The Human Centipede 3 Qartulad ◎

This paper proceeds in three parts. First, a summary of The Human Centipede 3 and its place in transgressive cinema. Second, an analysis of the linguistic and cultural impossibilities of a Georgian localization. Third, a critical reading of the film’s politics, arguing that even a hypothetical Georgian version could not salvage its shallow provocation. The Human Centipede 3 follows Bill Boss (Dieter Laser), the sadistic warden of a failing US private prison. After being denied funding for a new execution chamber, Boss—advised by the docile accountant Dwight (Laurence R. Harvey)—creates a “human centipede” of 500 inmates. The film abandons the medical pseudo-realism of the first film and the ethical ambiguity of the second for cartoonish brutality: Boss rapes, mutilates, and castrates prisoners and staff, drinks blood mixed with Viagra, and forces inmates to eat rat carcasses. The final centipede, stitched mouth-to-anus, marches pointlessly across a desert.

Law of Georgia on Broadcasting. (2019). Article 56: Content Restrictions. Parliament of Georgia. Note: This paper is a work of critical speculation. No official Georgian release of The Human Centipede 3 exists. the human centipede 3 qartulad

Tom Six himself appears as a fictionalized version of the director, who blesses the project. This metafictional layer suggests that The Human Centipede 3 is not about horror but about the spectator’s complicity in demanding ever-greater extremes. As film scholar Xavier Aldana Reyes notes, “The third film collapses into self-parody, exposing the diminishing returns of the torture subgenre” (Reyes, 2016, p. 112). 3.1 Linguistic Barriers Georgian (Kartuli ena) is a Kartvelian language with its own script (Mkhedruli) and a literary tradition rich in polyphony and understatement. Translating the film’s dialogue—which consists mostly of shouted obscenities, bureaucratic jargon, and pained screams—would present two problems. First, Georgian profanity is highly contextual and often family or religion-based, lacking the clinical Anglo-Saxon vulgarity of Boss’s tirades. Direct translation would sound artificial. Second, the film’s few moments of dark humor (e.g., Boss’s demand for “American goulash”) rely on English idioms that have no Georgian equivalent. 3.2 Censorship and Legal Context Georgia’s Georgian National Film Center operates under a classification system that prohibits content “promoting torture or inhuman treatment” (Law on Broadcasting, Article 56, 2019). The Human Centipede 3 was banned in the UK, Australia, and Germany; in Georgia, it would almost certainly be refused classification. Furthermore, Georgia’s post-Soviet prison reform (2012–present), though imperfect, has explicitly rejected the punitive excess depicted in the film. Screening it could be interpreted as mockery of ongoing human rights efforts. 3.3 Cultural Reception Georgian audiences, particularly older generations, retain memory of Soviet psychiatric abuse and prison camps (the gulag system). As anthropologist Tamta Gelashvili observes, “Graphic depictions of state-sanctioned torture are not entertainment in Georgia; they are testimony” (Gelashvili, 2018, p. 45). A film that literalizes suffering without political specificity would likely be received not as transgressive art but as exploitative kitsch. 4. Critical Analysis: The Film’s Internal Contradictions Even if we imagine a successful Georgian localization—complete with culturally adapted insults and a disclaimer about historical context— The Human Centipede 3 remains critically problematic. The film attempts to critique the American prison-industrial complex but does so by reproducing its sadistic logic. Warden Boss is a caricature of the corrupt official, yet the film’s camera lingers on the suffering bodies of largely Black and Latino prisoners with the same fetishistic gaze that Boss himself employs. This paper proceeds in three parts

A Georgian localization would be impossible not only because of censorship or language, but because the film has nothing to say to a culture that has already survived actual centipedes of the state. In the end, qartulad fails because the film itself fails: it mistakes volume for meaning, and cruelty for critique. Gelashvili, T. (2018). Soviet Legacies in Georgian Memory: Trauma and Testimony . Tbilisi University Press. Third, a critical reading of the film’s politics,

Author: [Generated for academic purpose] Course: Film Studies / Transgressive Cinema Date: April 16, 2026 Abstract Tom Six’s The Human Centipede 3 (Final Sequence) (2015) represents the logical endpoint of the director’s “transgressive trilogy”—a film so deliberately excessive in its depiction of pain, degradation, and carceral absurdity that it defies conventional narrative pleasure. This paper explores the hypothetical Georgian localization of the film, referred to as “qartulad” (in Georgian). By examining the linguistic, cultural, and legal barriers to such a localization, as well as the film’s inherent critique of the American prison-industrial complex, this analysis argues that translating The Human Centipede 3 into Georgian would paradoxically reveal the film’s central failure: its inability to generate meaningful catharsis or critique beyond shock value. The Georgian context—with its own history of Soviet-era carceral systems and contemporary prison reform—serves as an ideal critical mirror. 1. Introduction The request for a paper on “The Human Centipede 3 qartulad” is inherently speculative. No official Georgian dubbing or subtitling of Tom Six’s 2015 film exists. However, the term qartulad (meaning “in the Georgian language” or “according to Georgian custom”) invites a thought experiment: what would it mean to translate the most grotesque entry in the trilogy for a Georgian-speaking audience? Georgia’s cinematic tradition, from Tengiz Abuladze’s Repentance (1984) to contemporary works like Dea Kulumbegashvili’s Beginning (2020), has often engaged with suffering, authoritarianism, and bodily violation through allegory and restraint. The Human Centipede 3 operates through the opposite: graphic literalism.