That's what they call it and that's just *****ing stupid.
They are not that, and anyone who says they are hasn't watched them, or at least not properly.

Ok so starting with the first Saw... if you look at it there's not much gore at all really, There's the stomach cutting and the foot and that's about it.
hardly Torture porn.
the sequals got more gory, but still they had a story to go with them, if it wa spron they wouldn't bother so much

ok and Hostel, it has a lot more gore than Saw, but still, both the first and second ones don't even have any violence untill over an hour into the films, and even then it's not enough to be "torture porn".

I think it's just ridiculous and it pisses me off real bad when people call them that.

I am assuming the term 'Tortue Porn' means its gross/a bit naughty to be watching it?

I LOVE horror films, they are my favorite genre. I wouldn't say it was bad to watch such films, its not as if it is true to life - now that is sick! Some of the sites on the internet I have seen in my time are just stomach wrenching. But watching something that isn't real in any way, shape or form - there is nothing wrong with that.

Umm, Hostel has horny guys? Don't know about Saw IV and V, haven't seen those.

The word "Torture Porn" the porn part is not about sex, it's suggesting that the viewer gets sexual pleasure from watching torture, and also that it has minimal story that isn't really important to the film, which is not true for either of them. See, it's ****ed up and untrue.

Until "torture porn" gets its own genre next to romance, action, and comedy I could care less if Saw and Hostel are referred to as such. It's just a slang genre that encompasses twisted, gory movies and doesn't apply unless the person watching the movie is getting their jollies from seeing someone cut off their belly flab. It's in the eye of the beholder.

Oh, I don't swing that way so I wouldn't know. :P

Bah, people are fools. Have to put sex into ev erything. If it's popular, it's sexual somehow. That's how they think. idiots.

The saw series is a masterpeice in my opinion, those movies made me think about a lot of things many never thought about before, including I.

I think it's an accurate descriptor. I've also heard "Disaster Porn" as a descriptor for the Independence Day/Day After Tomorrow/2012 type movie too. It has nothing to do with sex but instead is about it being a very graphic depiction. I'm not big into torture porn, but disaster porn is amusing.

I agree... I think it's a very fitting title. It's not like people typically go to see movies like that for their challenging plots and thought-provoking moral conundrums... they go for the violence and gore. Not really my cup of tea, but to each his own, I guess.

And disaster porn is very amusing. There's just something satisfying about watching things collapse in the most elaborately unlikely scenarios imaginable... even if the disaster sequences ARE sandwiched between bursts of horrible dialogue that would give George Lucas a run for his money.

Well, I don't think torture porn is a good word for it, I think the people who use it generally haven't seen the films and want to put them down based on what they've heard which may not be true.

Hahahah!

Yes, it is.

My reason why...I remember seeing Saw 2 in theaters...horrible movie BTW, but anyway...one of the audience members didn't think so.

The entire theater had to be emptied halfway through the film, 'cause an usher caught this "beating" off during one of their rather infamous torture scenes.

So if ya'll truly think it isn't sexual...well, Bob and Sandy Palm didn't think so.

XD

Heh, after that I couldn't watch another Saw movie again...mostly because of that particular experience, but also because of that Stephen King movie...ummm, the one about the snuff films, and that couple, and that little motel out in the middle of nowhere.

Though when you think about it Saw and Hostel are pretty mild compared to actual torture porn, but still...it's torture porn.

Even if we don't find it sexually appealing, we still exhibit a bit of euphoria from watching someone get his finger cut off.

; )

That's assuming you agree with the notion that the moniker is putting the genre down, which I don't. Porn isn't bad, and torture seems at least an adequate term to start for labeling movies that involve the confinement and psychological and physical harm of the characters. What's the problem, other than your own feelings that the term somehow attacks the genre? Why not simply embrace it and use it to look for similarly labeled films that are to your tastes?

Along with what people have mentioned before me, I think that everyone misunderstands the word "porn." I mean, considering typical associations with the word, many just assume the worst and assume that it involves a negative connotation, when in fact it doesn't (necessarily).

dictionary.com definition:
obscene writings, drawings, photographs, or the like, esp. those having little or no artistic merit.

So all torture porn translates to would be "explicit maiming/torture violence," which is very true. The title "torture porn" is too often taken out of context. People might think that it means that anyone who watches these films is gross because they "like the gore" (in a sexual way, even).

Because of that, I completely despise the phrase. I would murder it if I could. It undermines the idea behind these movies... the torture is not the point of the whole movie. There's meaning behind it all. It's not just one of those ,"Hey, let's go watch a slasher film where the killer shoots and stabs anybody and everybody with no objective or purpose."

I know I'm the worst at explaining things, so I hope that there's been at least a tad bit of comprehension on y'all's parts.

little to no artistic merit...so yeah, this furthers my point that Saw is definately torture porn.

XD

Saw didn't really get gory untill the third film
don't see why you'd masturbate to Saw 2 even if violence did turn you on, because it's not much gore really
and it certainly has artistic merit anyway

It is, and I never said it wasn't.
But people think that the whole of these movies is just "AHHHHHH MY LEG! OH MY LAWD JESUS STOP! MY SPINE!" when it isn't.
Such a phrase is only for those who aren't willing to look past the blood for the "meat" of the story.

If it was torture porn, they wouldn't bother with any story, or the plot twists
I mean, the first Saw has the foot scene but that's it for the whole film apart from a few short flashbacks earlier, if you see that and simply label it as torture porn with no artisitc merit, your and idiot

There's also a difference between describing it as torture porn and labeling it torture porn.
The Saw and Hostel movies have explicit displays of maim and torture, but that's not what they're all about.

So I would describe it as torture porn, but I would label it a horror/thriller.

Tbh, i don't see there's anything wrong with either or those films! They're both good, i wouldn't call them torture porn. I mean i love horror films..alot xD But i never ever thought of anyone getting sexual pleasure out of them! D:
There's a few films that's been banned from all countrys, has anyone heard of it? They're the guinea pig films! And someone actually thought it was a snuff movie and phoned the FBI to report it. It's very realistic, an awful film with barely any speech, but i expect some weird people would get a HUGE kick out of them!

The Guinea Pig films aren't banned in all countires, not Japan for example.
For Flower of Flesh and Blood the makers were made by law to release a making of film showing how the effects and stuff were done. I haven't watched them and don't plan to so I don't feel right to give an opinion on it, it'd be kind of hypocritical...