Salo o Le 120 Giornate di Sodoma

[Kirk Anderson]

I just saw this in a "images of Eroticism" class at SFSU. Seriously WHAT THE fu**????

I don't think I'll ever be the same....I just want to know if anyone else has seen this or has any opinions or if i'm just gonna be messed up for years.

whoa, pasolini....whoa, what were you thinking??!!

 

It wasn't as graphic as I had anticipated, I thought it'd be like Audtion but still, I almost puked in my lap during the poop eating.

 

 

whoa, any comments?

 

kirk

[Steve Zimmerman]

I've been curious about Salo myself. Supposedly it's symbolicly anti-fascist.

 

Another Euro art film w/ bodily fluids and excretions to stay away from is Dusan Makavejev's Sweet Movie. You should mention it to your professor for "brownie points" lol.

Edited September 29, 2006 by Steve Zimmerman

[James Steven Beverly]

I just saw this in a "images of Eroticism" class at SFSU. Seriously WHAT THE fu**????

I don't think I'll ever be the same....I just want to know if anyone else has seen this or has any opinions or if i'm just gonna be messed up for years.

whoa, pasolini....whoa, what were you thinking??!!

 

It wasn't as graphic as I had anticipated, I thought it'd be like Audtion but still, I almost puked in my lap during the poop eating.

whoa, any comments?

 

kirk

 

POOP EATING???!!! Shades oF John Waters, I definately gotta check that poop out (sorry about that, I couldn't resist), I know students have to take a lot of crap from thier professors but this is rediculas. It's a Dirty Shame. I have this image in my mind of your professor, wearing Polyester and several gold chains with a medallion of his zodiac sign hanging at his navel and the words "Girls, Girls, Girls" flashing in brilliant blue neon from the window behind him as he explains the social meaning behind THIS "Art" film. Makes that tuition you paid seem like you just flushed your money away doesn't it? POOP eating as part of a college ciriculium, even I, as twisted as my little brain is, woulda never come up with that one. Dude, your gonna be messed up for years. Although, giving this guy a VERY big benefit of doubt that this scene DID have SOME redeeming cultural or artistic value, I still must wonder if eating poop would really quailfy as an "image of eroticism" to ANYONE but the most Cicile B. Demented of us (Forgive me, I'm going for a whole John Waters thing here). I don't want to be a Cry Baby but, I think your professor needs to rethink his terminology. Any one who thinks that is sexy has Female Trouble. If he conciders this erotic rather than an full blown exploitive atempt to shock and absolute Mondo Trasho, he may be in need of a series hy-colonics administer through the severed necks of several bright, plastic, Pink Flamingos a because HE'S DEFINATELY FULL OF.....well, you know. B)

[Jason Debus]

I haven't seen this yet either but it sounds interesting. Salo had a big influence on Vincent Gallo, he talks about it in this interview:

 

It was the first time that I understood that there were these whole other cultures around the world that had their own insights, points of views, and sensibilities that could transcend America. I'm 16, it's a funny age, I'm still a little naive, but I was blown out that these Italians-and you know my mother and father are Sicilians-had a cinema language that was completely separate from anything I had seen before. I can't tell you how shocking that thought is at that time in your life. And the other thing was, there was violence in the movie that was not presented in a titillating way. Instead, it was disturbing. Really disturbing. There's a scene where one of the fascist queers is in a room, and the room is dead silent; you can't hear the horror of the torture outside this room, but you can see it. One of the cast members is looking out the window at the torture of these young boys and girls. He can only see it, he can't hear it. We could see these horrific things, but we were aware that we were seeing them through glass, that we were separated, that someone was in a beautiful study observing this horror. And something about this detached point of view disturbed me. My brain left my body. It refused to see what I was seeing. It shut down. My mind went blank for ten seconds.

[Kirk Anderson]

according to the professor, eroticism is not sexy or a turn on, or supposed to be appealing. Eroticism is perversion. So, technically according to him, these movies should be focusing on sexual perversion and messed up poop, rather than a pizza guy and two roommates who just happen to fall into bed together.

I don't know if I agree or if it really is even correct, I'm just repeating it and I'm weirded out.

 

kirk

[James Steven Beverly]

Dude, I DEFINATELY can understand WHY your freaked out. Believe me, your reaction is EXACTLY what the filmmaker wanted you to feel. If it turned you on to watch that scene, his film would have been a dismal failure, so don't feel like your "missing' something here. It is PURE manipulation and THAT in and of it's self is not nessesarily a negative thing. If you trying to shook an audence to make a point, then using explotive manipulation as a tool is valid as long as you are able to walk the line between manipulation and self endulgence. Hitchcock was a master of manipulation but was NEVER self endulgent. The scene in Psycho where Norman pushes the car with the dead girl in the trunk into the lake and it starts to sink the stops halfway in, is utterly brilliant. We as the audence hold our breath in hopes that the car will go down and feel the fear that Norman feels at that monent that he might be caught. We are manipulated into sympatizing with a man who is helping to cover up the cruel, cold blooded murder of a beautiful, vital young woman, yet never ONCE dfo we feel taken advatage of by this manipulation. That is a master filmmaker.

 

Eroticism, though, by the very definition of the word (IE: 1: An eroric quality or theme. 2: Sexual excitement. 3: Abnormally persistent sexual excitement.) and the definition of it's root word, Erotic (IE ! Of or corcerning sexual love nd desire, amatory. 2:Tending to arouse sexual desire. 3:Dominated by sexual love or desire.) is sexual in nature . Sexual preversion is a whole other subject. Sexual preversion is an aboration of eroticism outside the norm of most human behaviour usually caused by emotional trama of some kind at a young age dure our developmental years. There ARE some people that would find this scene erotic, but they would be in the vast minority. This film COULD have redeeming social value in exploring the themes of sexual preversion, however THAT is NOT eroticism. They are 2 different subjects.

 

What your going to find after you leave collage is that 3/4s of your professors are literally controlling, manipulative and full of poop. I'm not saying there is no value in this particular film, just that him calling that particular scene erotic is abserd. Don't fall for that bullsh*t. Make up your own mind as to what was effective and what was mere exploitation. Your professor is not God and he DOESN'T have all the answers. He's PAID to try and open up your mind, so open it up to the fact that he could be completely WRONG. Debate the merits with him. That's how you learn. Just because your as lowly sudent, doesn't mean your instincts are incorrect. You may be 100% right, but just remember some of these clowns have enormous egos and act like little tin Napoleans in their classes, so be aware that if you do challange his assurtions, he MIGHT retaliate unfairly. Just food for thought. B)

Edited September 29, 2006 by James Steven Beverly

[Morgan Peline]

Hi,

 

I remember a friend buying a DVD of this film. If I remember rightly, the introductory notes in the box said that that scene was meant to be a metaphor for how the quality of food in the modern world had deteriorated to the point where people were eating crap.

 

So in other words maybe a prescient comment on the convenience and fast-food McDonalds generation. I suppose it's just as valid an analysis as any other.

 

Don't forget that Pasolini was Italian, I think, so therefore probably very much obssessed with good food. The film was made in 1975, so convenience supermarket and fast-food food was probably becoming quite popular, ever since after the war. Foody Europeans hate convenience food and complain about it incessantly.

[Morgan Peline]

Also the sexual scenes are meant to be a commentary on the permissiveness of modern society I think, or something like that anyway.