So, the BBFC has rejected The Human Centipede II – effectively banning it in the UK, as without a certificate from the BBFC it can’t be legally distributed in this country.
In a press release, the BBFC goes into great detail about why the film has been refused a certificate. Be warned: it’s pretty grim reading. In conclusion, the BBFC says:
“There is little attempt to portray any of the victims in the film as anything other than objects to be brutalised, degraded and mutilated for the amusement and arousal of the central character, as well as for the pleasure of the audience. There is a strong focus throughout on the link between sexual arousal and sexual violence and a clear association between pain, perversity and sexual pleasure. It is the Board’s conclusion that the explicit presentation of the central character’s obsessive sexually violent fantasies is in breach of its Classification Guidelines and poses a real, as opposed to a fanciful, risk that harm is likely to be caused to potential viewers.”
I’m trying to get my thoughts in order about this, to come up with a coherent position on it (particularly because Sarah Ditum asked me to weigh in for her Comment is Free article). On the one hand, the BBFC decision sounds reasonable: this is the job the BBFC exists to do, and it doesn’t sound like they’ve done this lightly. On the other – do we have to do this all over again? The idea that horror movies might have a corrupting influence on vulnerable minds is hardly a new one, and it feels like we’ve only just finished discussing what Saw, Hostel, and the whole “torture porn” wave that followed meant for our collective morality.
I’m not really a fan of the trend for “extreme” horror movies – but when I say that, I mean that I actively avoided A Serbian Film, The Human Centipede, and Antichrist. I am, though, a massive fan of the Saw franchise, and I think that the first Hostel film is one of the best horror movies ever made. “Extreme”, to me, maybe doesn’t mean the same thing that it does to you. Or your mum. (Or my mum!) I’m not a violent person, I pass out at the sight of (real) blood, and yet I love horror movies and watch a lot of them; I don’t think I’ve been particularly desensitised or morally compromised by these films. I don’t think watching The Human Centipede II would do that, either; it’d make me feel sick, and uncomfortable, and maybe angry, but I don’t think it’d do me any lasting psychological damage.
And yet… I haven’t seen the film, and the BBFC examiners have. If we think they’re wrong about this, we need to maybe reassess what they’re there for in the first place. Personally, I’d like to see a system that offered more information about what films contained – a series of warnings, perhaps? – so that individuals can make a more informed choice about what they want to watch. The current age restrictions seem kind of arbitrary, and the guidance info is usually pretty useless. I’m uncomfortable with the idea of banning something because it’s been deemed immoral; morality is a tricky, slippery thing, and once you start making pronouncements on what is and isn’t moral, where do you stop? And what does art have to do with morality, anyway?
The Human Centipede II isn’t a film I want to stand up for. Personally, I think it sounds horrible and I have no desire to watch it. But should that mean no-one should be able to? I’m not convinced.







Sometimes, rarely, I’ll fall completely in love with a film. And it’s usually not a perfect film, or even a great film. But when you’re falling in love, superficial flaws hardly matter. I am utterly smitten with Jennifer’s Body, and I have been ever since I first saw the trailer.