So the movie version icludes "only" teenage victims? No 3-year old girls and new-born babies? Well that explains it. I mean, after reading from Wikipedia especially about the third & fourth months' events, I WAS wondering how the fuck wasn't this movie banned for all time world wide. But if it changed the victims and events that much then I guess it makes sense. But nonetheless I have no desire to poison my mind with anything that has something to do with that novel which I also will never read.
@TheLoboFairchild I meant poison in the sense that those sick images are there for the rest of your life and any sane person would be happier without them there. If I personally end up watching a horror movie with sick shit in it, I'd rather watch a film which story has a point and lesson of a kind that can not be told effectively enough in another way. Like Stephen King's "Pet Sematary".
@VampireOutlaw Again the images don't stay with you the rest of your life, and the book has many valid points, on society as it was back then, and many philosophical points, also De Sade came up with evolution(Darwin just added to it), and Stephen King is over rated, no offence, but Stephen King is easy reading, I could read one of his books on a Sunday afternoon. Salo, the film, is over rated, but the book, the book is well worth a read. And the images only haunt you if you have a weak mind.
@TheLoboFairchild Whoever spoke about haunting? The images WILL be there for the rest of a viewer's life as nothing is ever really forgotten. While long "forgotten" memories may pop up by a situation or event even distantly related to the topic, and weakness or strength of mind has no power over it. Even if this popping up / returning happened just once or twice in life, which is not "being haunted", it still is less happy person that would be if not seen such images.
@VampireOutlaw Em you're the one that mentioned the word "haunting" I didn't. And no sorry the images didn't stay with me. Do you get disturbed by watching the news or reading the newspaper too? I only ask, cause the stuff that happens in real life is way more disturbing a work of fiction, like really, if you let things fictional haunt you then sorry but you do have a weak mind and that means you can't handle them, so yea it has everything to do with the type of mind you have.
@TheLoboFairchild I used my browser's search tool. You seem to be the only one on this entire comment table who's ever talked about haunting. So, again, I never said fictinal things haunt me, as in I do not let fictional things haunt me. And images do stick with you too. Your mind isn't a superhuman mind that miraculously completely erases anything your eyes saw. Images stick with you as long as they're there at all. How often they pop up is irrelevant.
@VampireOutlaw Ps: the only time an image really "stays with you" is if it is through a traumatic event which I am guessing is something you have never went through, which also tells me, that you are unwillingness to read De Sade over his reputation is because you fear his works will traumatize you. Puh-lease, leave the big boy books to the adults.
@TheLoboFairchild Oh, puh-lease. It's not over his reputation, it's for what I know the book contains. The only reason I don't want to read the novel is because I'm not into reading sick shit that has no moral lesson behind it that other kind of story could not tell, b/c in such cases I see it pointless. "Historical value" is not enough to make it worth reading, "psychological study" is not enough to make it worth reading as I am not aiming to becom a psychiatrist.
@TheLoboFairchild And I'll have you know I'm in late 30's and read many kind of sick and dark stories (as I've been a huge fan of horror since childhood), but I require more from the stories I get into. The hell with "symbolism", "historical value" or "psychological study possibbility" if there is no moral or lesson of if it can be told in more tasteful way. "We are not free" can be told clearly and effectively in more tasteful ways. The points & lesson in Pet Sematary can not.
@VampireOutlaw Nah you are just too afraid to branch out, that is all, ok I respect that you read "dark stories" but when you mentioned King as a reference then I just stopped taking you seriously, their are much better horror novelists than king, Ryu Murakami for example, Koji Suzuki, and Peter Straub, check them out, you should check out De Sade too, cause like you said you have read "sick and dark" so therefore Sade should be a walk in the park, and his stories have incredible points to them
@TheLoboFairchild There are people who consider Pet Sematary to be "completely inapproriate filth" so I can only imagine what they'd say about Salo...But do I accuse them of weak mind and being too afraid, or not take them seriously? No. Because the bottom line is not whether something scares and traumatizes or not, but what kind of a horror one considers a tasteful and effective way to bring up a specific point. And this is not such to me.
@VampireOutlaw Really, cause I have never heard anyone refer to pet cemetery as "complete inappropriate filth", mostly I hear people say it was easy reading or at the very least entertaining, which I admit, I did enjoy it, but I am not a big King fan, every novel is the same point just under a different pre-tense, anyway, you have a different opinion to me, and I can't change that. Some things are just not for certain people. :)
like the Jewish owned porn industry, anything to bring down western culture, degrade, humiliate for own ends, whether Italian , from whichever country... food for thought...
At risk of sounding pretentious,don't mistake this for a mere gorefest.It had a point;you can be too wealthy and powerful.That it often leads to corruption.More recently,think of Abu Ghraib.That said,it was powerful enough to make me swear off Tootsie rolls and chocolate mousse for years.
Chocolate and orange marmalade? I always wondered what they used to make it look like real crap. The funny thing is, this guy objected to the use of the word "interesting" to describe the film. The film WAS interesting. My objection would be to use of the word "artistic."
These movies are terrible. The only reason people watch films is to have an overall good experience. Even with horror. If a movie does nothing but disturb you, how the hell could that be considered good?
Same with even more famous films, such as Precious. These movies are made just for shock value and to disturb people and make them feel awkward. Awful movies.
And Human Centipede was entertaining at least. It's just so over-the-top, I haven't met a single person yet who hasn't laughed at it.
the dick gettinn stuck on fire didnt impres me, thr people watching it trough the binoculours really disturbed me. its one sick piece ofr shit this movie
Guys, please: do not mix Pasolini's 'Saló' with regular horror or 'sick' movies. Pasolini's movie has a deep political message. In one scene, one of the 'master' says that 'the true anarchy is power, because if you have power you can do whathever you want with whoever you want'. This movie depicts the structure of power as imposed on people's bodies and how people become manipulated: they even betray other people to please the men of power, who force them to eat shit and, at the end, kill them!
@vins1979 more than to "please" the men of power, the betray each other because they are scared! that's the main theme of the movie, use of power to manipulate people and force them to do what you want, even when they all are in rhe same position, they hope to get away with their "mistakes" by spying on the others.
@foodonface As a matter of fact, I would like to see "A Serbian movie" but I've never found the DVD around yet. From what I read, it must be very interesting.
@vins1979 eh, not my thing, but whatever. I think they could have made a film with the same message about serbia or salo could've had the same message without being so messed up. 1984 was unpleasant (but good) and still pulled off a message without being completely disgusting.
@foodonface Yes, it's disgusting, but that's how Pasolini wanted the movie to be. Considering that the movie was made in 1975, probably being shocking and horrific was one of the very few ways of shaking people minds. We're all used to speak about the "structure of power" and the "top-down manipulations" now, but it wasn't so back then. And plus, the movie has some intrisic artistic merits: undeniably, it is beautifully shot despite its content, it's a treatise on the "aesthetic of disgusting"!
@vins1979 yeah, okay. I get making it uneasy on purpose (like 1984), but still, I don't see a reason. I agree, most disturbing films are very well shot. Maybe one day this will be tame.
The one guy doing the Anyalisis has some legit things to say but the other person is just annoying and childish. Yeah we get it Salo is a sick film... Anyone who knows about the movie knows its hard to watch do we really need that particular peice of commetary?
@ichater Well, no, but commentary IS welcome if it concentrates on the encapsulation, by the movie, of the political, social and economic issues stemming from WWII in Italy, fascism and 1970's Italy, which was heavily influenced by political tension, terrorism and assassinations, creating a climate of fear, repulsion and, eventually, schizophrenia, all of which are represented in the movie somehow.
@phoenix9909 They show it, but it's at a distance and very brief. I would actually consider A Serbian Film to be more disturbing than Salo, though Salo is far more disgusting.
@phoenix9909 They're distinct...A Serbian Film has more "oomph" to the individual scenes I found...I was more disturbed by the actual acts I was witnessing and almost felt like I needed to turn away or pause it at points to get my shit together. Salo is more about the actual atmosphere of the whole film, what you see is disturbing of course, but the "texas chainsaw massacre"-style filming (grainy, dark, it FEELS disconnected like a medical film) makes the overall atmosphere more oppressive.
@ZarathustrasCrown yep seen both of them and i agree with your statement. i found it really creepy when the crazy lady was telling her sex stories when she was a kid, lol huge WTF moment for me
Not Dante's inferno but a direct adaptation of 120 days of sodom by the Marquis de Sade
tyknos93 5 days ago
ART?! How the F*ck can any one call this art? Graffiti is art, This is just sick
dRpAnKy97 1 week ago
Comment removed
ninearthify 3 weeks ago
Tell you what... Marquis de Sade was a sick bastard.
CasanovaConstantine 3 weeks ago in playlist More videos from genericperson12
So the movie version icludes "only" teenage victims? No 3-year old girls and new-born babies? Well that explains it. I mean, after reading from Wikipedia especially about the third & fourth months' events, I WAS wondering how the fuck wasn't this movie banned for all time world wide. But if it changed the victims and events that much then I guess it makes sense. But nonetheless I have no desire to poison my mind with anything that has something to do with that novel which I also will never read.
VampireOutlaw 1 month ago
@VampireOutlaw It doesn't poison your mind, unless you have a weak mind.
TheLoboFairchild 3 weeks ago
@TheLoboFairchild I meant poison in the sense that those sick images are there for the rest of your life and any sane person would be happier without them there. If I personally end up watching a horror movie with sick shit in it, I'd rather watch a film which story has a point and lesson of a kind that can not be told effectively enough in another way. Like Stephen King's "Pet Sematary".
VampireOutlaw 3 weeks ago
@VampireOutlaw Again the images don't stay with you the rest of your life, and the book has many valid points, on society as it was back then, and many philosophical points, also De Sade came up with evolution(Darwin just added to it), and Stephen King is over rated, no offence, but Stephen King is easy reading, I could read one of his books on a Sunday afternoon. Salo, the film, is over rated, but the book, the book is well worth a read. And the images only haunt you if you have a weak mind.
TheLoboFairchild 3 weeks ago
@TheLoboFairchild Whoever spoke about haunting? The images WILL be there for the rest of a viewer's life as nothing is ever really forgotten. While long "forgotten" memories may pop up by a situation or event even distantly related to the topic, and weakness or strength of mind has no power over it. Even if this popping up / returning happened just once or twice in life, which is not "being haunted", it still is less happy person that would be if not seen such images.
VampireOutlaw 3 weeks ago
@VampireOutlaw Em you're the one that mentioned the word "haunting" I didn't. And no sorry the images didn't stay with me. Do you get disturbed by watching the news or reading the newspaper too? I only ask, cause the stuff that happens in real life is way more disturbing a work of fiction, like really, if you let things fictional haunt you then sorry but you do have a weak mind and that means you can't handle them, so yea it has everything to do with the type of mind you have.
TheLoboFairchild 3 weeks ago
@TheLoboFairchild I used my browser's search tool. You seem to be the only one on this entire comment table who's ever talked about haunting. So, again, I never said fictinal things haunt me, as in I do not let fictional things haunt me. And images do stick with you too. Your mind isn't a superhuman mind that miraculously completely erases anything your eyes saw. Images stick with you as long as they're there at all. How often they pop up is irrelevant.
VampireOutlaw 3 weeks ago
@VampireOutlaw Ps: the only time an image really "stays with you" is if it is through a traumatic event which I am guessing is something you have never went through, which also tells me, that you are unwillingness to read De Sade over his reputation is because you fear his works will traumatize you. Puh-lease, leave the big boy books to the adults.
TheLoboFairchild 3 weeks ago
@TheLoboFairchild Oh, puh-lease. It's not over his reputation, it's for what I know the book contains. The only reason I don't want to read the novel is because I'm not into reading sick shit that has no moral lesson behind it that other kind of story could not tell, b/c in such cases I see it pointless. "Historical value" is not enough to make it worth reading, "psychological study" is not enough to make it worth reading as I am not aiming to becom a psychiatrist.
VampireOutlaw 3 weeks ago
@TheLoboFairchild And I'll have you know I'm in late 30's and read many kind of sick and dark stories (as I've been a huge fan of horror since childhood), but I require more from the stories I get into. The hell with "symbolism", "historical value" or "psychological study possibbility" if there is no moral or lesson of if it can be told in more tasteful way. "We are not free" can be told clearly and effectively in more tasteful ways. The points & lesson in Pet Sematary can not.
