Salò, or the 120 Days of Sodom 1976 123movies

Watch: Salò o le 120 giornate di Sodoma 1975 123movies, Full Movie Online – In Nazi-Fascist Northern Italy in 1943-44, four senior members of government, aided by henchmen and Nazi soldiers, kidnap a group of young men and women. They hold them for 120 days, subjecting them to all manner of torture, perversion, and degradation..
Plot: Four corrupted fascist libertines round up 9 teenage boys and girls and subject them to 120 days of sadistic physical, mental and sexual torture.
Smart Tags: #banned_film #sexual_torture #voyeur #masturbation #sexual_cruelty #sadomasochism #degradation #rough_sex #pubic_hair #debauchery #rape #sexual_abuse #italian_fascism #sexual_sadism #sexual_perversion #sadism #humiliation #nazi #voyeurism #perversity #bondage

Find Alternative – Salò o le 120 giornate di Sodoma 1975, Streaming Links:

123movies | FMmovies | Putlocker | GoMovies | SolarMovie | Soap2day

Ratings:

	5.8/10 Votes: 60,984
	70% | RottenTomatoes
	N/A | MetaCritic
	N/A Votes: 1580 Popularity: 51.576 | TMDB

Reviews:

It’s not necessarily a film, per say, as it is an endurance test…
…meaning that if a viewer can stay tuned, as I could, through the “Circle of Sh*t” segment, then a viewer can sit through just about anything that’s on celluloid. It’s indeed appropriate that it’s called the most disturbing and disgusting film ever made, as it well could be. As I watched all the way through till the end I got the same feeling as I did watching Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ. Both films go out on a limb with excesses (although Gibson’s excesses were arguably not as faithful to the source as Pasolini was), and I have to say that at least from an objective point of view Pier Paolo Pasolini gets the job done there. With great cinematographer Tonino Delli Colli (Once Upon a Time in the West) providing the sometimes exquisite camera-work and lighting, Ennio Morricone delivering a slight, but melodic tone in the background, and with interesting sets, plus an interesting editing style that doesn’t entirely show as much of the grotesque and sex as it could’ve, the craft behind the film is pretty good. If one were to look past the subject matter, it’s actually a very well constructed piece of film art, which is why many consider it important.

I suppose it’s a unique film, but you couldn’t pay me to want to watch it again (unless it was in a film class where the teacher proved himself to have reason to have us watch it). At the core, Salo: 120 Days of Sodom, is interesting as a concept, from which it was taken from Sade’s novel – a group of f*cked up fascists during the end of world war two capture some young boys and girls and force them to go under sexual and mental tortures. As in the book (which I’ve never read and don’t really have a desire to seek out at this point in my life), the acts are relentless, and in between the fascists instilling fear and intense degradation, a woman narrates stories that go over and over as she describes everything from eating excrement to helping out a grown man in diapers. By the end, it’s a controlled chaos as most are dead and those who aren’t look on with binoculars. Now, the problem is with this material, at least for me, it becomes very subjective.

I can see the core point PPP’s making (it’s almost like a twisted satire), and it does remind me how much fascism is the worst kind of ideology there is on Earth…But then the relentlessness of it all becomes very, very close to unbearable (i.e. endurance test). And, reminding me again of ‘The Passion’, Salo doesn’t give any of the characters any other kinds of emotions to work in than those they’re stuck with. There’s no deviating from the paths and fates of the characters, and without any point of entry into the victims (the exclusion being two girls, who all they say are ‘I can’t take this anymore’ to each other), they’re left with the controlled state that the villains have put them in. I suppose the acting by these four, vicious bastards is commendable, but after a while the acts that they thrust upon the kids stops being shocking, and becomes boring. And when a film that is supplied with a talented crew and cast that does whatever PPP tells them to do, and it’s boring, it doesn’t work for me. The stories by the one woman, in-particular, tend to drag on as her character seems to just think up new ways to entice the heads of the manor into ecstasy. On top of this, there isn’t logic to history because if this is towards the end of the war, where are the allies putting a stop to the fascists?

I guess, in the end, I found Salo to be one of the more difficult films I’ve ever seen. I know I’m sort of glad I got through with it, but by the end I realized that PPP committed a bit of a film crime (though certainly not deserving of his mysterious death before the film was released) – there’s no room for catharsis. This could be argued by some, however I’d have to say that if there was one it was buried underneath all of the sh*t food and *ss raping. Because the film is a bit one-dimensional, and hope is a lost cause, by the end all one could reasonably be left with is emptiness. In a way it reminded me of Bergman’s Cries and Whispers in how it’s just a sea of bleakness and despair for everyone involved, but at least in Bergman’s bleak world there are moments of sweet (if maybe brief) humanity and love. I can’t recommend Salo except for extreme, die-hard film buffs and for nihilistic types (and maybe for those interested in understanding the nature of fascism), and for those looking for what’s worse after Gibson’s POTC. It’s definitely deserved, either way you take the film, as one of the most notorious, soul-churning pieces ever produced, though I wouldn’t say it’s one of the worst.

