
I am bothered by movies, such as “Saw” and “Hostel”, that, to me, serve no purpose other than to depict the extremes of human pain and cruelty. I confess to having never watched a film from either of those series, nor have I watched a Hannibal Lector movie, or a Chucky, Freddy Krueger or Jason movie (which, I imagine, at this point seem almost quaint in their depictions of cruelty), so it is not only what is depicted on the screen, which I haven’t even seen, that disturbs me. It is the very fact that such movies exist, and that they pull in audiences. To me, they are a depraved sub-genre of moviemaking that elevates torture to their prime, even sole, raison d’etre (indeed, they have been dubbed “torture porn” and “gorno” by critics), and that bothers me. Are people really entertained by all that blood and gore? And if that is not the right word, what IS the experience that they crave, as they settle their butts into aisle seats? As to the people who make such films, why on earth do they spend precious hours of their lives depicting demoralizing, black spectacles of the last things that any of us would wish to experience, or even wish upon our worst enemies? Oh, believe me, I know the obvious answer to my question (they DO make money after all, and frankly, how hard can they be to make? We all know what we don’t wish to experience; all one has to do is pick up a camera and film that!), but is even money worth the de-humanizing that I feel must go on in the process of creating such films?
I am not arguing against the presence of violence in films. Indeed, some of my personal favorites, such as “The Godfather” and “Goodfellas”, contain numerous scenes that are not for the squeamish. If push came to shove, I could probably even be called upon to defend Wes Craven’s notorious, ultra-violent 70’s sleeper, “Last House on the Left” ( which took its plot from Bergman’s “The Virgin Spring” and borrowed heavily from Kubrick’s “A Clockwork Orange”). One might well ask, what’s the difference? Well, in the case of LHOTL, this was an amateurish film by a freshman director, depicting amateurish villains who epitomize the dumb, self absorbed, amoral, societal outcasts we can easily imagine committing the atrocious crimes we see onscreen (and read about in the papers). They are not the incarnations of sadism one finds in slick gorno movies, creatures right out of our nightmares who are intelligent and irredeemably evil, sparing no expense to devise the most ingenious and horrific methods by which to dispense with their victims, for no other purpose than the pleasure that they get from doing so. To arrive at an understanding of the villains of the gorno movies, to place them in any sort of context, we need to go back to a French nobleman from the Age of Enlightenment whose writing was so over the top that he provides the very name for the “ism” that is out and out cruelty toward another living being.
Sade’s “libertines” (one should not refer to them as “villains”, when to him they were heroes) were precisely the kind of monsters we see in todays horror movies. Smarter and more powerful than their victims, they operated without restraint, and with no other purpose than to inflict pain. In Sade’s stories, the only way to escape victimhood was to allow yourself to become corrupted by your torturers, to become just as merciless and sadistic as them. These were the only triumphs he would allow in his nightmarish fables, that some would “liberate” themselves from any moral or empathetic impulses, which he insisted came from society, the real “villain” he himself was at war with. One can read Sade’s stories and accept them as he intended, as all-out assaults on society and civilization, on anything that limited individuals from behaving exactly as they themselves chose to. But that would naturally lead one to ask, if people could do anything they wanted to, why would they do that? Looking deeper, I believe that one can find a more pathological motivation, one which is readily on display in today’s torture porn movies as well; a deep seated hatred of the human body.
Oh, Sade loathed bodies! He wanted them sliced, diced, beaten, pulled apart, you name it. The one thing he didn’t want was for them to keep their original, native form, to be allowed to go on about their ways in peace. To him, an intact body was a challenge, perhaps even an affront, to his aesthetic. He treated them with nothing but the utmost disdain. And yet, it is telling that for all the descriptions of cruelty he filled page after feverish page with, he was particularly vicious toward the parts of the body that give birth to and nurture other bodies. Although there is no question that his writings and ideas have spiced up the sex lives of numerous couples throughout the years (and hey, whatever gets you through the night…), in the works themselves sex was anything but a life affirming, life celebrating activity. Genitalia, breasts, pregnant women, and fetuses are mercilessly tortured and destroyed by Sade’s libertines. The family itself is attacked viciously. In his stories, fathers rape their daughters, and corrupted daughters do unspeakable things to their mothers. The very reality of biological life seems to infuriate him.
