Can Sup Forums have an unironic conversation about this film?
Can Sup Forums have an unironic conversation about this film?
Other urls found in this thread:
moviepilot.com
youtube.com
twitter.com
I've always found it ironic that the director was tortured and murdered just days before the film's release.
moviepilot.com
no, because it explores ideas that are intellectually uncomfortable for most of the idiots around here
almost prophetic
the book is better
Sounds Ukrainian
Sup Forums is a christian board fuck off with this pseudo intellectual pretentious movie nigger
Sure! What's Pasolini going for with this one? Personally, I felt that the statements it makes about fascism and totalitarianism were somewhat undermined by the overtly erotic tone of some of the film. Is it possible for a director to make an artistically important statement while seemingly indulging in his own niche fetishes?
Sorry, OP, this is a Disney board, we only talk about Marvel/Star Wars/Pixar kinos. Try r/movie.
I read the book it was based on and found it to be a repetitive, pathetic piece of shit.
Is the movie any better?
edgy book edgy movie
there is very little similarity between the book and the film
Sup Forums is solely for capeshit and for redditors to talk about how much they love Trump
HERE’S A DELICIOUS PLATE OF SHIT
DIG IN
void of substance, no artistic merit, no merit beyond being shock material and weeding out pseudo intellectuals who argue otherwise
I figured as much. I've watched a lot of sick, depraved shit before, is it really all that "bad"?
people don't have aversive responses for intellectual reasons. disgust is an emotion.
It's fine if you wan't to discuss a movie that features fags eating shit, but you don't get to pretend to be an intellectual because you don't find it grotesque like a normal person would,
no not really
Yeah if you count the imagery given. Even if it is just for shock value.
but what if i am an intellectual?
Nasty piece of propaganda
It's fucking dogshit.
There are NO
LITERALLY NO
characters. There is no one and no thing to care about. If this was intended to be shocking or some allegory for fascism, it doesn't matter, because the movie isn't interesting. And when you have no character to care about, it becomes almost comedic. And I don't mean, "wow this very disturbing and making me laugh uncomfortably." I mean actually funny.
Why did they eat all that shit Sup Forums?
You obviously read the English translation, which is trash. The book is actually quite beautiful when read in French.
You're not , if you like garbage films like this. You're at best a contrarian pseudo.
:(
No it's not, Sade is overrated and only valued for shock value, he wrote like shit and all his books are trash that now serve as political propaganda for Frankists.
>The book is actually quite beautiful when read in French.
It's been a while since I've seen it, but I remember thinking that the edgy shit-related stuff isn't edgy after about 45 minutes and the flick doesn't properly raise the edginess level.
>reading the fanfic book
>not reading the original
she eat da poo poo
Haha lol fascists eat da poopoo viva comunism.
i liked caligula more
Please suck more dicks
>i can only follow a generic film format to entertain myself
pleb
The movie was literally rushed out with half the A rolls missing and the director being dead killed by a kid he tried to fuck.
I watched it while a teenager but I skipped the scenes that weren't naughty stuff
There were too much boys in that movie
Of course, that would be the case if you are engaging with the text as a piece which operates purely to entertain. Salo is a different beast in this respect, as the film does not function to entertain but rather to disgust and repel. It questions itself, asking what the limits are in what can be aptly depicted on screen in the service of art. Whether or not you think the film works in this regard, is irrelevant as the film never claims to be anything other than an experimental piece, devoted to examining the pathology of power and pleasure. A political allegory is often misattributed to 'Salo', the Facist republic simply being a backdrop to explore hedonism and insatiable, undeniably sadistic / masochistic lusts. It is, however, political in the sense of its reaction from censors and certainly broke down many boundaries for future filmmakers to further explore, deep, unthinkable aspects of the dark corners of the human psyche.
If we deal with 'Salo' on Pasolini's terms, it is indeed a masterpiece and completely successful in its aims. The film did prove that there truly isn't anything that is too 'extreme' to be depicted in film as long as it is tackled responsibly. I imagine many of you will argue against 'Salo' being an example of this.
Those who see the film merely as a perverted love letter to scat fetishes and sadism, have completely missed the point.
Kys
Pozzolini projected his homosexuality and other deviances onto the fascist party like all good commies and jees do.
Can I get a quick rundown on this?
...
I can't self-insert, ergo it's shit
>if the movie lacks relatable characters, it's bad!
>I can only watch narrative-centric films
i think capeshit is more your speed
D U D E
P O O P
L M A O
Pasolini is a hack
please refer him as Pozzolini from here on to underline the fact that he was a faggot and a pedophile, thank you for your understanding.
