Ginî piggu 2: Chiniku no hana

My friend showed me this film, which he had on video. He is a huge fan of gore movies in general so I have seen my fair share of them. NONE of them compare to this film. This is by far the most repulsive film I have ever seen. I consists of a Japanese girl being slowly dismembered, which seems to take over an hour to do.

Mind you, I am not someone who winces at bloody movies. I am a big Peter Jackson fan, and enjoy Fulci's films. This film is nothing like those. It's horribly realistic and sadistic. Supposedly, this film was investigated by the FBI because it was suspected to be a real snuff film.

I do not recommend this movie. Anyone who sees it, I hope it is by accident. The effects are done brilliantly, and are quite convincing. Unless you are studying how to do impressive gore-effects, or are a sadist, try to avoid this film.

I'm going to say something that I've seen very few reviews anywhere say: Guinea Pig: Flowers of Flesh and Blood really, simply is NOT that gory. Do not misunderstand me. I'm not one of the countless reviewers who are complaining this movie didn't look realistic. Some of those people wouldn't think a real body being cut up looked realistic if they didn't know it was real. What I'm saying is, the actual events depicted on screen simply weren't all that gory or sick. Not by today's standards.

It's a sad little world when you read the internet nerds who hide behind a cheesy screen name and trash modern torture movies because they're not gory enough for their supposed juggernaut balls. Most of them speak with elegance, spouting off the names of obscure Japanese movies that are "So sick!" and "Make Hostel look like a family movie!" Put simply: They're almost always wrong. What's sadder than that is that most people don't realize their wrong, even after they watch oh-so-sick obscure movie and shyly realize they've seen worse on the Saw promo posters, but would never admit it because it would mean going against the self-proclaimed film buffs.

That is why I'm here to stand against the crowd and say what needs to be said. Flowers of Flesh and Blood is not the goriest movie of all time. For someone who's seen modern torture movies, it's not even that gory at all, and here is why . . .

First and foremost, as has been stated by almost everyone, this movie has no plot. It's pure fake snuff from open to close. I have absolutely nothing against that at all. While it was too tame for me to fully enjoy, the lack of a plot made the film very intense and easy to sit through without getting bored. On the other hand, however, the lack of a plot made the film seem a lot more brutal than it actually was. If you were to take any of the five Saw films and cut out every minute except the pure gore, all of them would seem just as intense, if not more intense, than Flowers of Flesh and Blood. If you were to add forty more minutes of plot to Flowers of Flesh and Blood, it would seem just just as tame as all the Hollywood torture films that the self-proclaimed film buffs all call tame. Don't mistake intensity for gore.

Second, Flowers of Flesh and Blood isn't something you can just walk to the local video store and get five copies of. It's nowhere even slightly as well-known as Saw and Hostel. The obscurity is something self-proclaimed film buffs have always fed off of, and if this were something you could easily pick up, the same self-proclaimed film buffs wouldn't even consider it gory. You see, it's not about content, it's all about lack of popularity that builds a false hype. Likewise, whenever someone says, for example, that Ichi the Killer is "The sickest movie I've ever seen!", the self-proclaimed film buffs all jump on his back and say they found it tame, even if they really didn't. Then they say something like, "But, man, go watch Flowers of Flesh and Blood—now there is a sick movie!" Again, the lesser known name build the hype.

Third, the gore content is simply uncreative. Standard limbs are severed as in every other standard gore movie ever. The only difference here is that the cameraman goes into ultra close-ups every few seconds to give the illusion that this movie is actually doing something that hasn't been done thousands of times.There were at least ten spots in the movie where my own mind went into things that could have been done to make the scene four times as gory, but the director doesn't even have half that imagination or balls. He stuck to the generic, seen-it-a-thousand-times gore scenes. That alone makes this inferior to the Saw and Hostel series as far as gore goes, not to mention inferior to the countless other modern films like The Decent and Inside. Point blank: there is nothing here that is sadistic or even that gory. Sadism implies that gore has creativity, and that is a total joke here. Gore implies that something is brutal and bloody, and, as I've said, compared to modern movies, this is fairly average.

Don't believe the hype that this is oh-so-gory.

On a technical level, the acting from the main villain a joke, as I think it was meant to be. The acting from the woman was very believable. The ultra close-ups became cheesy. The gore effects are nothing compared to the French gore film Inside, but I never once thought they lacked enough realism to become laughable, as some reviewers stated. You have to remember, also, that most of the reviewers who say they laughed at this movie are most likely saying that to overlook that they have weak stomachs. It's common.

On an entertainment level, I found this movie to be very much worth a watch, and very entertaining. I give it credit for the intensity. The only plot point in the film, that the killer only kills women, is a outright cliché, but it doesn't bear anything on the actual film.

Overall, Flowers of Flesh and Blood is a fun little torture film that lacks anything truly disturbing or gory, but is worth the watch if you're a gore fan. I'm really just sick of people hyping this to be so much gorier than the Hollywood norm, because it simply is not. The first five minutes of Saw IV alone, the autopsy scene, had every single thing this movie had. When it comes to the world of gore, this is the single most overrated film of all time.

