Page 1 of 2

'Inside Deep Throat' on Channel 4..

Posted: Tue Mar 23, 2010 12:59 pm
by max_tranmere
I watched this last night, and I thought it was interesting. All about the famous 'Deep Throat' movie that was made in the 1970's, how the Government in the USA tried to stop porn being made, and about the people who made the film and starred in it aswell. It revealed that the Mafia had a lot to do with its making, its distribution and so on, and it also revealed that Linda Lovelace looked back on the whole thing quite disfavourably to say the least. Anyone else see this and what did you think of the documentary?

Re: 'Inside Deep Throat' on Channel 4..

Posted: Wed Mar 24, 2010 6:03 am
by JamesW
I saw it when it was first shown, which was a while back.

I can't say it 'revealed' Linda Lovelace's views on the film now as she had made her thoughts known quite widely anyway.


Re: 'Inside Deep Throat' on Channel 4..

Posted: Wed Mar 24, 2010 11:23 am
by Robches
So you mean if you make things illegal the Mob will get involved? Whoda thought it?

Re: 'Inside Deep Throat' on Channel 4..

Posted: Wed Mar 24, 2010 12:39 pm
by Floydoid
I have that on DVD. To be honest the interviews which form part of the extras are more interesting than the film.


Re: 'Inside Deep Throat' on Channel 4..

Posted: Wed Mar 24, 2010 5:20 pm
by one eyed jack
Correct me if Im wrong but Im sure I saw Linda Lovelace on a programme many years ago that fuelled the notion that porn was made by guys who pointed guns at womens heads to make them perform sexual acts on film.

Ive come to beleive this was innaccurate but Im sure htis is the story she once had us believe.

Correct me if I am wrong but did she not say this?

She is entitled to say what she wants from her experience but I am a little sceptical that it was as bad as she made it out to be so therefore I wonder how much truth there is in what she says.


Re: 'Inside Deep Throat' on Channel 4..

Posted: Thu Mar 25, 2010 5:16 am
by JamesW
Some of her assertions have been contradicted by witnesses but others have been corroborated by witnesses.

It seems that she was violently beaten by her husband, but if he held a gun to her head as she has stated it would have been in private, not on set.


Re: 'Inside Deep Throat' on Channel 4..

Posted: Thu Mar 25, 2010 7:38 am
by one eyed jack
Ok I finally watched it. I thought it was great. HBO lavish some good money on their docs.

My thoughts are, does porn in general owe a nod to this movie and would the porn industry have been what it is today if films like that had not been around?

Consider this for a second, whether technology, the video moviement and whether we would be at this specific point today if it wasnt for the success of that movie.

Its like, would porn be the way it is now if it wasnt for the porn that made the internet a success?

Deep Throat wasnt very good as a movie. I saw it and it sucked LOL I honestly didnt like it at all but knowing what it meant back then made it stand out for what it was.

Love em or hate em, Gerard Damiano, Harry Reems and Linda Lovelace are icons for their involvement with this movie and what it has achieved.

More than i can say about the movie itself. the fact HBO made a doc about them is testimony to that and to be honest I found the doc way more interesting than the film.


Re: 'Inside Deep Throat' on Channel 4..

Posted: Thu Mar 25, 2010 1:20 pm
by one eyed jack
Thats all fair Porn Historian but what has her partners abusive behaviour to her got to do with the porn per se?

This is a problem that really needs to be addressed when it comes to understanding porn and the people that satellite it.

Porn itself is not the bad thing. If anything it provides a source of employment and a social circle. It seems to me that people are the element that fuck it for themselves


Re: 'Inside Deep Throat' on Channel 4..

Posted: Thu Mar 25, 2010 7:55 pm
by Ogre
I guess, Linda Lovelace is one of those subjects that you can't really know the full truth of, unless you have a time machine. There seems to be hmmm, "solid evidence" of both sides of the story, meaning seems the part about the husband being a waste of human life and subjecting her to all kinds of things inhuman, and Lovelace's at least occasional consent to _some_ things in her career, though she denied it.

As I understand, she was on certain chemicals a lot during her tenure, and came to faith somewhere after the mid-70's. Certainly his abusive husband and perhaps the chemical fixation might make it possible for both sides to coexist in truth. After faith steps in, it doesn't seem at all conflicting that she would deny everything and/or regret it. Regardless, seems like a tragic story.