This is topic Salo - A sick film in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.
To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=000204
Posted by Howard Johnson (Member # 62) on 03-29-2001, 12:59 PM:
Have you ever felt embarassed to project a film? I have just shown Salo or 120 Days Of Sodom which was made by Pasolini in 1975 but banned in the UK till now . The BFI are distributing it here. I thought it was the most sick and disgusting film I have seen and I have seen some strong stuff over the years. It shows a group of fascists holding a group of young girls and boys in a villa and subjecting them to torture, humiliation and sexual assault. I find it difficult to imagine how anybody could sit and watch this film . What do other projectionists think has this been shown in the USA? Howard Johnson
Posted by Ian Price (Member # 14) on 03-29-2001, 01:11 PM:
I haven't seen this one, but I have hated and walked out on every Pasolini film I have ever had the misfortune to walk in on. 
I have heard people hail him as one of the most inovative filmmakers ever. I think he is just a hack who went for shock value.
I tried to sit through two of his films in the 1970s but was unable to. They were Arabian Nights and Canterbury Tales. I thought this would be high brow entertainment. These were his third and second to last films. His last film was The 120 Days of Sodom. He was killed in 1975 by homicide.
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 03-29-2001, 02:35 PM:
Moving to Yak forum.
Posted by Dwayne Caldwell (Member # 417) on 03-29-2001, 03:47 PM:
I'd never heard of Pasolini until this post. Guess it's a good thing he didn't get to make any more crap. Sounds like whoever performed the Homicide did the rest of us a favor. Maybe that was the plan.------------------
The man with the magic hands.
Posted by Larry Davis (Member # 609) on 03-29-2001, 05:39 PM:
I didn't see Salo, but it was released by the Criterion Collection on DVD. Once it went out of print, prices skyrocketed. Loot at ebay for Salo. There's one disc with bids over $200 and another DVD starts at $350! Incredible. I thought I had read that Pasolini was murdered by one of the child actors in Salo. Is that true? Ironic, if so.
Posted by Mike Heenan (Member # 392) on 03-29-2001, 06:10 PM:
I think saying that murdering someone as a favor to the rest of us is a pretty dumb observation, since you claim to have not seen his work at all. Now if it were someone like MAnson, or McVeigh, yeah I would agree, but since its an artist expressing himself or doing it for shock value, thats definetly wrong to say. I found Canterbury Tales quite funny, especially the Satan crapping scene, which must be seen to believed. Pasolini was in fact murdered by homosexual teenage prostitute I believe, he himself being a homosexual, this was covered in Anger's Hollywood Babylon book. What you must realize is that this movie was based on the writings of the Marquis DeSade and of course it is going to be quite graphic and intense. I guess it is the context that would count, because wasnt Schindlers List and Private Ryan overly graphic in its depiction of the holocaust and the war, and both of these movies surely deserve an X rating gore wise, but no, because of the context of the movie and the fact they were directed by Steven Spielberg, they get an R rating. Now, one would say that these movies were honest depictions of war, but so would Salo be in its depiction of DeSade's writings. It's too bad this movie probably wont be shown here in the US, Im sure the AFA and all those "family" associations would be up in arms over this flick.
Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 03-29-2001, 10:08 PM:
I haven't seen Salo but I remember showing Lolita. I didn't like that movie at ALL. It kinda' made me sick in the stomach just to watch it.What really sickened me is that the movie tried to make you sympathize with the guy because he was "traumatized" as a teenager. Then they tried to play it off with a "good pedophile" VS. "bad pedophile" thang.
Pedophilia and murder just aren't the kind of subjects I care to think about, LET ALONE be "immersed" in by watching a movie.
I'm sure that Lolita is nowhere NEAR as "graphic" as Salo so I'm sure I would not want to watch it.
