IMDb-BEWERTUNG
6,7/10
7168
IHRE BEWERTUNG
Eine Untersuchung des berüchtigten pornografischen Films Deep Throat (1972), der Aspekte von der Entstehung des Films bis hin zu dessen kulturellen Auswirkungen beleuchtet.Eine Untersuchung des berüchtigten pornografischen Films Deep Throat (1972), der Aspekte von der Entstehung des Films bis hin zu dessen kulturellen Auswirkungen beleuchtet.Eine Untersuchung des berüchtigten pornografischen Films Deep Throat (1972), der Aspekte von der Entstehung des Films bis hin zu dessen kulturellen Auswirkungen beleuchtet.
- Regie
- Drehbuch
- Hauptbesetzung
- Auszeichnungen
- 1 Gewinn & 1 Nominierung insgesamt
Linda Lovelace
- Self - Linda Lovelace
- (Archivfilmmaterial)
Dennis Hopper
- Narrator
- (Synchronisation)
Ruth Westheimer
- Self
- (as Dr. Ruth Westheimer)
Francis Ford Coppola
- Self
- (Archivfilmmaterial)
Empfohlene Bewertungen
All I can say is wow, this was a great documentary. Because of the subject matter it isn't for everyone, and the fact that it has an actual X-rated scene in it doesn't help either. But if you can get past that, this is an insightful, fascinating look at adult films and our society. And there is a lot of humor in it as well. I wasn't surprised that several people in the audience walked out, since even I didn't realize how graphic the language/visuals would be. Showing how Deepthroat brought the "BJ" into the mainstream of adult films was interesting, and the interviews with the people actually making porn were very insightful.
Yes, there is fellatio depicted inside the documentary Inside Deep Throat. About 3 seconds. So go see the original groundbreaking porno flick of 1972, Deep Throat, if you want to be deeply titillated and experience a poorly made movie that grossed over $600 million and sparked a sexual revolution that resulted for exhibitors and actors in stiff penalties that carry through today in Nikon's' wet dreams.
Today fortunately is also a world where videos allow private viewing of private parts and only a handful of "art" houses even try to offer porno films. So why go back to those carefree days of free love and iconoclasm? Because conservatives have taken up Nixon and Reagan's call for a purer world, a world suited to George Bush's values-laden regime. Inside Deep Throat is a cautionary tale that implicitly argues, sometimes humorously, that young Jack Nicholson and Warren Beatty are on to something when they complain our rights are being stolen.
Much bigger mirth arrives with the interviews of the retired director and project manager, among others, in their cheesy Florida print shirts and garish bungalows pontificating about the film's greatness emerging out of a mere $25,000 into film history. Not funny is star Linda Lovelace's return to the business, after disavowing it by taking an anti-porn feminist position with Gloria Steinem to speak for her and then going back to make a buck.
Sadder still is star Harry Reems' long association with substance abuse after being hounded by the feds as a scapegoat eventually cleared of obscenity charges. His current license to sell real estate in Park City, Utah, is a rich bit of irony. However, the humor continues with profundities by pop culture stars John Waters, Erica Jong, and Gore Vidal. Only a wry Dick Cavet puts it all into ironic perspective to ask if he could see the original now since he missed it and to aver that he always does what Nicholson and Beatty recommend.
Inside Deep throat is not as artful as Boogie Nights or as thoughtful as Kinsey; it is, however, a light look at a dark world that still thrives on privacy regardless of the public hunger for sex.
Today fortunately is also a world where videos allow private viewing of private parts and only a handful of "art" houses even try to offer porno films. So why go back to those carefree days of free love and iconoclasm? Because conservatives have taken up Nixon and Reagan's call for a purer world, a world suited to George Bush's values-laden regime. Inside Deep Throat is a cautionary tale that implicitly argues, sometimes humorously, that young Jack Nicholson and Warren Beatty are on to something when they complain our rights are being stolen.
Much bigger mirth arrives with the interviews of the retired director and project manager, among others, in their cheesy Florida print shirts and garish bungalows pontificating about the film's greatness emerging out of a mere $25,000 into film history. Not funny is star Linda Lovelace's return to the business, after disavowing it by taking an anti-porn feminist position with Gloria Steinem to speak for her and then going back to make a buck.
Sadder still is star Harry Reems' long association with substance abuse after being hounded by the feds as a scapegoat eventually cleared of obscenity charges. His current license to sell real estate in Park City, Utah, is a rich bit of irony. However, the humor continues with profundities by pop culture stars John Waters, Erica Jong, and Gore Vidal. Only a wry Dick Cavet puts it all into ironic perspective to ask if he could see the original now since he missed it and to aver that he always does what Nicholson and Beatty recommend.
Inside Deep throat is not as artful as Boogie Nights or as thoughtful as Kinsey; it is, however, a light look at a dark world that still thrives on privacy regardless of the public hunger for sex.
