AVS Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 34 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,580 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I thought there was a thread on this but I didn't find it through the search mode.


For those who don't know, this is a very controversial film. For a number of reasons. Let's see if I can remember them all: originally screened at Cannes (in a version 26 minutes longer), Roger Ebert dubbed it the worst film ever shown at Cannes. Reportedly, Gallo placed a Hex on Ebert's colon or prostate (can't remember which), which Gallo claims is an exaggeration of an off hand remark he made to a reporter. Ebert followed up with a cheap (but witty) shot about how he would be thin one day but Gallo would always be the director of this film and Gallo responded by saying Ebert had the "physique of a slave trader". Ouch. The film really did have a very negative screening in Cannes and Ebert's comments hurt Gallo on a professional level, irregardless of whether they were accurate. So you can imagine the whole press hullaballoo over this, especially considering that the film also contains a graphic, no fakin' it fellatio encounter between Gallo and Chloe Sevigny. Supposedly Ebert and Gallo have found a level of mutual respect after a face to face encounter. Gallo recut the film and removed some of the long takes that audiences had responded to so negatively.


I saw the recut version. I didn't see the original so I can't comment on it, versus this new cut. This is a good movie. It's not a masterpiece and it is uneven. There are slow parts, meandering parts. But, I did get a feeling of authenticity with Gallo's portrayal of motorcycle racer Bud Clay. I sympathized with his character. No, this is not a film that anyone would describe as "riveting", but there is a payoff later in the film with a kind of "twist" that puts a lot of Bud's pathetic behavior in context. I won't ruin it by describing it. I'll just say that sitting there in the audience, his pain felt real. This is the kind of film that a sensitive person leaves the theater being a better person than when they first walked in. Some people will just hate it. That's fine. Gallo said that the danger of Ebert's original Cannes review was that it could intimidate filmmaker's from taking chances. Now I know what he means. I'm glad I saw it. Bear in mind it is Rated X, but don't see it just for that reason or you will be disappointed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,771 Posts
It's amazing how many people want to see this movie. I hope it gets a wide enough release to reach its audience. I cannot wait to see it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28,223 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Larry Davis
Bear in mind it is Rated X,
NC-17, you mean.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,580 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Matt,


Hopefully it will get a wider release. I think these kinds of movies play better in theaters. It's more of an "experience", to me anyway. It seems like years ago going to see a film was a way more transgressive event than now, especially with the rise of the multiplex, homogenization of movies and sequelitis we are subjected to today.


Josh,


I wasn't sure what it was, but when I left the theater, I saw posters for the movie with "Rated X" printed on it like a Damiano film from the 70's. Maybe it was the marketing dept. that put it on the poster or maybe they want to clue people in to the sex in the film without saying "b***job inside". Or maybe both. I just checked IMDB and they say "unrated"...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,518 Posts
Quote:
"Rated X" printed on it like a Damiano film from the 70's.
Wow, someone aside from me actually made a reference to a "golden era" adult filmmaker. What's next, reviews of the latest Dark Bros. feature? :D


But yeah, Gallo has been putting old-school X-Rated markings on the promotional materials. The circled X I haven't seen since 70's movie posters is making a comeback...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,771 Posts
It's scheduled to hit one theater in my state. It's an hour drive to a crummy cinema, but I'm going anyway. Now I have to convince my wife to go with me. :eek:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28,223 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Larry Davis
I wasn't sure what it was, but when I left the theater, I saw posters for the movie with "Rated X" printed on it like a Damiano film from the 70's. Maybe it was the marketing dept. that put it on the poster or maybe they want to clue people in to the sex in the film without saying "b***job inside". Or maybe both. I just checked IMDB and they say "unrated"...
Interesting. The "X" is not an official MPAA rating anymore (I'm not sure if it ever was, actually). So it must be the marketing department trying to be clever.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,580 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Quote:
Originally posted by Sergei Esenin
Wow, someone aside from me actually made a reference to a "golden era" adult filmmaker. What's next, reviews of the latest Dark Bros. feature? :D
Yeah, I'd say that is overly optimistic. ;)
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
23,031 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Josh Z
Interesting. The "X" is not an official MPAA rating anymore (I'm not sure if it ever was, actually). So it must be the marketing department trying to be clever.
I'm pretty sure "A Clockwork Orange" was rated X when it was first released. I seem to remember the hub-bub back then.


larry
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28,223 Posts
Yeah, and Midnight Cowboy too. Maybe it's that X was an official MPAA rating but they didn't copyright it. Or something like that.


I don't remember the whole story (I'm sure someone with a few minutes can look up the history; unfortunately I'm at work at the moment), but as I recall the gist of the problem was that porno producers were using the "X", and the made-up non-MPAA "XX" and "XXX", for their own purposes as an advertising tool, so eventually the MPAA had to create NC-17 as their new official rating for adult content.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,266 Posts
Don't get me started :)!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,771 Posts
OK. I went with two friends. We HATED this movie. And I mean HATED IT with every sense of the word HATE. I could go on and on as to why, but suffice to say, this is a 10 minute short subject dragged out to painful lengths by a pretentious director who wants us to see his girl suck his shlongalongdong.


What a waste of $5.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
224 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Josh Z
Yeah, and Midnight Cowboy too. Maybe it's that X was an official MPAA rating but they didn't copyright it. Or something like that.


I don't remember the whole story (I'm sure someone with a few minutes can look up the history; unfortunately I'm at work at the moment), but as I recall the gist of the problem was that porno producers were using the "X", and the made-up non-MPAA "XX" and "XXX", for their own purposes as an advertising tool, so eventually the MPAA had to create NC-17 as their new official rating for adult content.
The MPAA did initally use the "X" rating but it was not a copyright issue that led to its use being discontinued. As the porn industry usurped the rating and made up their "XX" and "XXX" ratings for marketing purposes, they never meant anything on the MPAA scale, the meaning of the MPAA's "X" rating got diluted to basically refer to porn in the publics eye - as opposed to just noting adult fare, noone under 17 period. So in an effort to move away from the porn industry and add a little bit of credence to a non-porn film that should be adults only they invented the NC-17 rating.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
23,031 Posts
I watched the DVD last night. I tried to watch the movie, but wound up FFing until it looked like there was some dialogue or action. Then FFing until it looked like some dialogue or action that might be interesting. Then near the end there was "the scene" and the revelation of what happened previously to make us suffer through the whole movie with the main character, albeit suffering in two different ways. :)


I could very well believe it was the worst film ever shown at Cannes.


larry
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
23,031 Posts
Quote:
Apparently the DVD is getting the Superbit treatment.
Really? The PQ wasn't that great and a higher bitrate won't help it, IMO. I know, it's for the rivoting dialogue to be put on the DTS track....
Quote:
Apparently Vincent Gallo is giving someone the shaft:
LOL!!



larry
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
685 Posts
Regarding the link above, a "double" demanding to get paid for receiving a blow job from Chloe Sevigny, he should be paying HER. There was also a rumor that Vincent Gallo used a fake you-know-what, dunno which is true.


Sean
 
1 - 20 of 34 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top