no more pork buns for me (well, for a few weeks at least)

Human Roast Pork Buns: The Untold Story (1993), is one of the very few movies that forced me to look away and grimace in disgust, and that’s as good a place to start as any. Why did this movie produce a bodily reaction compared to like, most other horror films that I’ve seen?

Untold Story doesn’t glorify the violence handed out. We hear hard thuds, pained screams, and the background music is anything but calm and serene. According to Stephen Prince’s article, he brings research that showed “visible or audible signs of a victim’s suffering, for example, tend to depress, or inhibit, aggressive responses.” Does this mean that the violence we see on screen can act as a way to deter violence towards others? As Prince points out, the response is rather individualized and variable, for me it totally does because although I love action and stylized fights, anything resembling real violence or seeing violence off of a screen isn’t appealing to me. Even though the violence is less glorified, still, some key decisions in the movie stand out to me and provide maybe a different subtext.

To prove my point that I don’t think this movie’s goal is particularly to glorify violence (although some may see that), I’d like to think about Sweeney Todd. The story of a barber who kills his customers and makes them into meat pies. Gruesome, and you can see the initial plot similarities, yet Sweeney Todd’s got a full musical and movie musical adaption (and many other representations in various media) that almost make him into a sympathetic character, with a real reason for committing murders. Especially in the Tim Burton version, where the barber just wants to get back at the guy who was awful to his wife. Further, the way Sweeney Todd uses the barber knives is often reduced to a pretty song and choreography, unlike the gruesome, heavy meat cleaver we’re treated to in the Untold Story. In Sweeney Todd, we can even laugh at some of the killings too. Sweeney Todd not only glorifies violence and gives it a moral ground, but it romanticizes violence with Mrs. Lovett’s obsession, sympathize villain, and especially with the tragic ending of everyone dying.

In The Untold Story, yes, we see brutal killings in their entirety, and none of them are particularly short, and often we’re presented with an uncomfortable amount of on screen detail. Yet, we have no emotional connection to the victims. In the beginning, when Wong first kills the guy he was playing mahjong with, we don’t really know the circumstances of the death. Do the characters have a history? Is there are real reason they’re both so emotionally invested that leads one to killing? Is it that Wong truly just snaps that easily to killing or is there some extenuating circumstance? When the cashier woman is raped and killed, all we know about her is that she got a job after Wong took “ownership” of the restaurant, and maybe her mother was sick and needed taking care of.

This lack of emotional depth for the victims also resonates with Wong as a character too, we don’t have the chance to humanize him except when he is literally taking a beating, and at that point, we have all this context of him being an awful killer that makes the violence done to him appear more justifiable (but is it? that’s more of a philosophy question). By disregarding character development and information, the potential emotional weight of the victim’s death is dulled, and because of this distance, we’re allowed to dissociate ourselves from the consequences of violence, even though the aesthetics in the scenes of killing are not glorifying the murder. Conversely, I think it’s possible this lack of character description makes it easier for the audience to come up with their own narratives, and if a poignant narrative is created, it may just stick to a viewer better. Even amidst this more grounded and brutal killing, we are allowed a sense of detachment from emotions, and I wonder how that effects the reception of the on screen violence?

I think it’s interesting too, that the people eating the “pork” buns love the taste. It brings up all kinds of complications and feelings. It heightens the severity and grossness of the pork buns, as if people thought they were just average we could make the comparison that, maybe, just maybe, we would feel disgust that humans we’re not quite so different from the pigs they eat. But in the movie, humans taste better. I believe part of the choice to emphasize this aspect is to increase the gross out of a passersby eating pork buns under the wrong assumption that they are made entirely of pork. Everyone who tastes the buns compliments them, and I doubt those compliments would come after realizing what they were made of, so is it possible that the movie speaks to these preferences that most people would rather sweep under the rug and ignore? Is it possible that people, genuinely liked the taste of human? Would they try it again? From this angle, is it possible that The Untold Story partially acts to draw attention to peoples more, carnal aspects (that may not be the right word)? I don’t necessarily believe this is the only critique, or even that it was intended, but I think the argument stands.