Did Pasolini really “wallow in his own sensationalism”?
With Pier Paolo Pasolini’s “Salo,” the long-disputed issue of the extent to which a filmmaker can interpret a story on screen has been put to the ultimate test.And when “extreme” cases do happen, do the censors become “morally” justified in interfering with the filmmaker’s “creative freedom”?

There are a good number of films that can be used to illustrate the issues raised:Alejandro Jodorowsky’s “Santa Sangre” can be a case in point regarding the subject of violence and gore (a mentally-disturbed serial murderer and his domineering mother, with surreal images and subtle attacks on the Catholic faith),while Nagisa Oshima’s “In the Realm of the Senses” can be a point of reference regarding the subject of sex and nudity (a couple—a geisha and a tradesman—who has practically made sexual intercourse the be-all and end-all of their lives, to the point of obsession and possessiveness).

On the other hand, Pasolini’s film shows both “flesh and blood.”

The opening credits, with the accompaniment of a soft-sounding music, and the opening shot of a calm body of water, with a palace (turns out to belong to the high officials) viewed from afar, are deceiving:what follows from thereon is definitely not soothing to one’s senses.Set in World War II Italy, where Benito Mussolini’s Nazi-Fascist regime is very much in power, the film depicts the ways in which the dictator’s high-standing minions are capable of degrading and brutalizing the citizens,particularly the youth, just to satisfy some perverted and homo-erotic desires.

The film is divided in four parts (or “chapters,” if one may call them so, since the film, it’s significant to say, is based on a novel by Marquis de Sade, a controversial and provocative man of letters during his time),where each one represents the stages in which the young, innocent and gentle are deliberately and systematically corrupted and destroyed by the supposed-to-be leaders and guardians of the state—it’s like hungry wolves feeding on gentle lambs.

“Antechamber of Hell” shows how a number of young people, most of them beautiful and fresh, are rounded up, brought to the palace and oriented with the “rules and regulations” that are to govern their existence within the chamber of power—upon hearing them, one gets the impression that this might just be what hell really is.

“Circle of Obsessions” has the state officials weaving tales of eroticism and sensuality to arouse themselves and the youth into making some of the most perverted sexual acts—unabashed nudity, autoeroticism, hedonism, lasciviousness and homoeroticism are strewn all over.

“Circle of Shit” illustrates a further debasement:feeding on others’ and one’s own excrement (there’s even a scene where one of the officials lets a young woman urinate right into his mouth) as, if I understand it right, a gesture of wholly accepting the “evil” in all of us—the “stench,” to be taken literally and figuratively.The images may truly repel the viewers:a graphic act of defecation, close-up shots of feces (and what a heap!) and the notoriously unforgettable mock wedding reception.

Finally, “Circle of Blood” takes the viewers to “salo”—the punishing ground, where the young boys and girls who broke some of the “rules and regulations” are “taught their lesson” by the men in power.Again, this part is excruciating to watch, for the viewers become witness to some of the most brutally painful acts of punishment:how about an eye being removed, just to give a sample?

Now, was Pasolini “guilty” of, to use film critic Leonard Maltin’s words, “wallowing in his own sensationalism”? I’ve yet to read the book on which the film is based, but someone told me that the Italian filmmaker was just being faithful to De Sade’s work.Meaning to say, Pasolini tried as much as possible to express visually what the French novelist expressed in words.True, “Salo” in its entirety is an extremely offensive and shocking film, the kind to which the moviegoing adage “Just sit back and relax” won’t definitely apply.But then, isn’t that the kind of response that the film’s theme and images should elicit from the viewers in the first place?

Not to be disoriented and enraged by the lowest depths into which man’s (ab)use of power and satisfaction of primitive cravings and desires can plunge is one of the most absurd things that can ever happen.We should really appreciate artists (directors, novelists, poets, etc.) who have the courage and commitment (an abundance of them, it must be) to explore “extreme possiblities” inherent in human life.Life isn’t always like “a box full of chocolates”—sweet and comforting—is it?

If it ever happens that “the people concerned” get alarmed, raise concerns about a film and eventually mangle, if not ban, it, it may only prove that the film hits right where it should.

Other Information:

Original Language it
Runtime 1 hr 57 min (117 min)
Budget 0
Revenue 22017
Status Released
Rated Not Rated
Genre Drama
Director Pier Paolo Pasolini
Writer Pier Paolo Pasolini, Sergio Citti, Pupi Avati
Actors Paolo Bonacelli, Giorgio Cataldi, Uberto Paolo Quintavalle
Country Italy, France
Awards 2 wins & 1 nomination
Production Company N/A
Website N/A

Technical Information:

Sound Mix Mono
Aspect Ratio 1.85 : 1
Camera Arriflex Cameras (35 mm)
Laboratory Technicolor
Film Length 3,129 m (Fondo Pier Paolo Pasolini), 3,185 m (Italy), 3,195 m (Sweden), 3,200 m (1976) (Finland)
Negative Format 35 mm
Cinematographic Process Spherical
Printed Film Format 35 mm