Unicorn Blood
December 2, 2014 1:08 PM Subscribe
"The young have the best and sweetest flesh."
A short animated film by Alberto Vazquez. NSFW.
A short animated film by Alberto Vazquez. NSFW.
Men are the true monsters, but still (spoiler alert) better than the goddamn teddy bears.
posted by sourcequench at 3:31 PM on December 2, 2014
posted by sourcequench at 3:31 PM on December 2, 2014
Well, I guess I'm old, then.
posted by Imperfect at 3:49 PM on December 2, 2014 [3 favorites]
posted by Imperfect at 3:49 PM on December 2, 2014 [3 favorites]
Well. The wall of film festival awards laid out right in front lowered my expectations sufficiently that I was not disappointed.
posted by Mr.Encyclopedia at 4:24 PM on December 2, 2014 [3 favorites]
posted by Mr.Encyclopedia at 4:24 PM on December 2, 2014 [3 favorites]
I think they've confused unicorns with Yog-Sothoth. It's... well, not it's really an easy mistake to make.
I don't know how you'd do that.
posted by Caduceus at 5:56 PM on December 2, 2014
I don't know how you'd do that.
posted by Caduceus at 5:56 PM on December 2, 2014
This is what I think if every time I hear "unicorn blood".
Which I do surprisingly often.
posted by clarknova at 5:58 PM on December 2, 2014
Which I do surprisingly often.
posted by clarknova at 5:58 PM on December 2, 2014
Thanks for posting this. I watched it yesterday, and haven't been sure how to process it -- it's been conflated in my mind with the previous day's post of Eric Wareheim's new video, and the subsequent really great conversation about when art is a valuable mirror of society's failings and when it's just punching down or going for grotesquerie as its sole form of expression.
I still don't know what to think of this... whether it's saying something of value, or is just aiming for sinister/grotesque for its own sake. There's nothing wrong with the latter, either, but as I get older I find I'm assigning more value to meaning and less value to impact. My 24-hours-later impression is that this has a lot of impact but to me, personally, not a lot of meaning.
It's stuck with me though, which is cool. Again, thanks for posting it.
posted by Shepherd at 6:17 AM on December 3, 2014 [2 favorites]
I still don't know what to think of this... whether it's saying something of value, or is just aiming for sinister/grotesque for its own sake. There's nothing wrong with the latter, either, but as I get older I find I'm assigning more value to meaning and less value to impact. My 24-hours-later impression is that this has a lot of impact but to me, personally, not a lot of meaning.
It's stuck with me though, which is cool. Again, thanks for posting it.
posted by Shepherd at 6:17 AM on December 3, 2014 [2 favorites]
My 24-hours-later impression is that this has a lot of impact but to me, personally, not a lot of meaning.
That perfectly describes my reaction as well. I wasn't really sure what to make of this, but it was weird enough that I felt compelled to share. I honestly don't even think it is particularly grotesque... it seems to intend to shock the viewer by placing what is normally considered "cute" things in, for lack of a better word, a gritty setting, but that itself is not a terribly original idea and I did not actually find it jarring. It pretty much establishes immediately that this is NOT a cutesy piece so audience expectations are never subverted.
I do think it has more substance than, say, anything by Chuck Palahniuk, whose writing I think is a perfect example of art whose sole purpose is shock value without having anything at all to say. This film at least maybe you could draw some meaning out of with multiple viewings.
Not that I really want to watch it again.
posted by Librarypt at 7:22 AM on December 3, 2014
That perfectly describes my reaction as well. I wasn't really sure what to make of this, but it was weird enough that I felt compelled to share. I honestly don't even think it is particularly grotesque... it seems to intend to shock the viewer by placing what is normally considered "cute" things in, for lack of a better word, a gritty setting, but that itself is not a terribly original idea and I did not actually find it jarring. It pretty much establishes immediately that this is NOT a cutesy piece so audience expectations are never subverted.
I do think it has more substance than, say, anything by Chuck Palahniuk, whose writing I think is a perfect example of art whose sole purpose is shock value without having anything at all to say. This film at least maybe you could draw some meaning out of with multiple viewings.
Not that I really want to watch it again.
posted by Librarypt at 7:22 AM on December 3, 2014
« Older sweating metaphorical bullets daily in front of my... | Half of all marriages - oh, wait Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Krulth at 2:41 PM on December 2, 2014 [2 favorites]