I’m also really interested in this line or fantasy versus reality and how that shapes a viewing experience. Prince brings up how people tolerate, and often enjoy, more violence under the pretense that it is fake. To paraphrase, seeing someone stylistically chopped in half with fake blood, is not the same at all as watching a real life surgery or blood drawing or something. In my own experience even, I’m a big fan of horror films, and oftentimes I’m all for tasteful amounts of blood (all subjective of course), but I can’t look when I get poked with a needle or I get queasy and tell the nurse or phlebotomist to “please, don’t tell me when you’re gonna do it.” Untold Story hits closer to home rather than fantasy in part because there are no fantastical elements to the story, there’s no Babadook, no Nosferatu, no scientific mayhem monsters like the blob, and there’s no magic. No particular shot stands out, and disregarding debates on what an art film is, this doesn’t feel like a stereotypical art film (no long scenic shots or fanciful score, it’s no heavenly creatures), and it’s not shot pretty. The movie feels more based in reality and that’s only heightened after knowing the movie is based on a true story.

I’m also very curious about people’s thoughts on the violence the police do. Because the movie postulates it simultaneously in a good and bad light, maybe? When the police engage in violence, there’s less blood, especially in comparison to when Wong kills anyone. For example, when they first interrogate Wong in the police office, the hits are still hard, and we feel them from the audio and visuals. We occasionally even see the hits from Wong’s point of view too, which I almost think acts in favor or proving how brutal they are without having to see every detail. The sheer brutality made me shy away from all the violence, kind of like what Prince said, how if it feels too real, it’s less satisfying. For the progression of the second half of the movie I was utterly and thoroughly convinced that Wong would either die from their torture, and/or not confess to the murders and kill himself. I genuinely did not believe that he would say anything indicating anything but denial.

To me his confession says that ultimately, torture works and that the people who commit serious crimes need to be tortured in order to admit their crimes. However, this reading is conflicted by the Mainland Chinese official that says, ‘give him to us, we have proof of murder, and will be dealt with.’ If Wong has withstood the torture maintaining that he’s innocent, then not giving him to the mainland ultimately takes up more time and effort on the policemen’s part that remains unfulfilled. That reading is contingent, however, on the belief that Wong definitely committed those murders, and a belief in the death penalty hinted by the official. If the viewer expects some type of revenge against Wong to feel vindicated, or has a belief in some type of truth exposure for the exposure of truth, than having such a torturous ordeal in order to get the truth out of Wong is paid off. The choice between sending Wong to death or sending him to torture is never complicated by whether a death penalty is moral or not, but rather contingent on the policemen’s pride. To Wong, he’s punished by the system and punished by himself because he “wasn’t good enough.” His options were to be killed, or kill himself, I believe, and that brings up the point, why did they need the police torture to do so? I get that it was partially a matter of pride, but it also feels very vindictive.

I don’t think the movie fully glorifies punishment, we don’t see close ups of the policemen beating him up as a way to emphasize the exhilarating nature (we get those close ups for Wong, but I think that’s more of a way to help incite horror rather than feel his joy). But it paints violence as this necessary deed when dealing with potentially violent people. This contradicts so many studies that show how torture is not a valid method for information gathering, and often, when under extreme stress, memory and cognitive function decrease. By having Wong confess to the murders, the violence done against him is presented as the right thing to do. I can name so many other movies/books that take similar stances on violence and I wonder if that’s a symptom of our society, and/or the presented media impacts someone’s beliefs.

So to go back to the original question: why did I get this bodily reaction? It’s probably from the less aesthetic violence and killings, can expose people as aspiring cannibals (gross), and the story, being mostly true, becomes that much more unsettling. I also think, discussions on what this violence says within the context of a story reveals a lot at how we may subconsciously alter our beliefs or be normalized to such violence.

As an aside, being a home chef, I would probably cry if my knife chipped the way Wong’s cleaver does near the end of the film, and that was probably one of the grosser minor details that had me really getting a grasp on the brutality. I'm also glad I'm not a huge fan of pork anyways.