VampireOutlaw 3 weeks ago
@VampireOutlaw Nah you are just too afraid to branch out, that is all, ok I respect that you read "dark stories" but when you mentioned King as a reference then I just stopped taking you seriously, their are much better horror novelists than king, Ryu Murakami for example, Koji Suzuki, and Peter Straub, check them out, you should check out De Sade too, cause like you said you have read "sick and dark" so therefore Sade should be a walk in the park, and his stories have incredible points to them
TheLoboFairchild 3 weeks ago
@TheLoboFairchild There are people who consider Pet Sematary to be "completely inapproriate filth" so I can only imagine what they'd say about Salo...But do I accuse them of weak mind and being too afraid, or not take them seriously? No. Because the bottom line is not whether something scares and traumatizes or not, but what kind of a horror one considers a tasteful and effective way to bring up a specific point. And this is not such to me.
VampireOutlaw 3 weeks ago
@VampireOutlaw Really, cause I have never heard anyone refer to pet cemetery as "complete inappropriate filth", mostly I hear people say it was easy reading or at the very least entertaining, which I admit, I did enjoy it, but I am not a big King fan, every novel is the same point just under a different pre-tense, anyway, you have a different opinion to me, and I can't change that. Some things are just not for certain people. :)
TheLoboFairchild 2 weeks ago
like the Jewish owned porn industry, anything to bring down western culture, degrade, humiliate for own ends, whether Italian , from whichever country... food for thought...
Domdeone1 1 month ago
This reviewer is useless.
richardm123uk 1 month ago
That movie is shit
DarkXxXJack 4 months ago
boring, dirty film for perverts
Deefit81 5 months ago
Is it me or does the President look like the Joker!?
SPeacock 5 months ago
At risk of sounding pretentious,don't mistake this for a mere gorefest.It had a point;you can be too wealthy and powerful.That it often leads to corruption.More recently,think of Abu Ghraib.That said,it was powerful enough to make me swear off Tootsie rolls and chocolate mousse for years.
exeuroweenie 6 months ago
The book is the most fucked up thing ever.
rp1dmc 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
the director was murdered not long after making this movie...
TheNinja404 8 months ago
Chocolate and orange marmalade? I always wondered what they used to make it look like real crap. The funny thing is, this guy objected to the use of the word "interesting" to describe the film. The film WAS interesting. My objection would be to use of the word "artistic."
mplsmn1975 9 months ago
The depictions of violence in this movie aren't what's scary. The sense of the victims' powerlessness and vulnerability is what's scary.
bunnywailer14 9 months ago 2
A Serbian film is worse. I couldn't sleep for days after I watched that nightmare.
bunnywailer14 9 months ago 2
i jerked off to this movie :)
SSwipperSS 9 months ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
can you watch it online?
skeetdoner 10 months ago
I love this video Im sub for sure
saucess12 10 months ago
This movie isn't gross at all. Not even as bad as guinea pig films. I just didn't get it. Confusing.
x0ticShwty 10 months ago
These movies are terrible. The only reason people watch films is to have an overall good experience. Even with horror. If a movie does nothing but disturb you, how the hell could that be considered good?
Same with even more famous films, such as Precious. These movies are made just for shock value and to disturb people and make them feel awkward. Awful movies.
And Human Centipede was entertaining at least. It's just so over-the-top, I haven't met a single person yet who hasn't laughed at it.