What’s going on here? In the face of such depravity, one naturally searches for answers. Even if the knowledge goes nowhere toward ending man’s inhumanity to man, we strive to somehow make sense of things so dark and twisted they seem to defy explanation, for the sake of our own sanity if nothing else. My belief is that we see in Sade’s writing a psychological phenomenon that has its roots in the very nature of our sentience. It is the mind’s hatred of the body, because it can suffer, and take the mind along with it as it does so.
It is hard to imagine anything more painful than being eaten alive from the hind legs forward, and yet this is a fate that befalls thousands of our fellow creatures, in forests and savannas, every day. The vast majority of human beings will come to far more benign ends, but the important distinction is that we are well aware of what could happen to us, if we are not careful, or just plain unlucky. The fact is that, unlike animals, we can think about things happening to us that are every bit as frightening and unwelcome as the things that are shown in the torture movies. It is with our minds that we think about them, but it is our bodies that we imagine experiencing the suffering. We are the only species that has a distinct separation, a schism even, between mind and body. We can actually live lives, of a kind, outside our bodies. No other creature can. We can daydream, create stories, make songs, paint pictures, have sexual fantasies, relive memories vividly, conceptualize, invent, etc. We can easily imagine a life involving no body at all! Indeed, we have created science fiction stories where our minds are placed inside computers, thereby living eternal, pain-free lives. People who are stricken with cancer or other long term, debilitating and painful illnesses frequently describe themselves as “prisoners” in their bodies. What I am positing is that there is an element of human consciousness that chronically feels this way. Sade was expressing this, first and foremost, I believe, though he himself was perhaps unaware of it and presumedly would have denied it. It is ironic that he, due to his atrocious behavior as well as his writing (which outraged the Emperor Napolean), spent much of his life as a prisoner, in jails and mental asylums, creating through his mind an outward experience of the very thoughts that drove his writing.
The mind is frightened by the amount of pain, seemingly limitless, that the body it is merged with can experience. Although our central nervous system has evolved the sensation of pain to keep us from burning or bleeding or freezing to death, this impeccable biological system renders us horrendously vulnerable. So averse to its demise is our body that it keeps pain sensations active even as we lie helpless, and crushed, under the rubble of an earthquake, or trapped inside a burning room, on the off chance that we will somehow manage to get ourselves out of our predicament. Isn’t it plausible that our minds, aware of the stubbornness of the body, and its survival-at-any-cost imperative, would develop resentment against it? Why can’t we shut the pain mechanism down when we want to (apparently some yogis have developed this very ability, but it takes years of rigorous training)? When there is no hope of escape? Every king, dictator, Grand Inquisitor and mafioso throughout history has exploited this “flaw” in the body’s design. In fact, it is impossible to imagine the worst forms of government even existing without it, as such regimes are propped up by the fear they induce in the common folk. All of that suffering, down through the ages; no wonder the mind is pissed!
And so, the mind acts this out, through the mediums that it has developed, the “art” that is Sade’s writing and today’s gorno movies. Each time the mind, represented by Sade’s libertines or Hannibal Lector, or any of the demonic, merciless,ingenious psychopaths who fill our screens as well as our nightmares, gleefully tortures to death somebody else’s body, it has its revenge, momentarily. That’s the experience viewers are after, I feel. Though I am disturbed by such movies, and by the large following they have, I ultimately see them as merely symptomatic, and don’t expect them to go away. They, or some similar manifestation, will be with us so long as we have the ability to contemplate, and fear, our fate.
Wow – what amazing thoughts and reflections! I admit I pay NO attention to these sorts of films or readings at all because they creep me out from what little I do know about them.
Violence is very much a part of my history. It has not tended to be of this nature, precisely, but is there really a difference? I’ve had five friends and acquaintances murdered, all of it political in origin – at least ostensibly. Who knows what went through the heads of the murderers at the moment? I do understand killing in self defense, but the idea of wantonly taking the lives of people for any reason other than that sickens me, and I simply do not understand it. I’m a great fan of mysteries (books more than film) but stay away from stalker, serial killer, sadistic sorts of plot lines. I am nauseated by the very idea that someone is driven by, yes KQ sex AND violence, to harm, cause terror and suffering, mutilate – all the things of which humans are so capable.
