Editorials

Is ‘The Binding of Isaac: Rebirth’ Too Violent for Apple?

Published

8 years ago

February 14, 2016

Reporting on Apple’s rejecting The Binding of Isaac: Rebirth’s being included in the App Store had even barely begun before the braying laughter of ridicule had begun. It was yet another example of how Apple’s jackbooted policies had undermined artistic expression for the enforcement of its arcane app curation process.

Tyrone Rodriguez, a developer for Nicalis, the team developing the iOS version, posted the notice from Apple on Twitter, with the caption “C’mon, wtf…Apple” on February 6. Since then, the internet has done what the internet does in these situations, skewering the company for what appears to be a ridiculous bit of censorship.

Part of me thinks this was a big non-surprise. Various members of the development team of both The Binding of Isaac and Super Meat Boy have always held smartphone development in a kind of contempt. The ‘announcement’ of the Super Meat Boy iPhone game (which I don’t think ever surfaced) and Team Meat developer Tommy Refenes’s anti-iPhone App Store rant in a GDC2010 speech definitely express a certain, specific opinion about the platform.

However, then I started to read up on what, exactly, had caused the game to be denied a coveted spot among the million or so Flappy Bird clones still floating around in the App Store. Ostensibly, BoI:Rebirth was turned away because it depicted violence against children, an understandable qualm on the part of Apple…if it weren’t such a head-scratcher in this situation. Before I render my judgment on the topic, allow me to give a little background on the game.

In The Binding of Isaac, players take on the role of Isaac, a baby whose mother has locked him in the basement — which sounds way harsher than the actual gameplay implies — and so the miniature protagonist must battle foes of a disgusting and often unsightly variety to escape the “dungeon” of the basement.

The Binding of Isaac: Rebirth is neither wholly objectionable — a little (or a lot) gross, maybe — even by the standards by which Apple regulates itself in these kinds of situations. Nor is it some fly-by-night operation, the iOS equivalent of uber-reprehensible shooter Hatred. If you didn’t catch it from the title, The Binding of Isaac is mostly an interesting take on violence and the nature of familial relationships, not a celebration of murder, chaos, and abuse.

Not only that, the game is on multiple platforms already (PC, PS3, PS4, Vita, 360, XBO, Wii U…).

Now, it is probably clear to everyone that objectionable material should be regulated by Apple, who has a responsibility to its users. The Binding of Isaac: Rebirth is certainly not the first iPhone app to be tossed out on its ear in the last several years. Upskirt apps, iBoobs, and the Slash! app have gotten the axe. Even Eminem has felt the squeeze of the censors at Apple.

I could underscore my point here by pointing out the myriad games that allude to or outright depict violence toward children in the App Store. Any number of movies currently available on iTunes currently fit that description.

C'mon, wtf… Apple pic.twitter.com/aEygkjqH2b

— Tyrone Rodriguez (@tyronerodriguez) February 7, 2016

We could discuss the terrible nonsense Apple allows onto the App Store. (iFrenchKiss, anyone?) Or we could delve into the myriad, garbage-y ripoffs of McMillen’s other game, Super Meat Boy, which dupe the naive into purchasing them through blatant marketplace confusion. (Pissed off block! Super meat boy edition! is the most flagrant offender in this category.

We could even make sure to mention the number of games that are perhaps even more obviously and unselfconsciously violent for sale right now, up to and including the Grand Theft Auto games. Of course, we’d also have to discuss how The Binding of Isaac: Rebirth is no RockStar property, and — if it were — just how quickly we’d probably see it go into the iOS Store for purchase. Money talks, people, and despite being one of the most compelling roguelikes of the last few years.

The most bizarre category of Isaac-adjacent content is the plethora of Binding of Isaac guides and wikis and whatnot that pervade the iOS Store. Plenty of them are free, but not all of them, and it seems a little strange that Apple would deny a game for being too openly violent for its platform but then allow a guide for said game and take a percentage of the profits.

None of what I’ve mentioned is illegal, or no doubt Apple would have zipped it up. Most of it probably isn’t even that different from what happens on most other platforms. (I haven’t even looked at the horror show that is the Android store.)

If Apple genuinely believes in the integrity of the app store, they would either have a more sensible, open, and fair submission and curation process, or they would put that responsibility in the capable hands of the public. Right now, they’re not doing the public justice in either sense.

They are both allowing stupid, half-baked, nonfunctioning cash grabs onto the store, and they are restricting access to interesting content for the sake of some obscure, internal reason. “Violence towards children” is a pretty vague descriptor, and yet, it does not prevent movies containing the self-same problem to be included in the iTunes store. You can go and rent Battle Royale right now and be privy to all sorts of graphic teen-on-teen violence.

That’s not to say that Battle Royale, San Andreas, or even iFrenchKiss should be taken down. It’s that maybe Apple should focus its time and energy regulating the kinds of content that has actually earned the public’s ire for the company. Banning broken apps, borderline infringing material, and the thousands of generic copycats would go a long way toward restoring credibility of and faith in the App Store. And, for God’s sake, please allow The Binding of Isaac onto your platform.

T. Blake Braddy

2 Comments

Editorials

Finding Faith and Violence in ‘The Book of Eli’ 14 Years Later

Published

13 hours ago

April 22, 2024

Luiz H. C.