Hiraga08 11 months ago
the dick gettinn stuck on fire didnt impres me, thr people watching it trough the binoculours really disturbed me. its one sick piece ofr shit this movie
ischa666 11 months ago
iv never seen it but after reading about salo i wouldent compare it to a clock work orange
GothicSatnist666 1 year ago
Guys, please: do not mix Pasolini's 'Saló' with regular horror or 'sick' movies. Pasolini's movie has a deep political message. In one scene, one of the 'master' says that 'the true anarchy is power, because if you have power you can do whathever you want with whoever you want'. This movie depicts the structure of power as imposed on people's bodies and how people become manipulated: they even betray other people to please the men of power, who force them to eat shit and, at the end, kill them!
vins1979 1 year ago 22
@vins1979 more than to "please" the men of power, the betray each other because they are scared! that's the main theme of the movie, use of power to manipulate people and force them to do what you want, even when they all are in rhe same position, they hope to get away with their "mistakes" by spying on the others.
vulcanica75 9 months ago
@vins1979 and a serbian film is about serbian gov't...
foodonface 4 months ago
@foodonface As a matter of fact, I would like to see "A Serbian movie" but I've never found the DVD around yet. From what I read, it must be very interesting.
vins1979 4 months ago
@vins1979 eh, not my thing, but whatever. I think they could have made a film with the same message about serbia or salo could've had the same message without being so messed up. 1984 was unpleasant (but good) and still pulled off a message without being completely disgusting.
foodonface 4 months ago
@foodonface Yes, it's disgusting, but that's how Pasolini wanted the movie to be. Considering that the movie was made in 1975, probably being shocking and horrific was one of the very few ways of shaking people minds. We're all used to speak about the "structure of power" and the "top-down manipulations" now, but it wasn't so back then. And plus, the movie has some intrisic artistic merits: undeniably, it is beautifully shot despite its content, it's a treatise on the "aesthetic of disgusting"!
vins1979 4 months ago
@vins1979 yeah, okay. I get making it uneasy on purpose (like 1984), but still, I don't see a reason. I agree, most disturbing films are very well shot. Maybe one day this will be tame.
foodonface 4 months ago
I wonder if the actors in the film actually read the script before singing the contract to do the film
jpc08109 1 year ago 14
@jpc08109
meh i dunno.. are you sure that they actually sang the contract?
ZwergpiratXXL 10 months ago
The one guy doing the Anyalisis has some legit things to say but the other person is just annoying and childish. Yeah we get it Salo is a sick film... Anyone who knows about the movie knows its hard to watch do we really need that particular peice of commetary?
ichater 1 year ago 2
@ichater Well, no, but commentary IS welcome if it concentrates on the encapsulation, by the movie, of the political, social and economic issues stemming from WWII in Italy, fascism and 1970's Italy, which was heavily influenced by political tension, terrorism and assassinations, creating a climate of fear, repulsion and, eventually, schizophrenia, all of which are represented in the movie somehow.
darwincity 1 year ago
man i just saw a serbian film, but man this looks way worse from what i just heard, do they actually show the penis getting burned or it implied?
phoenix9909 1 year ago
@phoenix9909 They show it, but it's at a distance and very brief. I would actually consider A Serbian Film to be more disturbing than Salo, though Salo is far more disgusting.
genericperson12 1 year ago
@genericperson12 When does this happen what scene?
HelloZepp316 1 year ago
@genericperson12 eh whats the difference between disgusting and disturbing?
juiced2death 3 months ago
@phoenix9909
penis get burned nippels get burned with hot iron and slaves have to eat shit and nails
01Ray01 1 year ago
@phoenix9909 They're distinct...A Serbian Film has more "oomph" to the individual scenes I found...I was more disturbed by the actual acts I was witnessing and almost felt like I needed to turn away or pause it at points to get my shit together. Salo is more about the actual atmosphere of the whole film, what you see is disturbing of course, but the "texas chainsaw massacre"-style filming (grainy, dark, it FEELS disconnected like a medical film) makes the overall atmosphere more oppressive.
ZarathustrasCrown 8 months ago
@ZarathustrasCrown yep seen both of them and i agree with your statement. i found it really creepy when the crazy lady was telling her sex stories when she was a kid, lol huge WTF moment for me
phoenix9909 8 months ago
those shits were made out from chocolates right?
UncleHobbysHobbys 1 year ago
@UncleHobbysHobbys And almonds! Very important!
darwincity 1 year ago
Serbian film....omg as I typed that I saw the end of the vid lol nice
quizzachu 1 year ago
My god what a f***ed up film. It sounds more disturbing than the Human Centipede. Great review.
Nin10Guy 1 year ago
@Nin10Guy I know the human centipede sounds horrible but its really not
HelloZepp316 1 year ago