I do think horror films tend to proliferate when life itself is uncertain since movies provide some measure of phony “control” over the relentless drive of some seemingly all-powerful force to do harm. Generally films have some survival outcome (I’ve never seen the “Saw” films so don’t know about that) wherein a central character triumphs and lives. In their own weird way, isn’t that a message of hope in an otherwise dark and dangerous world?
But fascination with death and suffering baffles me. I hope it’s like slowing down past a horrible car crash – I think it’s “there but for the grace of God go I.” We try to find both intimations of our own mortality AND the hope we’re never in those poor people’s situation by looking and thinking and wondering and gawking.
When I hear kids laugh at some splatter scene or violent confrontation or explosions and mayhem in films, I wonder if I’m not wrong and that people are hideously desensitized to the pain of others. I hope not. I hope slasher films are some kind of catharsis and not a “how to” guide. But my own experience tells me that the right “how to” in the wrong hands can have devastating consequences.
I don’t think everything has to be Pollyanna, but for me, I can’t any longer see films that have no hope or are violent for violence alone. One of the best films ever was “Gallipoli” which is horrible in its death and destruction, but it was powerful in its critique of the wastes of human life in war. I’m glad I saw it. The rest – the wallowing in the pain and terror of others, especially women, for nothing more than sheer gore – not for me, thanks. Death is permanent, and pain and suffering are all too present in reality for those to be even remotely interesting. I admit – I do not understand.
You know another weird movie that involves loathing of the human body? Eraserhead. Really weird, creepy movie. It has images and sounds you’ll never forget.
I was thinking about that one too. Really, really wild.
For some reason I always fell asleep during Eraserhead. I’ve never seen it through in one shot. I find the film soothing, kind of like the white noise of a vacuum cleaner!
I just remember the body of the baby.
😆
Yes! And Lynch made it not long after he became a father. So the “baby” in the movie kind of tells you where his head was at! But, hey, we all can relate to waking up at three in the morning (again!) to feed a screaming little potato creature, at least those of us who have the experience. Thankfully, it gets better.
Ironically, that “baby” went on to make an even viler movie than any her father ever did, “Boxing Helena” (again, just assuming because I haven’t actually watched it, and wouldn’t if you paid me)
You know, I’m gonna be a heretic. I loved Mulholland Drive, Lost Highway, and I need to see his others (like Wild at Heart – and Twin Peaks stuff, given its setting especially), but Eraserhead didn’t do it for me. I had to keep reminding myself how crazy it would have been when it came out, but I was left kinda – okay… it was more monotonous than anything. Perhaps that was part of the point, though. My point is, is that it should have, on paper, been the very kind of movie I would love – but I ended up feeling it was overhyped.
Blue Velvet is my favorite Lynch film.
😳 Please don’t read through all of the comments then.
“Twin Peaks” was the most boring thing I have seen on the TeeVee. I wish that spaced out directors who want their inner demons on film, would at least try a little harder so that the audience gets a whiff of what on earth it is they waffling on about.
Yeah, I totally want to see Blue Velvet, too. I’ve seen YouTube clips of it.
Dennis Hopper’s greatest performance.
Then he turned into a Republican.
“Ffffffftt — Mommy!”
I loved Mulholland Drive!
Me too! Naomi Watts was fantastic.
And super sexy. Good lord!
One of my favorites of all time.
I’m probably the only one here who liked Inland Empire. Like a dream.
I got into quinoa because of Lynch. He shows how to make it in a special features section. He’s an obsessive freak about that too.
Did you know he also directed The Elephant Man?
And “Dune.”
The bad one. The *really* bad one.
I call jinx, Pepe!
I didn’t even know he did Dune. 😳
I cheated: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Lynch#Filmography
As Leonard Pinth-Garnell liked to say:
“Stunningly BAD.”
Monumentally ill-advised; exquisitely awful!
HHAHAHAHHA! Leonard Pinth-Garnell!! I remember him! And speaking of SNL, do you remember “Tales of Ribaldry” with Jon Lovitz in the Lady and the Bootblack?
Okay, I cheated and had to look up Pepe’s reference (before I was born), but I do remember the Lovitz’ bit. Congrats, you brought us back to the Sadean.
With Mel Gibson. There’s something ironic about Mel Gibson in a Lovitz sketch, but I shan’t digress.
I just looked there– a kinda spotty career. Some really good and others really bad. I guess that’s more about experiment and taking risks than to have a career of so-so romantic comedies.
Even a Moby music video.
I feel this way about Tim Burton. He has hits, and he has some really bad misses.
*Apologies to WTS for the mini movie thread happening!
No problem, but you have some weiiiirddd tastes, K!
I didn’t necessarily like Eraserhead. It just freaked me out.
I suppose the only difficulty I have with your argument wts, is that the “schism” is artificial in biological actuality. But phenomenologically, I’d agree with what you say.
I do think Sade, philosophically, does see the body as a victim, a slave.
But the body is freer than the mind in many respects. For instance, it is free to respond sexually with exuberance but limited by the moral, neurotic, and inhibited “shortcomings” of the mind.
I’m not sure the schism is “artificial” just because it is ostensibly psychological in nature. There may be (and I personally think there is) something to the religious, spiritual New Age ideas that, as Pierre Teilhard de Chardin wrote, “We are not human beings having a spiritual experience. We are spiritual beings having a human experience”.
I love that quotation! But I think the obverse harmonically resonates with that.
Isn’t it also a question of the the mind, or the spiritual being, doing battle with nature, best illustrated by the body? The body is more like nature than the mind. It fucks, shits, eats with abandon if allowed to. Try as it may, the mind, the identity can not transcend the body; the identity cannot transcend nature.
Perhaps Sade is angry at nature because he tries so hard to have his mind completely run as unhindered with it, for his mind to be as free as his body. Maybe he’s jealous of his body because his body is freer, it has fewer neuronal synapses to slow it down. The brain, in that way, is the brake of the body.
I may be going way off on a tangent.
Questinia–That makes perfect sense to me.
Thank-you! I was beginning to fear the little de Sade in my brain was up to his old tricks!
😆 Don’t we all have a bit of Messr de Sade in us?
I think that was le divin marquis’s point, e’cat. 😉
Nope, Q, I thought it was brilliant, and reminded me of this:
@ 3:16 onwards regarding nature and death.
Wow. Something about that kept reminding me of the wailing and gnashing that goes on on certain threads over yonder.
It does resemble Charenton asylum in many ways, e’cat. 😆
Thank-you Khirad. Emotions are what Sade was after… he detested and wanted to defile the glazed over mind which “obeyed” the conventions. The politeness, the artifice… the “excuse” for not profusely participating in the messiness.
And, though this will be a tangent of sorts to that accurate appreciation of Sade’s point Q, one of the reasons he also opposed the death penalty. A crime of passion he could understand; whereas, the cold calculation of the state to murder someone, he could not.
Not at all. If I’m understanding what you’re saying, it jibes perfectly with my ideas. I never meant to suggest that the mind IS more free than the body, and agree that both can be “more” free in different ways. My interest is in what this does to the mind, to know that its body can be tortured or otherwise have to endure great pain.
I think I knew that whatsie. Sorry!
What you are saying is much more direct.
There is something about this subject that is always confusing to me. I think it’s because my mind becomes so lost in the potential metaphors.
Q, IMHO we are not meant to transcend the body; we are embodied for a reason. But because we have a mind, the mind rebels against the body’s limitations. You characterize it as doing battle with nature, and there are certainly many people who do just that! Personally, I think that is unfortunate and unbalanced –to greater or lesser degrees. There is a Native American greeting (can’t remember which tribe): “Are you in your skin today?” Basically, asking “How are you?” But more. They are really asking, “Are you connected to yourself, to your body, today?” But I do not believe the body is freer, just amoral, as is nature. True, the body has no morality (unless you count the amygdala, or the various neural excretions that produce feelings). So while I agree we can never COMPLETELY transcend our bodies, (and I do not think we are meant to) we can do so to an amazing degree. The question for me is “why”? As I wrote earlier, the mind/body dynamic is the basis of all our religions.
Edit: I don’t think that made much sense except in my head!
Cher, you always make sense to me. 🙂
That Amerindian greeting puts a different twist on ‘namaste’! I wish I were on my game, because Hindu philosophy delves into the mind/body “dichotomy” in some depth.
Totally off topic, and like it wasn’t blatant already, speaking of Amerindians. If you saw Avatar, did you notice that when she said ‘people’, she used the word Na’vi?!
Thanks, Khirad! But I didn’t see Avatar. 🙁 I was sick when the family went. Does Navi refer to the Hebrew word for prophet?
