If the UK tabloids have now picked up on the term 'torture porn' from their lazily copied dispatches - how different now from inventing phrases like 'video nasty' (one of my faves) - has anyone considered what the (un)known origins of this, for gawd's sake, sub-genre were? In print, that is?
BFI Sight And Sound/Monthly Film Bulletin where are you?

I think the first critic to use the term was David Edelstein, in his February 2006 article. Other appearances of the term, such as Kira Cochrane’s wide-eyed Guardian piece, are a lot more recent, and I think other various perturbed critics like David Poland used the term post Edelstein as well.

You could probably chart with interesting results the media response to the various Abu Ghraib abuses, followed by the timeframe in which the initial 'torture porn' candidates like HOSTEL were written and shot. WOLF CREEK gets lumped in to the same category by some writers (possibly including the Guardian gal, though I'm not going to re-read her article again to check) but for various reasons (some of which I've just written and deleted) I think the WOLF CREEK scenes should be viewed a little differently from those in HOSTEL, TURISTAS and SAW, the latter two of which I've never seen.

Lloyd Kaufman tackles the subject in a sensitive manner in POULTRYGEIST by having photos shown of a hooded, wired chicken standing in the familiar pose.

I was wondering what films those articles might mention, as I had in mind Witchfinder General and Mark Of The Devil as early examples of torture porn (before the phrase was coined), rather than Blood Feast and I Spit On Your Grave et al (hence the canny thread title, natch?).

With this thread now up to 400 views plus of Andrew and mine's scintillating debate, I'd recommend that folks who are halfway curious to read at least one critic's dead-on commentary regarding the topic go visit Steve Bissette's blog, where he's returned to the 'torture porn' subject in discussions that link HOSTEL 2, ICHI THE KILLER, and some characteristically blunt commentary on possibly related contemporary events. This link bundles several key posts of his on the topic together, and if you scroll through it (there's a couple of brief comics related bits interspersed) you'll find enough meaty, incisive criticism to keep you going for a long while.

Whenever I read the term 'torture porn' in contemporary cinema I instantly know it refers to CRAP HORROR of the very worst variety!

Stephen Thrower has a good chapter on it in his fantastic NIGHTMARE:USA book, though he's referring to films like LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT and FORCED ENTRY, films that literally delivered 'torture porn', unlike the bubble-gum Neocon-Brainswash that is the diarrhea studios (and indy wannabes) belch out today!

Take a look at this essay by a BBFC examiner:

Tough to Watch - Torture Porn

Gee, whenever I go to a porn search engine and enter "torture", none of the results remotely resemble horror movies. They look like, uh, porn. Leading me to believe there's already torture porn. And critics need a less confused derogatory term for gross, sadistic horror movies.

When I've complained about this in the past, I actually get responses like: it's not a judgment, it's an objective description. So question: are there any critics that refer to SAWHOSTELCAPTIVITY as "torture porn" but gave them glowing reviews?

Well, I've also seen "gorno" but it doesn't seem to have been sensationalist enough to catch on.

And STILL talking rubbish after all these years:

Who remembers those obscurities like HALLOWEEN or FRIDAY THE 13TH? Not me!

What do they mean here with the word "quality"? Type? Superior violence? Sophisticated violence?

Could one say "The quality of violence in SAW is far superior to the fumblings seen in a Deodato film"?

The BBFC: to Protect and Serve (our own interests)

Draculina did a line of sex themed horror films in the early 90s like GORE WHORE and GORGASM that they referred to as "gore-nography." I'm surprised that term didn't catch on with this latest wave.