What does r/movies think of Salò? Truly one of the most disturbing films of all …


What does r/movies think of Salò? Truly one of the most disturbing films of all ... 4

It’s a hard film to watch. I definitely agree with it being one of the more shocking films out there, but I feel there’s more to the film than just shock value too. When thinking about how the town it’s set in, the time period (Mussolini rules Italy at the time the film is set), the way the victims in the film are under complete control with no escape, a lot of it seems like a criticism of dictatorships and how that evil drives people to their worst.

[I made a video going into more detail about why I think it’s an important movie.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QbVn3BZgCDA)

What does r/movies think of this film? Do you love it or hate it? Do you think there’s meaning to the film or do you think it’s just shocks for the sake of shocking? Do you think it deserves being called one of the most disturbing films of all time?

Source



10 Comments

Comments:

  1. I appreciated it for what it was it and I like Pasolini as a director.

    People seem to be trying to compare it to the likes of A Serbian Film but Salo is more of a philosophical art-house film, as opposed to an unapologetic exploitation movie.

    If anything it’s toned down a lot compared to de Sade’s ‘The 120 Days of Sodom’.

    It’s an important film for a country that never truly confronted it’s fascist past and at the time the film was made, Italy was experiencing what was known as the Years of Lead.

  2. It is a tough film to watch….and I can’t imagine watching it again…but I do appreciate it on an aesthetic level….much like 12 Years A Slave or A Serbian Film

  3. I tend to watch a lot of controversial movies at least once to see if they really deserved the controversy. In most cases the controversy turns out to be much ado about nothing. In the case of *Salò*, or *the 120 Days of Sodom* I feel that the movie really deserves the level of controversy that it received. There were many parts of the movie that had me physically cringing and even a few scenes that nearly caused me to vomit. I’m not saying that the movie has no positive aspects, just that the negative aspects are so harsh that it makes it incredibly difficult to sit through the full movie.

  4. I watched it once for the sake of watching what certainly is a notable film, and one with legitimately interesting philosophical underpinnings. I really love Passolini’s ‘Trilogy of Life’ films, and really appreciated the broader artistic vision that the film fit into, so I certainly don’t *regret* the experience, but I would never, ever, ever give it a rewatch, short of being decently paid for it.

  5. I actually thought the premise was good. I had a hard time watching some of it, but overall I liked the movie.

  6. I haven’t seen the film, but the book is tough. It’s basically every degenerate thing you could think of written down, it makes you just feel wrong reading it. I mean it’s good, but hard going.

  7. What you said about the film is kind of how I feel about “Irreversible” not just being simple shock value. Besides its great acting, unique cinematography and very great disturbing music, it does also criticizes the idea of revenge, sexual dominance, how humans see the idea of sex, how sex can be both a tool for love and a weapon and how some men do also try to justify “rape” and mistreating because of the way they dress and how some horrible things cannot be reversed.

  8. I got to finally see this for the first time in a theater a few weeks ago and loved it. I can see why people think it’s a hard watch, but I pretty much laughed through the entire thing. One of the greatest comedies ever made.

%d bloggers like this: