1/10
Blurring the Line Between Porno and Art; Porno wins again
19 July 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Since the legalization of hardcore pornography -- which I'll define narrowly here as filming genitals being manipulated to orgasm with the primary effect of sexually exciting the viewer -- there has been a constant tension between pornography and "legitimate" depiction of sexual conduct on camera, that is, actual sexual conduct graphically filmed, in order to make some greater philosophical or artistic point, so compelling that the message outweighs the sexual titillation.

(I realize I haven't done any better a job with these definitions than anyone else. Oh well.) Whether any film will bridge the two genres successfully, or whether it's even possible, I don't know. I do know that this one fails. It comes off as porno that has been dressed up with a tissue-thin veneer of pretense to psychological or social commentary, perhaps hoping that it can be shown in art-movie theaters. I'm not going to address the apologists for this waste of celluloid. The effect of this film is depression without elucidation, a result in which only some avant-garde critics seem to find any legitimate purpose.

It does manage to avoid some degree of cheesiness, but sacrifices any sort of joy or loopy humor. It's below pornography. It's the intellectualization of sexual predation. All it celebrates is the right of women to be stupid and self-destructive enough to masturbate and perform lesbian sexual acts on camera for money.
25 out of 62 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed