendant.He is obsessed with the first "Human Centipede" and ghastly works of Dr.Heitner.His dream is about creating his own twelve-strong human centipede.Victims are strikingly easy to find and capture..."The Human Centipede II" is more unsettling and gory than its infamous predecessor.The scenes of mutilation,urination,serial defecation,ligament-cutting,tooth-pulling,vomiting and rape manage to offend.The main performance of Lawrence R Harvey is gloriously weird.So if you are into graphic torture porn and extreme body horror "The Human Centipede II" is a must-see.8 defecations out of 10.
-
Coventry18 July 2012Actually I should be grateful to Tom Six Thanks to him and his demented movie, I finally know where to draw my own personal line when it comes to tolerating cinematic smut! The ideal way to describe this movie is to simply write down as many synonyms for the word "repulsive" you can think of! So here goes: "The Human Centipede II: Full sequence" is revolting, sickening, disgusting, loathsome, degrading, nauseating, appalling, despicable, vile, heinous, nefarious and absolutely positively depraved! The first film already caused quite a bit of commotion and controversy because of its plot and a handful of shocking sequences, but I swear the original looks like a politically correct Disney family flick compared to the totally messed up sequel! Not only does the concept of creating a human centipede gets enlarged and illustrated a lot more graphically, also the characters and sub plots are much more perverted and insane than in "First Sequence". I realize this will sound as a recommendation to all the sick puppies amongst you, but this is truly one of the most repugnant movies ever made. In spite of the emphasis more than obviously lying on gore and shock-factor, I nevertheless have to admit that the film features a number of ingenious story lines and creative twists. The whole basic plot and set up, for example, is surprisingly inventive. The sequel considers the original film in fact as a purely fictional "film" and thus the events and unorthodox medical experiments of Dr. Heiter were never real. However, the protagonist of part two – the obese and mentally handicapped midget named Martin – is addicted to watching this crazy movie and becomes obsessed with the idea of creating his very own (and bigger) human centipede. I can't deny that I find this idea intriguing as a starting point for a sequel. Writer/director Tom Six also generates a suitably grim and disturbing surrounding around pivot character Martin. He lives with his mother but she hates Martin with a passion. Why? Because her husband is in prison as Martin couldn't keep his pedophilic nightly visits secret. Martin works as a concierge in an underground parking lot where he captures his victims, but also bashes people's heads in with a crowbar and masturbates using sandpaper! He brings his centipede victims - all 12 of them, including a very pregnant woman – to a raunchy hangar and accomplishes his dream, which leads to many gross tableaux, I assure you. Multiple images that I can't even begin to describe truly give a whole new meaning to the words tasteless and immoral. When approaching the grand finale, you may expect scenes featuring excrement, rape, miscarriage and gratuitous torture/mutilation. Don't even consider watching "The Human Centipede II" – not even out of curiosity – if you have a bit of virtue left inside yourself. Laurence R. Harvey gives away a peculiar and remarkable performance as Martin. He is so convincingly perverted and deviant that I sincerely doubt if he's even a normal person in real life... I don't want to know him at least, that's for sure. The film is entirely shot in black and white, which perhaps makes the gruesomeness and on screen filth slightly more digestible, but primarily it increases the sober and grim atmosphere of it all. Other elements that contribute to this are the minimal use of dialogs and/or soundtrack and the nihilistic narrative tone. It maybe feels weird to admit, but technically speaking "The Human Centipede II" is actually a competent effort. Apparently there's already a third installment in the making, but I might just spare myself the hideous aftertaste in my mouth and stomach.
-
oOgiandujaOo_and_Eddy_Merckx6 November 2011What this singular piece of nastiness has going for it in the main is brevity, no film of 88 minutes really ever outstays its welcome. Tom Six feels like a guy who knows what buttons to push, he introduces a minor character who is a kind of cartoon of the UK doctor / serial killer Harold Shipman, whose educated, imperturbable, casually degraded outlook is like acid in your face. There's also an incredibly disturbing line that evokes the main character's messed up childhood, "Crying will only make daddy's willy harder".
Martin is an obese middle-aged nighttime security guard, who lives with his mother, who blames him for having his father sent to jail (i.e. being there for him to abuse). He is fantastically ugly, a stigma which in Western society leads to ostracisation. Martin is looking at these cards he's been dealt, which ain't great, and decides it's time for the proverbial to hit the fan, which is to say he'd like to try and re-enact his favourite DVD, The Human Centipede.
The British censors (and no doubt those of other countries will follow suit), have spared us a scene of a mother brutally killing her own newborn by mistake, of a coil of barbed wire being used as a marital aid, and like their forebears, the censors of Witchfinder General, had to ponder on just how many bludgeons with an axe, or in this case teeth removed by hammer blow, are acceptable, and decided on a lower number than the director.
The film is not quite squared away in terms of plot plausibility, but does what it can.
I actually found the movie implausibly human, what Martin ends up doing seems, on the face of it, entirely logical (which is not to say that everyone who is abused becomes an abuser). The film seems to have a message that people are marginalised and forgotten about at our peril, that society is judged by the people who behave the worst.
Two of Six's gambles that pay off extremely well are shooting the movie in black and white, and having Martin remain dialogue-less throughout. His implacability and remorselessness say all that needs to be said about someone who has been kept as an animal and poked one too many times. The black and white shooting literally portrays a miserable world drained of any colour. -
JonesyDC19 October 2011The movie was better than I thought it would be. It took me a a few days to get ready to view the movie. I usually watch a movie twice (on-demand), but I could only stomach HC1 once. I had to get into a frame of mind to view this movie and I was correct. HC2 is far more over the top. Lot's of gore and surprises.
I thought the villain in HC1 was a great choice, but the villain in HC2 is off the charts!! I felt pity towards this guy (however brief it was)until he started his re-creation. I hope this guy was acting and not just being himself. I mean I have never seen someone so jacked up. I thought he was going to pass out half the time or have a heart attack. I hope he has a life outside creepy movies.
I was shocked after reading about some of the parts that where cut out. I don't know how much more shock value I could have took, although some of the cut scenes seem to merit a viewing. Which begs the question of why IFC, the benchmark of indie films, would cut anything?
Overall, I liked the movie for what it was,although it must have been a bear to shoot. I have to give props to all the actors in this film. At some points I could see the physical difficulty some of the actors were having with some of the contortions.
Big props to Sixx for shocking me another time!! -
insultingfilms10116 October 2022This movie has made me lose all happiness in my life i have no words about this movie just dont watch it you dont need it in your life like actually ever, i would rather do ANYTHING else in life than watch this movie. Someone needs to sit tom six down and have the longest talk about his mental health ever after making these movies. What was he thinking I have no other words for this movie other than just dont watch it dont its not worth the suffering, obviously its fake and not real but oh my gosh is it so horrible. I now have to go bleach my eyes out. Just be careful watching this movie and probably skip this one, you are not missing out on anything i promise.
-
planktonrules7 February 2019I am not a horror fan...or, at least I am not a fan of gore horror...the type horror that mostly consists of folks being hacked apart for the audience's amusement. So, the fact I'd even try watching "The Human Centipede II" is strange. Well, it all relates to one of my passions...trying to see every film on IMDB's infamous Bottom 100 List...and this film made the list. However, I must point out that I never finished it, as the film seemed sick...and I felt poorer about myself for having viewed what I saw. This could, most likely, be why this movie made the list....it was just too sick, too gratuitous and was attempting to make torture entertaining.
In this follow-up to a film I never saw, some dumpy loser named Martin has taken to copying the crap perpetrated in the first movie. And, after seeing him work people over with a tire iron, shoot people and the like, well I guess I'd had enough. I made it to about halfway through the movie when I determined I'd seen enough.
Is there anything positive I could say about this film? Well, you could show it to a perspective spouse. If they like it, dump them and run....so for this purpose, and only this purpose, would I recommend you see this sick film. -
kvatter2 March 2013Remember when the Supreme Court was trying to determine if porn had any social redeeming value? They should have pointed to this as an example of just such a thing. How is one to find anything of worth in this humorless, continually sadistic, moral-less, repetitive, uncreative piece of something? In a nutshell, a very odd looking, obese character (with a sweating problem just to make him more distasteful than he already is) is infatuated with this director's previous film, taking copious notes on it. He is inspired to emulate the doctor of the previous movie by repeatedly clubbing innocents over the head with a crowbar and/or shooting them and then holding them all captive in a dank garage. Why these characters do not aid each other in the many hours that he is not around is puzzling. They are bound with a few pieces of duct tape. It would take a minimal effort to release the person next to you. Instead, these characters just squirm around on the floor until the wheezing, asthmatic can return to do something else sadistic to them. But, this "film" is not about thinking. It's about seeing how many disturbing images can be stuffed into 90 mins of space. Apparently, this director is striving for some sort of title by seeing just how worthless a product he can put out and still get others to pay for it. (I didn't pay) Poor man seems a bit disturbed himself.
-
dreamingskychild6 June 2022I've seen pretty much every horror movie out there, but this one truly disturbed me. I had to keep looking away, and I wish I didn't watch it at all. The movie was definitely successful in it's goal of being highly disturbing, but for me it was done too well and too real. I wouldn't recommend this to anyone because of how messed up it is. The acting was done well, but again, too much so that it felt truly sickening and upsetting to watch.
-
guitarherofreak3 November 2011Okay, so I'm a fan of the first film, due to its originality, I had high hopes for this one, purely because of its controversy here in the UK, I am quite the extreme horror fan too, before this, I watched A Serbian Film, but a heavily cut version, like the film I'm reviewing, so lets get to it.
Whilst watching the build up to the operation scene, my thoughts were "I don't see why this was banned", because lets be fair, the first hour is just plain and simple acting, once up to the scene where *spoiler*Martin knocks out Miss Yennie*spoiler end*, I was thinking, "oh god, am I ready for this?" and sure enough the gore was top notch, the special effects were pretty impressive and the acting by the lead part (Laurence R. Harvey) was fantastic, I will admit there was some parts where I covered my eyes, but that's a good thing! Horror films are supposed to do that!
I rated this 8/10 because of its originality, and the shock factor was high, definitely one of the most goriest films I've seen, and in conclusion, this film should NOT have been banned.
Fingers crossed part three will be equally as good -
george_veck21 October 2013Well we have Martin, the 'protagonist' who is mentally incapacitated and is abused mentally by his mother, physically by his neighbour and sexually by his doctor, who somehow works as a security guard in a car park. How he would get a job in real life beats me.
Despite the poor character development and non-existent script this is a chilling and disturbing title, one of the only horrors I have liked. I found myself much more intrigued and drawn in to this film than the first Human centipede, because of the unpredictability of the main man Martin compared to Dieter Laser in the first film.
I can understand why this film only has a score of 4/10 on this because of the non existent script etc but do not be put off by the low score, if your a fan of horror or enjoyed the first Human Centipede then your bound to like this.
7/10. -
Flicked6 November 2011I saw this out of plain old curiosity after hearing on a morning radio program how it was banned in a country or multiple countries I believe. I'm not sure what the reasoning could be to make this film. I'd like to have given it half a star, but it would only allow one; the one star is to credit any skill it took to operate and pan the camera, and assemble a sound and editing team that made this appear like a polished moving picture, at least in the most mechanical sense. Aside from that, this was the pinnacle of mediocrity in terms of anything that would seek to claim itself as art in the remotest sense of the term. The positive out of this is the fact that I can't wait to watch more movies that are full of decency, taste, tact, you name it. If this film was designed for a reaction such as mine, then I almost regret writing this so as not to offer any credit to the director. Never any redeeming value. Avoid at all costs, unless you wanted to get the unexplained bout of curiosity off of your chest.
-
TedStixonAKAMaximumMadness17 March 2012There's really no way to describe writer/director Tom Six's "The Human Centipede II (Full Sequence)" on IMDb. It's so grotesque, violent, over-sexualized and exploitive that it's near impossible to describe it in general, let alone here, where reviews should be "PG" rated. So I will try my best.
"Human Centipede II" is a strange hybrid of meta-fiction and satire of itself and of the first film (and is, to its credit, quite funny in a very "gallows" humor kind of way), while also being an extraordinarily grotesque and depraved "body horror film" at the same time. It's one of those movies that is borderline parody of its own concept (again, in a meta-fiction way), in the same vain as "Gremlins 2" or "The Princess Bride."
Essentially the plot is as follows- "Martin", a mentally handicapped man whom has suffered from rampant abused his whole life, becomes fascinated by the original "Human Centipede" film (which is a movie-within-a-movie in this sequel), and begins to kidnap various people in order to re- create the grotesque experiment from the original film.
I will not spoil anything else, but the film in its second half, is essentially a much more grotesque remake of the first film, albeit with different characters and different motivations.
I really must give credit where it is due. Tom Six has crafted a beautiful film, at least in terms of visuals. The black and white photography has a fantastic contrast and despite being stylized, has an iconic look to it. I also found his direction in terms of camera placement and movement, though a bit over-reliant on the "shaky cam syndrome", to be vibrant, kinetic and clear. The film is also well- edited and the atmosphere just reeks of tension and humor.
Like the first film, the acting is a mixed bag. Laurence Harvey, whom portrays the villainous "Martin" is actually a revelation, delivering a character that so far as I can remember, doesn't speak one work, yet manages to garner a lot of sympathy and horror. He's clearly unable to comprehend (or just unwilling to) the dramatic extent of what he does in this film, and his troubled past, which is alluded to, makes you feel sorry for him despite his sins. Ashlynne Yennie, one of the stars of the first film, returns, this time playing herself, as she is kidnapped by Martin due to her connection to the original film. Other centipede members (12 in all) are played by newcomers, and though I won't go into all of them, they are all adequate, though some sore thumbs bring the score down.
The script, as I said, is an extreme and bizarre example of meta-fiction with elements of satire, parody, body-horror, family drama and many other genres thrown in. It's a compilation of differing (and sometimes conflicting) ideas. And it is interesting, though the script suffers at times due to disjointed pacing, clunky dialog and an over-reliance on shocks.
All of that being said- I will address the one thing this movie does extremely well, and at times perhaps too well. The gore. This movie is one of the few films I've seen that made me have to look away. I'm a huge gore-hound, and I love my gory movies (I was able to sit through "August Underground", "Cannibal Holocaust", "Salo" and other extreme films), but this film took it to a disturbing new high... or low, depending on how you look at it. Featuring everything from realistic portrayals of teeth being tapped out with hammers, to skin being flayed and stapled, to depictions of graphic sexual violence, this movie will make your skin crawl, and may prove to be too much for even seasoned veterans. Be warned going in.
That all being said, I think fans of horror should see this film at least once. I've seen it twice, and I still don't know whether I love it or hate it. It's one of the most disturbing films I've ever seen, but it also has a highly enjoyable self-awareness and sense of humor, and I think that's what sets it apart from other extreme films. I'm giving this a 5 out of 10, because I don't know what else to give it.
(EDIT: Upon two more viewings, my affections have grown for this film, and I updated my score to suit its entertainment value and satirical hilarity!) -
gavin69429 October 2012Inspired by the fictional Dr. Heiter, disturbed loner Martin (Laurence R. Harvey) dreams of creating a 12-person centipede and sets out to realize his sick fantasy.
I loved this movie, and I think it is probably receiving lower ratings than it should because it will not appeal to wide audiences. First of all, you obviously have to be a fan of the first film, so that narrows down the audience for this one. And then, you have to appreciate the fact this is a fictional story referencing a fictional story.
Finally, I think you have to grasp that this is a very dark comedy -- possibly the darkest comedy ever made. Is it a horror film? Absolutely. It contains one of the most terrifying scenarios possible. But it is clear from certain elements (such as the brown splat on the screen and the psychiatrist) that there is a dark, twisted humor here, too.
Laurence Harvey is incredible, and plays the part of Martin flawlessly. You might even feel sorry for him, or have a certain sense of compassion. Is he sick? Yes. But he fully cognizant of what he is doing? It would appear not.
Recommended for fans of the first film. Everyone else, this is not for you. -
I just don't get what's the big deal about the original "The Human Centipede" movie. Sure, it had a very disgusting premise, but other than that, it was a pretty generic horror movie, with dumb victims that are unable to do anything and a cartoonish villain (Personally, I found Dieter Laser performance in the first film so cheesy and over the top that I wasn't able to take it seriously)
While this sequel tries to improve the flaws from the first film giving it some kind of "arthouse"/David Lynch wannabe treatment, the final result still leaves too much to be desired, mostly because of the absolutely terrible script and the bland and one-dimensional characters. "The Human Centipede II (Full Sequence)" starts with a shameless act of self-promotion from Tom Six, who makes the main character of this sequel a fanboy of the original "The Human Centipede" film. Why somebody would be so obsessed with such a forgettable and generic horror movie is a mystery to me, but to each his own, I guess.
So this guy wants to be like the villain of the first movie, and then he tries to make his own Human Centipede capturing a random group of people, and all of them are easily captured by the fanboy (Seriously, why so many horror movies make the victim characters so dumb and incompetent? I mean, all the people who are captured to make the new human centipede are so unbelievably dumb and unable to have any kind of proper reaction when they are in trouble. Also, there are no cops in this world, or at least somebody able to realize that there is an abandoned baby inside one car) and then we have some glimpses of the pathetic life of this fanboy in order to understand why somebody would be obsessed with such a lame movie as The Human Centipede in first place.
Those glimpses of the pathetic life of the fanboy are the best parts of the movie, because at least in those scenes he doesn't act as the generic invincible villain cliché that could be found in almost every horror film from the recent times. Other than that, there is nothing of interest here.
Stupid. This movie is stupid. It tries too hard to be "shocking" and "edgy" that it ends failing in every other aspect. It is boring, uninteresting and lame, but at least it tried to be better than its predecessor. And I appreciate that. -
You might be taken aback by my comedic summary regarding my vote to "The Human Centipede II (Full Sequence)". I guess it's my way of dealing with this horrifying and utterly bleak film, which must be at least partly related to why black comedy exists; people need to amuse themselves and others to cope when it comes to something like this film. It could easily be why the first one is parodied on "South Park" in the enjoyable episode "HUMANCENTiPAD". In the New York Times interview "A More Perfect Union", writer and director Tom Six himself indicated this film has humour, like maybe when there's thunder and lightning when Martin, the main character, gives an angry facial expression to someone. I admit I kind of laughed at that, but I don't think I laughed at anything else. However, I did say things out loud a few times, like probably "Oh God" in a dismaying manner. More appropriate, I think.
Martin is a demented, obese, and non-speaking man, played very well by newcomer Laurence R. Harvey. Martin works as a security guard in an underground parking garage and has a sexual obsession with the first film. Yup, the first film, which Tom Six also wrote and directed. However, whereas that one has three people sewn together ass to mouth, Martin sets out to have *twelve* for his human centipede. Why? For his own entertainment and sexual pleasure. Talk about an unusual sequel. He violently kidnaps some people in the parking garage. There's not a single bystander around, for whatever reason. I'm not sure if I buy that, but then again, I don't know how much realism Tom Six was going for. Martin keeps his centipede victims in a warehouse and eventually combines ten of them together, which makes my summary even more suitable.
"The Human Centipede II (Full Sequence)" is in black and white. If it was in colour, especially with little or even no altering, the film would've still been bleak, of course, but as it is, boy, is it bleak. In a good way, nonetheless. It *sort of* reminds me of "Eraserhead", a David Lynch film I really admire. Both are eerie, weird, in black and white, don't have much dialogue, involve an infant or two, and have each main character living in an apartment. "Eraserhead" is weirder and definitely not as violent, though. If David Lynch saw this film, I wonder what he would think about it.
If I look away when watching a film, it's usually because the film doesn't have me interested and not because there's something way too repulsive happening on the screen for me to even look at. With "The Human Centipede II (Full Sequence)", I never looked away, though I almost did because it did get a bit too boring. Nonetheless, it's mostly effective with its unorthodox storytelling, grungy and downbeat look, and the acting. (I had a bit of trouble believing the couple at the beginning, but that's a nitpick.)
There's a lot of human suffering and it largely comes from the victims in the warehouse. Even though they seriously lack characterization, I did care about them, at least somewhat. No sane person wants to go through their ordeal. I should mention I really enjoyed the first film. Even though the victims also lack characterization, they have more going for them and I strangely felt more sorry and supportive for them. It's probably because their pain wasn't overwhelming, they're main characters, and there's more focus on them potentially escaping. Here, the story is told mostly from Martin's perspective. He's definitely not somebody to root for. Why is he twisted? What's wrong with his sexuality? His sexual abuse by his father, whom we don't see in person, probably has something to do with those questions. Probably abuse by his mother, as well, whom he lives with. Yeah, this film hardly explores his past.
How come we never see Martin talk? I don't know. I actually don't consider it a flaw, however. I'm so used to main characters talking in films and with the different way it's done here, I didn't mind. He's implicitly characterized, but at the same time, his behaviour is pretty unsurprising. I don't think main characters necessarily have to be likable as if they're a close friend, but they should be interesting, one way or another. It actually seems like we're suppose to feel sorry for him at times, like when his mother lays blame on him to an angry neighbour over something *she* did. I guess Martin deserves some pity there, but when it comes to the film as a whole, you'd probably be wishing him death or having him locked away in a mental institution. I pick the latter. Maybe it'd be interesting if his past was explored and if he used to normally talk, what his dialogue was like, but as the film is, I'm okay with him *as a character*.
I didn't like or dislike "The Human Centipede II (Full Sequence)". It's well shot, even though shots are depressing as hell, especially in black and white. I doubt the film is trying to say anything about someone who's inspired by violence in films to use violence in real life. I don't think the film absolutely should, either. In the aforementioned New York Times interview, Tom Six said that such a person is already insane. He's probably right. In an interesting way, this film ends ambiguously, which I won't spoil how, but the third and final film that's in the works will apparently begin with this film's ending, just like how this one begins with the ending of the first. This trilogy is Mr. Six's film centipede. What the heck is he gonna do with the last one? Maybe it should be a musical.