Posted by Dwayne Caldwell (Member # 417) on 03-30-2001, 05:01 AM:
Mike,I guess my Homicide comment above seems a trite unnecessary, but did you have to call me a dummy for it? I will admit, I'm vaguely offended by it. Especially if my comment is considered deplorable while you defend a filmmaker who uses children in the depiction of unspeakable acts. Also, I was joking in the above comment. I guess I should have added a smiley to make the dark humor complete but I doubt I'd evoke as much amusement or chortling out of you as a Satan crapping scene. I guess I'd have to be a student of the arts to get that one.
------------------
The man with the magic hands.
Posted by Bob Maar (Member # 763) on 03-30-2001, 09:38 AM:
After reading the above eight posts, I can tell you I will never see any of his films.
If you showed it for free, I would not watch this trash. Let's call it what it is. What a wasted life.
Posted by Mike Heenan (Member # 392) on 03-30-2001, 04:05 PM:
Darryl, I did not say you were dumb, but rather the comment you made(see the comment in my post), so Im sorry if it seemed that way. I guess everyones version of humor is different of course, I found the Satan scene quite funny along with the rest of the film (canterbury tales). Salo on the other hand quite disturbed me with alot of the movie, and the ending. There were no children in Salo, but rather teenagers. Of course that itself is a problem and probably why its considered one of hte sickest movies ever.
Posted by Dwayne Caldwell (Member # 417) on 03-30-2001, 07:01 PM:
No problem Mike.It's just that when the words child pornography are used by others to describe an artist work, that artist gets my immediate disrespect, but I'd never wish death on anyone. Unless they pissed me off (again, this is meant to be humorous in a morbid way).
------------------
The man with the magic hands.
Posted by Mike Heenan (Member # 392) on 03-30-2001, 08:06 PM:
I should read my own posts, I mistakenly referred to you as Darryl. Sorry about that! And I totally agree with you on that post, Im curious to see whether he had any ramifications for using these people in the roles, but I guess things were more lenient in the 70s.
Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 03-31-2001, 01:25 AM:
Jeepers! I'd forgotten all about Pasolini. I ran all those films in the 70s in a rep house, and we really used to pack 'em in with some of them.Very bizarre, like you were watching snuff films. Although I got some laughs out of Canterbury Tales.
------------------
Better Projection Pays!
Posted by Jerry Chase (Member # 660) on 03-31-2001, 08:46 AM:
Tim, those were the depths of depravity, whether real or not.BTW, does anyone have information about the early Japanese films where some of the actors were supposedly condemned prisoners and their final scene was literally their final scene? I've heard rumors about at least one film like this for years, but no facts. Is it an urban legend or true?
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 03-31-2001, 11:21 AM:
I agree that many of Pasolini's films are quite impressively disgusting, and I personally would never contemplate paying money to see any.However, the disgusting scenes are intended to make a wider statement. In the case of 'Salo' it is that repressive political regimes dehumanise people to the point where such behaviour becomes first acceptable, and then the norm. So on these grounds I would at least defend the right of film-makers like Pasolini to produce and have shown such films, at least to mature adults.
There is a genuine difference between this and genuine pornography, which is to simply to present disgusting scenes so that sick-minded people can gain pleasure from them.
As an example of the latter I would cite the films of an individual who calls himself Bruce LaBruce. He has produced a number of films supposedly championing gay rights but which in reality do little more than celebrate and promote sexual violence. His latest, 'Skin Flick' (which I had the misfortune of being asked to show last year) contains two hours of scenes in which men are violently assaulted, restrained and then forcibly buggered, shot in a way which is clearly designed to give the impression that the people carrying out the assaults are the 'good guys'. Unlike 'Salo' I would have no hesitation in banning films like these and even prosecuting the people responsible for incitment.
In short, we have to be clear in distinguishing the artists from the arse-bandits.
Posted by Mike Heenan (Member # 392) on 03-31-2001, 12:55 PM:
Thanks Leo thats the point I was trying to get across as well.