What the fuck was his problem?
>mmmm why am I such a degenerate? how can i make a degenerate film with all my fetishes and get away with it?
>i know, i'll blame the fascists lmao
Beyond the shock value ( that soften with years ) it's forgettable.
I do love the song commemorating the commie faggot's death thou
It kind of loses its edge when you can see more fucked up shit actually done to people on the inter nette.
Great music throughout, but otherwise not Pasolini's best. Book is over 9000 more sickening, so the movie feels a little bland.
Also book makes more sense because bad guys are liberal aristocrats. Fasists are usually conservative, not batshit crazy pedofiles.
It was boring. I didn't understand their obsession with fecal matter. That might be from the fact that it was difficult to pay attention to anything the characters said.
MANGIA LA MERDA
This guy gets it.
The film is a piece of shit, and so was Pasolini. Good riddance.
Worst movie i've ever seen.
>let's eat some poop huuurrrr
>His body was mutilated and burned, his testicles crushed, and he had multiple broken bones as a result of being repeatedly run over by his own car.
Holy shit
degenerate italian gets what was coming for him
>2/3 of the book is devoted to shitplay
>beautiful
Literally Donald Trumps America
History Will Repeat Itself Thanks To Him.
only the ending was bad desu. it's quite tame. Martyrs was harsher.
If there is no coherent narrative, then is it really a movie? I personally don't buy the artistic pretensions of this flick. Renember, when this came out, shock and gore exploitation movies were in fashion. It was just a product of its time.
t. brainlet
And people on this shit board still compare this to A serbian film and similar garbage
>If there is no coherent narrative, then is it really a movie?
I hate the movie in question but yes.
>If there is no coherent narrative, then is it really a movie?
Yes, you dumbass. A movie doesn't even need a story to be a movie -- let alone have a coherent one.
nails through the guy's foreskin then burning his penis was too much more me(i dont even have foreskin), hell i barely made it though the scenes of then eating fecal matter with nails and other sharp objects was tough enough to get through
And what ideas would that be? It's an attention whoring, deeply disturbed individual's attempt at going for shock value. Saying it's 3deep is nothing more than a confidence trick. Getting gullible retards with terminal dunning kruger like you to defend this shit lest your equally gullible peers start ostracizing you.
This shock value "high art" crap is a case of the emperor's new clothes. All the proselytizing is just powertalk by the degenerate kike "artists" and the equally degenerate consumers who enjoy this crap to justify themselves to the public, and avoid ostracism. The author wanted to make a 2 hour scat orgy porn film. If you're not part of the crowd that either profits or gets off on this shit, you're being played for a fool.
sounds like he wrote his own death scene
Well, the original book by the Marquis de Sade had similar themes of the sexual corruption of the aristocracy, so Pasolini was simply translating those themes into into a more contemporary setting, i.e. Italy under Mussolini
But with this he kinda fucked up the point. You can't just turn liberals into fasist and except the characters make sense. It is also way less satirical than it should be, De Sade's book was so freightening due to the fact that it showed the horrible deeds as a lighthearted funtime with friends.
So you mean he simply made shit up? You do realize that you can't take an alleged trend from one point in space and time and just magically transfer to it somewhere else, right? It's a shock porn film, barely disguised as symbolizing anything, grounded in nothing and not exploring anything other than the author's fucked up mental world.
I mean, that's kind of how every adaption ever works. Are you saying that Oh Brother Where Art Thou and the like don't work simply because they are set in different time periods from the original work?
I do agree that Pasolini kind of lost the political wit and satire that De Sade had with the novel. Maybe he just got swept up with the sexual and perverted imagery and never stopped to consider the actual message.
Never watched this garbage, dont plan too
Does it show any bert holes? Preferably girl
The most uncomfortable thing about this film for me is that a really amazing girl I dated who left me, lived in Salo. So I always think of her when I think of this film.
this is pretty good
Pretty sums up how I feel about the movie.
This is completely missing the point. The unsettling nature of the film doesn't come from people eating fudge made to look like shit or the violence that was tame even by the era's standards. There are no relatable or even particularly memorable characters among the prisoners because the one aspect of the film comes from examining the effects of dehumanization and what it means to exercise complete control over the powerless.
120 Days is not where you start with Sade. He was becoming delusional in an asylum and using writing as an outlet for his extreme sexual fetishes and increasing obsession with numerology (something lightly referenced in the film with the silly number jokes and the repeated mentions of the number of male and female prisoners).
>not eating shit
>effects of dehumanization and what it means to exercise complete control over the powerless
Good intentions with nearly unwatchable results. Nothing about this film is interesting aside from how repulsive it is.