10diane-34
I was impressed with this marvelous doco after watching it yesterday and unlike Dick Cavett I remember watching the film in the heady days of the 70s in San Francisco-perhaps not as brave and revolutionary as watching it in Oklahoma City but a political statement none the less.
My thoughts about the film are coloured by this historical connection but that in no way diminishes the strengths of the film. After all these years to see the players in the flesh talking about such a phenomenon made for an enjoyable morning of film watching. You cannot view the film without seething anger at the religious conservatives that made virtually all the player's lives far more difficult than those lives should have been.
If there was a villain in the movie it would have been the Tennesee prosecutor who doubled as a lay preacher when he wasn't trying to make America into his own little brand of religious conservatism. Their kind of dead-head sociology and politics is still rampant in the States and the only difference is they've changed their target from sex to terrorism-or at least their definition of political terrorism.
The directors, Bailey and Barbato, have crafted a superb film inter-cutting old film clips with current interviews in order to create an excellent vision of all the threads between the personalities and opinions of the players. The hilarity of these characters come through when they speak with a forthrightness that generally ends up on the cutting room floor.
If you are an old guy like me-see the film for its historical look at a time that we can remember. If you are a young person interested in politics, look at the film to see the nature of the bad guys around us now but with new crusades to fight.
My thoughts about the film are coloured by this historical connection but that in no way diminishes the strengths of the film. After all these years to see the players in the flesh talking about such a phenomenon made for an enjoyable morning of film watching. You cannot view the film without seething anger at the religious conservatives that made virtually all the player's lives far more difficult than those lives should have been.
If there was a villain in the movie it would have been the Tennesee prosecutor who doubled as a lay preacher when he wasn't trying to make America into his own little brand of religious conservatism. Their kind of dead-head sociology and politics is still rampant in the States and the only difference is they've changed their target from sex to terrorism-or at least their definition of political terrorism.
The directors, Bailey and Barbato, have crafted a superb film inter-cutting old film clips with current interviews in order to create an excellent vision of all the threads between the personalities and opinions of the players. The hilarity of these characters come through when they speak with a forthrightness that generally ends up on the cutting room floor.
If you are an old guy like me-see the film for its historical look at a time that we can remember. If you are a young person interested in politics, look at the film to see the nature of the bad guys around us now but with new crusades to fight.
This is the story of the film that changed our culture and how our society looks at sex. Inside Deep Throat takes us behind the scenes of the making of the film,tells us how it became a huge blockbuster, and how it changed the lives of all of the people involved.
This is a very good primer to understanding Deep Throats impact on sex and censorship. This film does a very good job at laying out the story of the film and placing it into the context of the times. If you don't know what the big deal was when this film came out, you'll get a very good understanding of just why and how the film became so big that even small kids knew its name (though not its content). You'll also get a good over view of the battle to censor and to keep the film from public view, and an idea of how it shaped our world today.
I really did like this film a great deal. My one real reservation is that this film focuses a too much on the one film. Certainly the with Deep Throat in the title, I expected it to be mostly focused on that, but the censorship wars that were being fought at the same time involved other films and other media,for example the battle over George Carlin's Seven Dirty Words was happening at about the same time and was just as important.
But I'm nit picking. This is a good movie. Its a good starting point for learning about the film and the times that made our times what they are.
This is a very good primer to understanding Deep Throats impact on sex and censorship. This film does a very good job at laying out the story of the film and placing it into the context of the times. If you don't know what the big deal was when this film came out, you'll get a very good understanding of just why and how the film became so big that even small kids knew its name (though not its content). You'll also get a good over view of the battle to censor and to keep the film from public view, and an idea of how it shaped our world today.
I really did like this film a great deal. My one real reservation is that this film focuses a too much on the one film. Certainly the with Deep Throat in the title, I expected it to be mostly focused on that, but the censorship wars that were being fought at the same time involved other films and other media,for example the battle over George Carlin's Seven Dirty Words was happening at about the same time and was just as important.
But I'm nit picking. This is a good movie. Its a good starting point for learning about the film and the times that made our times what they are.
Deep Throat was filmed in less than six days at a cost of $25k. At the time, pornography was far from the mainstream and the easiest way to see sex was in sex education films and understandably there was moral outrage over this film. Despite bans and protests, the film went on to gross in excess of $600,000,000 and be one of the most profitable films ever made. This documentary looks back at how the film came about and the impact it had on society as it grew in success. However it also looks at the personal costs and benefits of those who were directly involved, from the stars to the director.
This film opens in an energetic fashion with lots of editing, cool music and animated effects, I like this style but I did wonder how the hell it was going to keep it up for 90 minutes or indeed how I was going to keep up with it. Fortunately the film only uses this approach until the title card and from then on it is comparatively more traditional, but still quite pacey. The story itself is interesting but perhaps is stronger for the link it makes to the wider impact of pornography on society as well as the impact on those involved in the specific film itself. It is not 100% successful at this because it seems to want to have its feet in several different camps. As a result it fudges the bits on modern society and relies heavily on Norman Mailer telling us how porn is different not because it is all about money and how the interest in artistic expression has been lost which is all very good while he says it in his unique, booming style but not when you think about 1970's pornography and wonder how much artistic creativity was involved versus the desire to make whacking material.
Despite this fudge though the film is mostly interesting and well structured, with contributions cutting over each other to good effect. In terms of bias though, it is clear that we are not on the side of the moral crusaders here. We get chances to hear them speak, which is fair enough if you take it as read that the film is not meant to be a debate of the right and wrong of pornography so much as it is a discussion starter on the subject. Hopper's narration is solid and the couple of celebrities who pop up are wisely hardly used in favour of those who were directly involved.
Overall this is an interesting documentary that is lively and interesting. Not the place to come to for a debate on the morality of pornography but it does a reasonable job of looking at the impact the film had at the time and, to some degree, the wider impact it had on society. However the potted focus on the film itself makes for an interesting and accessible film.
This film opens in an energetic fashion with lots of editing, cool music and animated effects, I like this style but I did wonder how the hell it was going to keep it up for 90 minutes or indeed how I was going to keep up with it. Fortunately the film only uses this approach until the title card and from then on it is comparatively more traditional, but still quite pacey. The story itself is interesting but perhaps is stronger for the link it makes to the wider impact of pornography on society as well as the impact on those involved in the specific film itself. It is not 100% successful at this because it seems to want to have its feet in several different camps. As a result it fudges the bits on modern society and relies heavily on Norman Mailer telling us how porn is different not because it is all about money and how the interest in artistic expression has been lost which is all very good while he says it in his unique, booming style but not when you think about 1970's pornography and wonder how much artistic creativity was involved versus the desire to make whacking material.
Despite this fudge though the film is mostly interesting and well structured, with contributions cutting over each other to good effect. In terms of bias though, it is clear that we are not on the side of the moral crusaders here. We get chances to hear them speak, which is fair enough if you take it as read that the film is not meant to be a debate of the right and wrong of pornography so much as it is a discussion starter on the subject. Hopper's narration is solid and the couple of celebrities who pop up are wisely hardly used in favour of those who were directly involved.
Overall this is an interesting documentary that is lively and interesting. Not the place to come to for a debate on the morality of pornography but it does a reasonable job of looking at the impact the film had at the time and, to some degree, the wider impact it had on society. However the potted focus on the film itself makes for an interesting and accessible film.
Wusstest du schon
- WissenswertesThe film discusses how Deep Throat oder: Der Mund, der alle Wünsche befriedigt (1972) was actually distributed to theaters. Prints would be hand-delivered and employees would count heads of moviegoers and then collect the cash profits from the theaters. This process was known as sending "checkers and sweepers."
- PatzerEarly in the film, an unseen projectionist starts the film and we can see the projected image through the projection room window. He carelessly allows the leader to show on the screen. A frame marked "FOOT" is shown. Unless he is running the film backwards, this is wrong. The beginning of a film is marked "HEAD".
- Zitate
Herself - Linda's Sister: [about Chuck Trainor] I curse the day she ever met Chuck Trainor. Unfortunately, he died before I could kill him. Lucky for him.
- Crazy CreditsDeep Throat Was Made For Just $25,000 It Grossed More Than $600 Million
- VerbindungenFeatured in At the Movies: Folge #2.38 (2005)
- SoundtracksCrime of the Century
Performed by Supertramp
Written by Rick Davies and Roger Hodgson
Courtesy of A&M Records
Under license from Universal Music Enterprises
Top-Auswahl
Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
- How long is Inside Deep Throat?Powered by Alexa
- What are the differences between the R-Rated and NC-17 Version?
Details
- Erscheinungsdatum
- Herkunftsland
- Sprache
- Auch bekannt als
- Dentro de Garganta Profunda
- Drehorte
- Paramount Studios - 5555 Melrose Avenue, Hollywood, Los Angeles, Kalifornien, USA(exterior shot of the famous Paramount Studios arch over the entrance to the studio lot)
- Produktionsfirmen
- Weitere beteiligte Unternehmen bei IMDbPro anzeigen
Box Office
- Budget
- 2.000.000 $ (geschätzt)
- Bruttoertrag in den USA und Kanada
- 691.880 $
- Eröffnungswochenende in den USA und in Kanada
- 88.709 $
- 13. Feb. 2005
- Weltweiter Bruttoertrag
- 709.832 $
- Laufzeit1 Stunde 29 Minuten
- Farbe
- Sound-Mix
- Seitenverhältnis
- 1.85 : 1
Zu dieser Seite beitragen
Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen