No discussion of this notorious Italian movie can
begin without a warning: The subject matter of Salò is so disturbing, and the onscreen content so gruesome, that
merely hearing descriptions of the film is enough to turn some people’s
stomachs. So, if you get squeamish when the subjects of child abuse and sexual
deviance are raised, please read no further. Make no mistake, Salò is a movie that one doesn’t watch
so much as endure. Yet while some pictures exploring the outer boundaries of
what can be captured on film are plainly exploitative, Salò is far more complicated. This is an artful meditation on
anarchism, depravity, fascism, nihilism, and other unnerving tendencies of the
human animal.
In fact, Pier Paolo Pasolini’s movie is such a serious-minded
endeavor that it’s almost impossible to say when and where he crosses the line
between clinically observing abuse and salaciously relishing abuse—yet since Pasolini
could have expressed his provocative thematic ideas without including some of
the ghastly images that fill Salò, it’s
inarguable the filmmaker got lost in the ugly maze he created.
Based on an
unfinished novel by the Marquis de Sade written circa 1785, Pasolini’s storyline
takes place in 1944 Italy. Four wealthy fascists establish a secret fortress in
the Republic of Salò, a short-lived nation established by Nazi Germany within
Italy during the height of World War II. The fascists kidnap 18 teenaged boys
and girls for use as sexual playthings during a 120-day festival of inhumane debauchery.
Aided by a support staff of willing adults, the fascists stage a bizarre daily
ritual. While congregating in a large room to listen to filthy anecdotes that
are told by middle-aged prostitutes, the fascists indulge their perverse whims
on the teenagers. These whims include beatings and rape in endless variations, and
at one point the youths are put on leashes and forced to walk on all fours up
and down stone staircases. Another favorite pastime is feeding the children
human excrement. The fascists grow more depraved with each passing day, gaining
arousal from the despair of their victims and competing with each other to see
who can travel further down the abyss of amorality.
Viewed from the most
forgiving perspective, Salò is a
merciless commentary on the subjugation of citizenry by any group with absolute
power, and many intelligent critics consider Salò an important achievement in 20th-century cinema because of its
boldness and political insights. Viewed more harshly, the movie seems sensationalistic.
For instance, Pasolini’s clinical visual style evokes a Kubrickian coldness
even though Pasolini lacks Kubrick’s photographic sophistication. At times,
this approach renders stomach-churning results, as in the finale—once sex games
give way to bloodsport, Pasolini observes various torture scenes through the
remove of long lenses tricked up to resemble the view through binoculars,
putting the audience in the position of the fascists who watch the torture with
voyeuristic fervor. At other times, however, Pasolini’s unflinching eye creates
a sense of unseemly luridness, as when the filmmaker lingers needlessly on
close-ups of genitals.
Furthermore, the film’s over-the-top dialogue exists on
a plane far beyond realism; the fascists speak with academic formality, saying
things like, “In all the world no voluptuousness flatters the senses more than
social privilege.” It’s tempting to call this aspect of the movie pretentious,
but it’s just as likely Pasolini considered his characters metaphors, thereby
aesthetically justifying their unwieldy speech patterns. In any event, Salò is unique—virtually
no other movie contains this many repulsive images. Salò offers no escape or salvation, instead immersing viewers in a
cinematic dungeon of psychological punishment and sexual savagery.
Salò,
or the 120 Days of Sodom: FREAKY
2 comments:
Any particular reason you do not mention that Pasolini was murdered after the release of this film, and that it's because of dialogue like “In all the world no voluptuousness flatters the senses more than social privilege.”?
I refer you to Bertolucci's documentary "Whoever Tells The Truth Shall Die", regarding this film and Pasolini's gruesomely violent death, which was ostensibly at the hands of a young gay hustler, but more likely arranged by The State in the their own special Italian version of Siskel and Ebert.
"Salo'" is a very difficult film to recommend, but there's nothing else like it, in my opinion. A sleazy exploitation film, masquerading as an allegory for the excesses of fascism and consumerism. (I'm guessing it's the only movie in history to include a bibliography in the opening credits... I'm happy to be corrected on this...)
Peter makes a great point that Pasolini undoubtedly got lost in his own maze of transgressive images. That, combined with static, almost clinical camerawork, and long, unbroken takes, make this even more difficult to watch.
When considered against the backdrop of Pasolini's often sordid life, "Salo'" takes on an even more lurid and disturbing tone. There have been volumes written about his life and especially, his death. In fact, there's still no firm consensus as to the specifics of his horrifying demise. "Salo'" remains a unique epitaph to a fascinating film maker.
Post a Comment