Follow RichJuz on Twitter

I'm So Into You

« There will be "fieeeerccccce!" | Main | Clearly, we've learned nothing »



I think it was seeing this movie in my teenage years that made me okay with watching 2girls1cup.


I thought this was already out on Criterion? Anyway, I watched this in college because it was a friend's favorite movie. I affectionately called it "Sodomy Camp"

Okay, I watched the clip and it made me want to die and it's haunting my soul a little bit. I need to know, to assuage myself, what are they ACTUALLY eating? What serves as poop substitute?


Wow, I thought I was jaded, but that was pretty gross. Methinks I wouldn't like this movie much.


Oh, that said, Rich, I agree you should check out Makavejev. His stuff is completely deranged in exactly the way you might enjoy.


Anyone else think that looks like Mischa Barton screaming in agony at the top of the post?

Nice discussion between you guys.
I'm on the fence as to whether this movie deserves such keen analysis, but I appreciated it nonetheless.

It's interesting to compare the impact fascism had on the film industry of the former Axis countries. Post-war Italian cinema was energized by both the Neorealists and later, Fellini's surrealist movement, while Germany's vibrant, pre-war Expressionist tradition all but dried up following the close of hostilities. Perhaps it's not a coincidence, then, that Germany now is associated with the infamous "Scheisse porn" genre.

That's to say nothing of Japan's emerging legacy as deviant purveyors of schoolgirl smut and the undisputed birthplace of torture porn.


And yeah, I realize that Japan was technically under Imperialist rule, as opposed to fascist, but hey, my point still stands. I mean...hello? Tentacle Porn?


Maybe it's just me, but I automatically dismiss movies that try to shock AND have a message to them. Sigh. Give me either one separately and I can respect it but both together and it's the most pretentious kind of movie that I can't help buy roll my eyes.

Those directors that seek to make the 'so deep and consisting of timeless importance' movies already fail because they can't be the voice of the people watching it (that is, after all, what the audience will decide for themselves) and have the vision of the person making it.


ok so i just watched it going in with knowing nothing but that it's shocking and controversial (read your post after). i couldn't get behind it, to me shocking and conteroversial was all it was, and it was cheap and badly filmed and edited, one note and unbelievable. i mean when your staring at a room full of naked boys and girls giving handjobs to there captors as an old prostitute recounts her youthful memories of pissing in the mouths of her much older clients, who cares if someone has to eat sh!t at the end of the story, i'm already numb from all that came before that the scene loses effect, this movie lost it's point by being so excessive to the point we can't even get a glimmer of light to strike contrast. It's just one poor taste scene after the next to the point i'm just as complacent as the victims. It would be shocking if it weren't trying so hard to be just that and in doing so passes up a really good chance to explore what would drive people to do this, especially the soldiers who are the same age as the victims yet remorseless, WHY? cheap. I mean in the shit scene, one shot is of the duke hiding behind the long table pinching it out, the next shot is his ass with the shit on the floor, wanna shock me, take a shit for real, i can tell this is acting and that ruined the film for me, Passolini is alot like Marie Antionette, he let em eat cake. and i have to disagree, alot of the scenes went on too long and were drawn out too much and made it dull, i mean seriously, shit or get off the chest. I see why this film makes most shocking top 10 list left right center but i can't help but feel it's a little bit of a knee jerk reaction to the scenarios, the nudity, the lengthy controversy that comes with the film. too me it was cheap and one-note and not that shocking (the storytellers tales and soldiers were somewhat disturbing, but underdeveloped), then again i'm very desensitized, i also don't have the benefit of the criterion which i'm sure is very eye opening. thanks for reminding me to check it out tho, i enjoy'd the challenge and glad it was able to get a passionate response from me, even if it was negative one. thanks again


ewww sorry! my post is like a saga :(


and i take some of that back, this films reputation preceeds it making it hard to view it without expectation and appreciate the film for what it is, which is probably more that simple shock value. I just didn't catch it on the first viewing, what were your initial reactions Rich?


The Devils! Oh yes. One of the greatest films ever made, no question. I believe wholeheartedly that there is Christian conspiracy to keep it from being released on DVD. When Hollywood Chainsaw Hookers gets a two-disc special edition, while a true masterpiece has never been on DVD at all, what else could it be. Everyone please write Warner Brothers and complain. But I have my uncut european bootleg with the nun orgy intact, so I'm ok for now. It's a lot more entertaining to me than Salo, plus it's got that bitchin' Derek Jarman set design.


i think i will get the book. and maybe the movie after that.

sounds interesting, despite the poop.


Holy crap!

I mean...Rich, you have the stomach of a goat. Or something. What I want to say is that, I could barely sit through that video without gagging. Can't imagine how the entire film would affect me.

Spin Sycle, love LOVE this! While I've never seen this film, watching your vid with your friend was a riot! The little bits you had in it on one hand made me want to vom just a little but I couldn't help giggling at it! What does that mean?

Spin Sycle

Also, why did this segment make me think of GG Allin?


Quote from The Chicago Reader:

"Roland Barthes noted that in spite of all its objectionable elements,... this film should be defended because it 'refuses to allow us to redeem ourselves.' It's certainly the film in which Pasolini's protest against the modern world finds its most extreme and anguished expression. Very hard to take, but in its own way an essential work."

I always thought of this film as a wierd fusion of Hitchcock and John Waters. A film which accounts for the audience's necessity to the cinematic apparatus, by constructing representative images and ideas unimaginably and violently repulsive; the seriousness of Hitchcock's point of view meeting cute with Waters' uninhibited cultural perspective. The mere projection of these images gauges the audience's moral capacity by their ability to continue watching a movie that repulses them. By watching we accept the fascist perspective that Pasolini's mise-en-scene foists on an audience as a condition of it's construction.

And I find it funny that you, Rich, imposed a Pasolini film on another to watch their reactions, as many including myself have done with Pink Flamingos and Female Trouble. The expressions of utter horror and revulsion on unsuspecting spectators are like early Christmas presents, aren't they?


oh man. i remember this movie. shocking and disturbing but also kind of interesting.

i'm way way too violence squeamish. i dealt with the sex and even the poop eating better than the violence. ack.

but yeah, interesting. i was not expecting a post about this movie when i visited your blog today. lol.


This is one of those movies that I've been avoiding. Basically because I barf easily.

That scene was pretty damn gag-inducing. But if I must go through that, I'm glad you two were with me. Thanks, it was just the virtual hand-holding I needed.

And having gotten through that, I'm looking forward to watching the entire film and even seeing that scene in context.

On an empty stomach.


Hey Netflix whiners, how about you go to an actual video store and rent it? Unless you're too embarrassed to ask for the film with rape and shit-eating. We've got 2 copies!


I absolutely love that Gabe responded like normal people and Rich's face had that look of sic, sick fascination.

I need to know the why's of this movie so I'll check out the wiki, but man. What's wrong with you!?! :DDD


ps. The first Manga guy looks so much like Gerard Butler it's freaky! 300 will never be the same for me again.


At some point in Helen Mirren's commentary on the recent re-release of "Caligula" (which I cannot recommend highly enough), she talks about the number of non-actors on that set too, and rather poignantly brings up how pooer many people in Italy were in the decades just after WWII.

Also, with "Caligula", you can pretty much bypass the question of whether it's art. Gore Vidal may have thought that was what they were making, but he wound up having his name taken off of it!


Yeah, watch Sweet Movie. Real poop :(

The comments to this entry are closed.

BlogHer Ad Network

SAY Media

  • SAY Media


  • Gay Blogads
  • Hollywood Blogads
  • Humor Blogads
Powered by TypePad