You know, I did think of that, too. ‘Nabi’ is the word in Arabic, so, no surprise it’s that in Hebrew! And it did have a bilabial fricative feeling to it, like ‘b’ in Spanish. I wouldn’t put it past the linguist who created it; but I was referring to the fact that a good portion of tribal names mean “the people” in their own language.
http://www.native-languages.org/original.htm
I don’t think it was accidental.
If one means a slave to the hypocritical mores and sexual repression of the time. Now is our heaven, now is our hell, was what I got from him – particularly Philosophy of the Boudoir.
Great essay, WTS, and you make a very good case. I also can’t watch those “Saw” movies and similar. There has to be some redeeming quality in it, such as the good dialogue and interesting characters you get in a Tarantino film (except the repetitiously dull Kill Bill series). I agree that there must be some element of body-loathing — why shouldn’t the mind resent the body for being a prison, once it becomes one anyway. It makes me think of my friend who has suddenly found herself in a wheelchair because of some kind of muscular atrophy disease. Her whole life is now a big production just to achieve what she once did on automation — just getting from one spot to the next, doing mundane things such as peeing. She has stopped drinking much water to avoid it. Until recently, she has enjoyed a life of being slim and beautiful, but her body has now betrayed her, has pulled a fast one on her, has suddenly stopped cooperating, has become enemy instead of friend.
I can think of another reason why the mind is drawn to violence. In the case of Sade, he blurred the line between pain and pleasure. He wanted to find out how to make them the same thing. Why? I suspect he, and many others, are simply bored. The mundane activities of life, day after day, week after week, year after year — this can drive anyone mad if there’s no excitement, no threat, no adrenaline rush.
You are never so alive as when you are hurt or threatened, especially if you are in survival mode. You read about men coming back from horrific experiences in war and they then spend the rest of their lives feeling alienated from their family and nostalgic for those terrible days and the others they shared them with.
There are others who never have these heightened experiences, so they create them. If the “Saw” movies don’t fulfill this need, and there is nothing more interesting going on than a trip to the grocery store, let’s pick a fight. Let’s break something — a bond or a foot or a TV. Let’s start a war. Let’s rock the boat, push someone too far, get drunk and smash our fist into the wall. There will be pain and consequences but at least it won’t be boring. It takes intellectual effort to keep the mind from getting bored, and most people don’t have the stamina or motivation to do the work involved in that. Violence and mayhem is an easy substitute. And if you’ve got a reasonable amount of control over yourself, maybe “Saw 15” will satisfy those urges.
I think that is so very true of most of the men I have known.
I know! Personally, I do it all the time, albeit in short snatches. But sometimes for an hour– and I’m not talking about meditation. Reverie. I am big on reverie. (Sometimes I think I live there.)
I yearn for solitude, I devour peace and quiet. Living in a noisy place like Tokyo, I used to set my alarm for 4 am just to savour the few short hours before life intruded again. I will try to continue as soon as I can fall asleep before 1 am.
Kalima, I will never forget when I was in Tokyo and went to the Yoyogi (sp?) Park and there were all these musicians practicing under the trees. My hosts said it was because the walls in their apartments were too thin.
Yes, Yoyogi Park and not only are the walls thin, our house is only about 50 cm from my nextdoor neighbour’s house.
She has a small doggy and sings opera until 9 pm at night. On the whole, Japanese people are quite noisy but nowhere near as noisy as the people I saw and met in Hong Kong. No peace for the wicked. 🙁
Kalima, Somehow your neighbor’s opera singing doesn’t seem quite complete without that small doggie! 😆
I agree, she’s about 4′ 9 inches tall, wears bright, pink fluffy mule slippers and that cute little doggie used to be such a quiet little darling before her indoctrination, now she barks at speeding motorbikes, the doggy, not the singing neighbour. 🙂
My reveries are shorter. How I do yearn for the days, when on a walk home from school I could get lost in the mysteries of the universe and compose poems to write down when I got home, which, – key into door – was like an alarm bell snapping me back to the real world. Now I try to recapture the magic of aunadultured fancy. I like and appreciate WTS’s art, because, I’ve lost the creative spark I myself once had with whimsy and without boundaries.
Don’t we all, Khirad, don’t we all yearn for those days! And I too, love Whats’ art. I am an artist of a much darker sort though.
Yes, Cher, as you well probably know by now, my personal aesthetic expression leans darker, as well.
