PDA

View Full Version : Salo is...


rhett
11-29-2006, 04:29 PM
...a great film, offensive trash, mediocre, above-average exploitation, you decide! Pasolini's film has garned viewers from every opinion, probably one of the most polar of all films. Criterion is giving it the special edition treatment in the coming year, so lets spark up a little discussion.

Hellbilly
11-29-2006, 04:31 PM
Can't wait to finally see this. My mother watched it in a theater back in the days and thought it was great :)

Paff
11-29-2006, 04:38 PM
There really wasn't an option I liked, though I went with "above-average exploitation".

I do think it brings up a lot of interesting and thought-provoking ideas, but they can be hidden by ass. A lot of ass. Things going into, and coming out of, ass.

dwatts
11-29-2006, 04:46 PM
Going for masterpiece. I think fans recognize elements as exploitation, rather than the Director intending to make an exploitaton flick.

maybrick
11-29-2006, 06:10 PM
I've never seen it. I've never really cared to ever see it. I'm probably never going to see it. Salo is probably not my cup of tea.

allmessedup
11-29-2006, 06:18 PM
Pasolini definitely intended to make a political statement about fascism, but got so caught up in depicting scenes of depravity that he wound up making an exploitation film. But above average in that it still has the reputation it has years later.

Luna
11-29-2006, 07:04 PM
I went for above-average exploitation because that's probably the closest option, even though it really didn't cover my particular thoughts. I didn't find the film as shocking as expected but I did find it much more interesting on a political level than on an exploitation level.

satans-sadists
11-29-2006, 07:47 PM
I've never seen it. I've never really cared to ever see it. I'm probably never going to see it. Salo is probably not my cup of tea.

Same here.

Workshed
11-29-2006, 07:47 PM
I was very shocked by the content in Salo. The classmate sitting next to me was visibly shaken and she kept whispering things to me like, "Oh my God! I cannot believe this!" So, perhaps having someone next to me who reinforced my view made it more shocking for me...I don't know.

Nevertheles, I haven't seen anything remotely close to Salo since, but I do not think it's a masterpiece by any means. I do think it's an important film, and I am...glad...I saw it. It took me entirely by surprise. I felt real dread as I watched it.

Numania
11-29-2006, 11:05 PM
I'm going with mediocre. Maybe I just need to watch it again.
I liked Pasolini's juxtaposition of the Italian fascists with De Sade's Libertines. However, I think that De Sade's version was a little sicker. Maybe it was more erotic, I don't know.
I should give this another spin in the future. Especially since Criterion is rereleasing it. Maybe there will be some extras that I'll enjoy if I enjoy the film a little more...pending double dip, that is.

KamuiX
11-29-2006, 11:06 PM
Crap, Passolini's worse film. Nearly every one of his other films is much better, and they don't need to use cheap tactics to be disturbing or get their points across.

Evil Dead Guy
11-30-2006, 12:11 AM
I went with above-averenge, when i first watched it i was amazed they released this kind of disturbing filth. Then a couple of viewings later it started to grow on me, i might pick this one up as i always found this film bizzare and different.

Myron Breck
11-30-2006, 04:20 PM
I went with mediocre simply because I left it feeling very unimpressed--although I would likely give it a second shot down the road.

uradouche
12-01-2006, 01:57 PM
pretty average. go watch some Jodorowsky instead. Yes, people are cruel to each other, I fucking get it all ready!!!!
Not very artfully done, sometimes slow, and very overblown.

allmessedup
12-01-2006, 07:01 PM
I think even though it does function best as an exploitation film, that it disappoints a lot of people when they first see it, people that expect something more like intentional exploitation films.

I think some of the reputation is due to the audience when it initially came out. I'm sure they were expecting something like Pasolini's earlier movies, and then they got this. It's probably one of the greatest practical jokes of all time.

Criswell
12-04-2006, 09:28 AM
Fetish crap for mine.

Closer to Kenneth Anger and his films like Fleshapods than political satire or allegory.

FilmFiend
12-06-2006, 10:43 PM
I made a copy of Salo a few years ago. I was amazed to find it at the library. I still haven't watched it yet. I'm guessing it is a mediocre film then?

Numania
12-06-2006, 11:12 PM
I made a copy of Salo a few years ago. I was amazed to find it at the library. I still haven't watched it yet. I'm guessing it is a mediocre film then?

It seems to be that it's one you should watch and decide for yourself. I've heard some wax poetic over it, while others think it's crud.
Only you can prevent forest fires.

mcchrist
12-06-2006, 11:25 PM
Fetish crap for mine.

Closer to Kenneth Anger and his films like Fleshapods than political satire or allegory.

Fleshapoids was done by the Kuchar bros, not Anger. But you're in the same ballpark. Brilliant stuff, IMO. As far as Salo is concerned, I see your point. Passolini did put the need to tittilate and shock ahead of the other issues of the film, but I have no problem with that either. I lurve it.

Criswell
12-07-2006, 11:01 AM
Fleshapoids was done by the Kuchar bros, not Anger. But you're in the same ballpark. Brilliant stuff, IMO. As far as Salo is concerned, I see your point. Passolini did put the need to tittilate and shock ahead of the other issues of the film, but I have no problem with that either. I lurve it.

Damm, my mistake there r.e Fleshapoids. But i am glad you understood my point.