4/10

Gave it a three because it was actually really well made but jfc never watching that again. As someone whose sadly seen some real things due to staying in hospitals, they did pretty well. Once again from being in a er hospital I've seen a severed finger and leg, the part where her leg was cut in half looked pretty realistic, though def didn't feel nice to see something like that again. If you've got any trauma relating to torture or blood or if you're just a normal person I wouldn't advise watching it.

Guinea Pig II: The Flower of Flesh and Blood (Hideshi Hino, 1985)

Hideshi Hino is, simply, one of Japan's finest exports. Writer, graphic artist, rabid media critic, all-around fun guy, but for as long as civilization exists he will be best remember as the guy who drove Charlie Sheen to the FBI.

Sheen saw _Guinea Pig II: The Flower of Flesh and Blood_ in 1990 at a party he was attending, and he was convinced that it was a true snuff film, so he took the copy and gave it to the local branch of the FBI. Large-scale investigations in both American and Japan followed, culminating ultimately in (a) the finding that GP2, like all other supposed snuff films, isn't real, and (b) Hino exploding in popularity in the United States (it's not a coincidence that an American graphic arts publisher started releasing Hino books in America in 1992, all of which I recommend very highly as a fantastic glimpse into the collective subconscious of post-WW2 Japan). The darker underbelly of the investigation resulted in the banning of Guinea Pig in Japan. To date, no distributor has picked up and reprinted the films officially (though the ban has not stopped new ones from leaking out, and the series now stands at nine), and so when one finds copies of Guinea Pig films, they are often fourth- and fifth-generation dubs of questionable quality at best. I have my doubts as to whether even owning them in the United States is legal, but one assumes that if it weren't, the sellers on ebay would be arrested pretty quick... but I'm relying on supposition here. (If I disappear quickly, you know why.)

Yesterday I received a third-generation copy of II and III (see below). GP2 is the most infamous of the series. It is also the shortest, clocking in at a scant forty-two minutes. It has no plot to speak of. A woman is abducted by a man dressed as a fourteenth-century Samurai warrior and systematically dismembered. And while, if you know the basics of film composition and realize that the cut shots could not have been done in the ways they are if this were actually being filmed in real-time, there are a few points where the best thing one can do is to sit and repeat to oneself "this is not real." The effects are, quite simply, spectacular (within the framework of what's going on), and I was pleasantly-- if anything about this can possibly be said to be pleasant-- surprised by the fact that other than the differing genders of the two players in this twisted, brutal sturm und drang (and much more drang than sturm, if you translate it literally), any sexuality involved is read into it by the viewer.

Guinea Pig 2 is not something to be enjoyed; it is something to test the boundaries of one's endurance. How is it possible to rate such an experience? And do you really want something like this in your home? In my case the answer is an unqualified "yes," but then, I'm depraved. Going strictly on the quality of my copy and the shattering effectiveness of the film at what it sets out to do, I'm forced to give it *** 1/2.

Well, I did it. I found and watched all 42 minutes of "Guinea Pig 2: Flowers of Flesh and Blood". Seeing how the series seems focused on gore (although the fourth installment which apparently features a mermaid sounds disgusting and yet oddly artistic, unlike the rest of them) and is largely unconnected I went for the 'accomplishment' of having seen what is supposedly the most extreme one. Also the favorite film of the first five in the series, prominently displayed among notorious serial killer Tsutomu Miyazaki's 5000-strong video collection, and supposedly the inspiration for his own crimes. When Charlie Sheen came across a battered VHS copy of this in the late 80's he was convinced it was real and reported it to the FBI. Eventually the makers of the film had to prove the effects were fake (as Deodato did with "Cannibal Holocaust").

As a look into the darkest corners of the human mind this is worth a look. But is it really? Can't you just read up on some serial killers or something if you want to be 'disturbed'. Watching this was ultimately a fairly worthless experience, and outside of the undoubtedly impressive (though certainly fake-looking) special effects, there is really absolutely nothing else to recommend with this 'film'. Clearly the cinematically illiterate who claim that this is some sort of great art film are nincompoops? I mean, come on. It's 42 minutes of dismemberment. The special effects are fairly admirable, but there is literally nothing else of worth here.

I sat through it. I suppose that this is something I thought I should see for myself due to its notoriety and reputation. Not that I was expecting it to be good, but I at least thought it would be worthwhile. Don't fool yourselves, this is on the level of a high school student film technically, there is no 'writing' to speak of (well, except some rambling about blood resembling flowers or some nonsense like that), and the 'actor' in the lead role spends most of the 'movie' looking pretty goofy. The abducted woman, 'guinea pig' if you will, is asleep most of the time. There is nothing here except something for fledgling serial killers to watch while sharpening their knives. I'm not dismissive of 'shock' films in general, some of them can be genuinely well-made and reasonably compelling films. This simply isn't one. It's absolute garbage, cinematic puke. Truly one of the worst films ever made, and my hatred comes not from being 'offended'. Watching this isn't watching somebody being tortured, it's torturing yourself.

0/10