I couldn’t help but be reminded of this from Goethe’s Faust:
Then give me back the time of growing
When I myself was growing too,
When crowding songs, a fountain flowing,
Gushed forth unceasing, ever new;
When still the mists my world were veiling,
The bud its miracle bespoke;
When I the thousand blossoms broke,
Profusely through the valleys trailing.
Naught, yet enough had I when but a youth,
Joy in illusion, yearning toward the truth.
Give impulse its unfettered dower,
The bliss so deep ’tis full of pain,
The strength of hate, Love’s mighty power,
Oh, give me back my youth again!
That was gorgeous, Khirad! I bet you love Dante too, as I do.
Thank you both. And Cher, where can one see your work? I’m very curious now!
Dante? naturalmente! I have one of those copies from the forties with the illustrations of scenes within.
I also once had a copy of Faust with this and other illustrations.
What’s, I’ll have to figure out– actually, ask my husband –how to upload some photos of my work someday.
Please do, Cher, and sooner rather than later!
The early carp catches the diem, or something like that.
This is why I love hiking so much. I go with my two dogs and just daydream my way through the woods. Daydreaming is wonderful. You have to first figure out how to shut down the “committee” though. The one that wants to continue arguments you’ve been having with people.
Oh my lord, I hate the “committee”. Nowadays when I walk, it’s down a street with my iPod. I do get out once in a while, take a deep breath and feel a much needed ‘stillness’ – those moments are truly golden. They exist outside of time.
Has anyone heard of the book “The Artist’s Way”?
I need to read it again. I’ve had like a decade-long creative block. I need to find my inspiration again.
What a great way to put it, “the committee”!
Reliving memories, rewriting history, and reminding us what clutzes we are. Don’t you just love ’em?
That book sounds familiar, Khirad. I’ve got a gift card to spend and I’m planning to visit the bookstore tomorrow. Maybe I’ll check it out!
E’cat, the Artists’ Way is a GREAT book!! Highly recommended.
Yes WTS, how much of our lives are spent recycling the past in our heads?
Very good addition to the post, e-cat! I think there is certainly something to what you write, that element is at play as well, I agree.
WTS
Great piece and one genre that I have never put much thought or attention to. I have never really explored the type of genre you speak of, I don’t even like the Friday 13 or other such movies. In Cold Blood, even though a (sort of)classic of the crime genre, made me sick to my stomach. I know it happens in real life, I am not naive but I guess I just don’t want to watch it by choice.
I am not naive enough to think this really does not happen, and while i am aware it does, I don’t need to see it in a movie. People who produce this type of genre like to think they are on the outer edges of the envelope, pushing farther. Maybe they think it is some kind of genuis, I haven’t figured it out. I know they are low budget movies and maybe some go on to make better films, or mybe they are just trying to break in to the film industry? I just have never understood watching a movie where you already know everyone is going to be killed for doing things most of us would never do in real life.
It is kind of like the Broadview Security commercials. Someone tries to break in to the house and the people run upstairs? Why on earth would someone trap themselves like that, alarm or not? Yet Broadview runs that same scenario over and over, like most people are going to do that with an intruder in the house, especially if they can walk out the front door. But they do it because they think it will produce revenue for the company. Money, in this society, is a pretty powerful incentive for some to do just about anything.
That is so true. People do the exact opposite of what they should do.
The part of The Godfather that I dislike is when Michael tells Carlo he’s going to be okay, the family’ not going to whack him, and then gives him a plane ticket to Vegas. They lead him out to the car, and then they kill him. The same exact people are involved in the entire scenario. What was the point of the elaborate lie?
It was so obviously contrived for the purpose of the audience. Even great movies sometimes contain but-people-don’t-really-do-that moments.
I think it was to get Carlo to feel safe and talk. Michael needed absolute proof– from Carlo’s own mouth– before he would have him killed. And, we get to see how cold and convincing Michale can be, how icy. Did you see Inglorious Basterds? The scene with Carlo reminds me a bit of the opening scene with the Nazi and the dairy farmer.
Yeah, but I think he gives the airplane ticket afterwards. But I’m not sure, so I guess I’ll give the scene the benefit of the doubt.
I haven’t seen Inglorious Basterds, but I’ve heard about that scene.
Forgive me I’m addicted to YouTube!
I think he already has the ticket, but it doesn’t show when he got it.