Having grown up in a religious family, Christian movie night was something that happened a lot more often than I care to admit. However, back when I was a teenager, my parents showed up one night with an unusually cool-looking DVD of a movie that had been recommended to them by a church leader. Curious to see what new kind of evangelical propaganda my parents had rented this time, I proceeded to watch the film with them expecting a heavy-handed snoozefest.

To my surprise, I was a few minutes in when Denzel Washington proceeded to dismember a band of cannibal raiders when I realized that this was in fact a real movie. My mom was horrified by the flick’s extreme violence and dark subject matter, but I instantly became a fan of the Hughes Brothers’ faith-based 2010 thriller, The Book of Eli. And with the film’s atomic apocalypse having apparently taken place in 2024, I think this is the perfect time to dive into why this grim parable might also be entertaining for horror fans.

Originally penned by gaming journalist and The Walking Dead: The Game co-writer Gary Whitta, the spec script for The Book of Eli was already making waves back in 2007 when it appeared on the coveted Blacklist. It wasn’t long before Columbia and Warner Bros. snatched up the rights to the project, hiring From Hell directors Albert and Allen Hughes while also garnering attention from industry heavyweights like Denzel Washington and Gary Oldman.

After a series of revisions by Anthony Peckham meant to make the story more consumer-friendly, the picture was finally released in January of 2010, with the finished film following Denzel as a mysterious wanderer making his way across a post-apocalyptic America while protecting a sacred book. Along the way, he encounters a run-down settlement controlled by Bill Carnegie (Gary Oldman), a man desperate to get his hands on Eli’s book so he can motivate his underlings to expand his empire. Unwilling to let this power fall into the wrong hands, Eli embarks on a dangerous journey that will test the limits of his faith.

SO WHY IS IT WORTH WATCHING?

Judging by the film’s box-office success, mainstream audiences appear to have enjoyed the Hughes’ bleak vision of a future where everything went wrong, but critics were left divided by the flick’s trope-heavy narrative and unapologetic religious elements. And while I’ll be the first to admit that The Book of Eli isn’t particularly subtle or original, I appreciate the film’s earnest execution of familiar ideas.

For starters, I’d like to address the religious elephant in the room, as I understand the hesitation that some folks (myself included) might have about watching something that sounds like Christian propaganda. Faith does indeed play a huge part in the narrative here, but I’d argue that the film is more about the power of stories than a specific religion. The entire point of Oldman’s character is that he needs a unifying narrative that he can take advantage of in order to manipulate others, while Eli ultimately chooses to deliver his gift to a community of scholars. In fact, the movie even makes a point of placing the Bible in between equally culturally important books like the Torah and Quran, which I think is pretty poignant for a flick inspired by exploitation cinema.

Sure, the film has its fair share of logical inconsistencies (ranging from the extent of Eli’s Daredevil superpowers to his impossibly small Braille Bible), but I think the film more than makes up for these nitpicks with a genuine passion for classic post-apocalyptic cinema. Several critics accused the film of being a knockoff of superior productions, but I’d argue that both Whitta and the Hughes knowingly crafted a loving pastiche of genre influences like Mad Max and A Boy and His Dog.

Lastly, it’s no surprise that the cast here absolutely kicks ass. Denzel plays the title role of a stoic badass perfectly (going so far as to train with Bruce Lee’s protégée in order to perform his own stunts) while Oldman effortlessly assumes a surprisingly subdued yet incredibly intimidating persona. Even Mila Kunis is remarkably charming here, though I wish the script had taken the time to develop these secondary characters a little further. And hey, did I mention that Tom Waits is in this?

AND WHAT MAKES IT HORROR ADJACENT?

Denzel’s very first interaction with another human being in this movie results in a gory fight scene culminating in a face-off against a masked brute wielding a chainsaw (which he presumably uses to butcher travelers before eating them), so I think it’s safe to say that this dog-eat-dog vision of America will likely appeal to horror fans.

From diseased cannibals to hyper-violent motorcycle gangs roaming the wasteland, there’s plenty of disturbing R-rated material here – which is even more impressive when you remember that this story revolves around the bible. And while there are a few too many references to sexual assault for my taste, even if it does make sense in-universe, the flick does a great job of immersing you in this post-nuclear nightmare.

The excessively depressing color palette and obvious green screen effects may take some viewers out of the experience, but the beat-up and lived-in sets and costume design do their best to bring this dead world to life – which might just be the scariest part of the experience.

Ultimately, I believe your enjoyment of The Book of Eli will largely depend on how willing you are to overlook some ham-fisted biblical references in order to enjoy some brutal post-apocalyptic shenanigans. And while I can’t really blame folks who’d rather not deal with that, I think it would be a shame to miss out on a genuinely engaging thrill-ride because of one minor detail.

With that in mind, I’m incredibly curious to see what Whitta and the Hughes Brothers have planned for the upcoming prequel series starring John Boyega…

There’s no understating the importance of a balanced media diet, and since bloody and disgusting entertainment isn’t exclusive to the horror genre, we’ve come up with Horror Adjacent – a recurring column where we recommend non-horror movies that horror fans might enjoy.