egafd.com

Has anyone seen this? Normally I dont like to sound dismissive and with the exception of a couple of scenes (Gaspar Noe and Larry Clark) the film was sadly lacking anything interesting and failed in my eyes what porn already says about itself.

To be honest a couple of sequences were nothing more than just another porn scene even if it was dressed up to be gritty and grimy and sleazy.

They say if you feel anything emotional about what you watch it must be art. It left me feeling outraged how the BBFC have set one rule up for those who are 'esteemed' film makers and another who produce the same sort of thing but with lesser backgrounds (like me).

If art is a bloke who walks into the middle of a big desert and kneels down and pulls his cock out and has a wank for no reason then something is seriously wrong. I just dont get how the BBFC think showing blowjobs and full penetration and cum in mouth is any less than the R18 stuff available

I didnt like it much, if at all save for a couple of interesting bits with a guy fucking a blow up doll and forcing a gun in its mouth while jacking off juxtaposed against a girl masturbating somewhere else biut both are watching Katsumi getting fucked in the mouth by Manuel Ferrara as he cums in her mouth. I'm probably being biased because I like the head rush way he makes his movies. Its almost a head ache to watch....but when it comes down to it, in my mind, it was just still porn.

The 'skip' function on my DVD remote was working overtime - completely un-engaging in every respect.

It was pretentious to the point that it was so far up its own arse it added an extra 2ft to the already 27ft of colon up there.

Utter shite.

A tad less diplomatic than me but I am in total agreement with you.

In the Gasper Noe one, wasn't the masturbating girl Katsumi?

I found it pretty interesting that exactly the same acts but presented for arousal not art would be much harder to get hold of - I mean, I rented Destricted from my local video store, and I'd never be able to do that with anything else Katsumi starred in, for example.

I actually liked a fair few of the shorts, the Noe was probably my favorite as I pretty much love all his work.

does anyone know the BBFC's justification for allowing this to pass as 18 cert?

Probably its the art not porn argument...yawn. The way I saw it, cocks were being diddled, fannys being fiddled. blowjobs, cum shots and a reference to messy anal. Just the hoity toity upper class film maker folk trying to say...Hey look at us, we make intelligent well thought out porn. Frankly it was bollocks that all porn says in your face anyway.

It would be nice to hear some feedback from the BBFC with regards to this decision. If it was an R18 I wouldnt be so cynical.

I'm just kinda thinking aloud here and its an invitation to more thoughts and debate. I'm interested that you use the word 'pretentious' - it begs the question what do you think it was pretending to be ?

Another connotation of 'pretentious' is 'inauthentic' but in this respect porn is pretentious inasmuch as it isn't real .. isn't authentic. Perhaps the best (ie most convincing) porn is that which 'seems' most real, but it's still a performance.

It was pretending to be art, porn and art/porn and failed on all three counts. It was like watching a poor imitation of a Richard Kern short an example being My Nightmare from 1993.

Leave the porn to the porn guys, leave the art to the artists and leave the porn/art to Richard Kern.

One eye,

If a light bulb going on an off, or a pile of bricks can be art then so can anything. I have not seen the film so I cannot comment on it but the 18 18R dichotomy is a false one and simply means that the title can be viewed by adults.

The licensed sexshops requirement of the Video Recordings Act simply restricts sex films into those the BBFC find some subjective artistic merit in and those confined to the ghetto of the restricted market of the sexshops.

The sweet sickly smell of corruption pervades my nostrils.
Mike.

I wonder what the outcome would have been if they give the same opportunity to a variety of different pornographers. Not necessarily British but a cross section.

Mike I'n not so sure corruption is the issue here. Thats implying back handers were given out. I credit the BBFC with a bit more decorum than that. I think the producers probably gave a good reason why it should be put forward as an 18....I can see the pitch now in my mind. Some 'mans inhumanity to man' type arty rhetoric to justify the importance of it getting an 18 rather than an R18.

The BBFC would have reconvened after a screening with a bunch of other 'specialists' and deemed it had some social and redeeming value because some nuns looking skyward while rubbing their saggy tits was more than just conventional porn while talking about...damn i just lost interest and forwarded to the next scene.