In a seemingly abandoned house, a group of people engage in wordless acts of passion. From evening to morning, the sexual couplings among the members of the house become increasingly harrowi... Read allIn a seemingly abandoned house, a group of people engage in wordless acts of passion. From evening to morning, the sexual couplings among the members of the house become increasingly harrowing as daylight arrives.In a seemingly abandoned house, a group of people engage in wordless acts of passion. From evening to morning, the sexual couplings among the members of the house become increasingly harrowing as daylight arrives.
3.2234
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Featured reviews
Well *I* liked it a lot.
The first two scenes really set the mood of this, especially the one that is not often mentioned on these boards about the guy with the joy stick and the women on stage in the top hats. I was quite fond of the music and sound element in this flick, especially during the male/male scene. I like bondage porn and I like pretentiously artsy stuff, so this one was kind of in the bag for me, but I can see where it wouldn't cater to too huge an audience. I've never read the book, but it certainly made me want to. After reading it I expect to find that it was more budget limitations that kept this one so cut down from the amount and quality of content that the original author had in mind.
I do like how well it balanced an arousing pornographic element with art-house style experimental film. The lighting work and some of the camera angles did throw back to some of Kenneth Anger's work, also the somber classical piano in the male/male scene. The progression of the sex was not unlike most porn with the exception of the obligatory climax which I think is overrated, even in gay porn. Honestly, the scenes could have been like 3-5 minutes shorter each and I don't think we would have missed the erotic element (unless it takes you a while to get off) and had room for another scene, but again I would imagine that that is directly related to funds.
All in all, if you call it porn, it is by far the best porn flick I've ever seen. If you call it experimental or an art film, it wasn't as compelling as Anger or even as abstract or pretentious as "The Pig --cking Movie", but I still put it up in a class of one of the more interesting movies I've seen in some time.
93, --DH
I do like how well it balanced an arousing pornographic element with art-house style experimental film. The lighting work and some of the camera angles did throw back to some of Kenneth Anger's work, also the somber classical piano in the male/male scene. The progression of the sex was not unlike most porn with the exception of the obligatory climax which I think is overrated, even in gay porn. Honestly, the scenes could have been like 3-5 minutes shorter each and I don't think we would have missed the erotic element (unless it takes you a while to get off) and had room for another scene, but again I would imagine that that is directly related to funds.
All in all, if you call it porn, it is by far the best porn flick I've ever seen. If you call it experimental or an art film, it wasn't as compelling as Anger or even as abstract or pretentious as "The Pig --cking Movie", but I still put it up in a class of one of the more interesting movies I've seen in some time.
93, --DH
An assault upon the senses
What can I say?! An assault upon the senses, certainly and I feel I should have read the book first. Or maybe not. Artily shot and still erotic, although the continuous walking up the stairs in the deserted building, towards the end stretches one's endurance, as does the 15 minutes or so of static at the end. Thank goodness for fast forward on the remote. Still at least I was pressing forward and not stop. Before everything seems to slip into a nightmare scenario there are, for the record, a surprisingly erotic gay sex scene and a similarly effective lesbian one. The turn for heterosexuals comes in the deserted building and is a tawdry affair with coughing and pissing. Also the examination of what I assume to be caesarean scars remind one of the hard to watch forceps assisted birth at the start. The casual violence with a snip here and a wrench there perhaps foreshadowing what is to come. Narrative may be the scourge of the middle class but total lack of any certainly makes life a little difficult. Mind you being the son of a mad, blind and violent father I don't suppose life was a bowl of cherries for Mr Bataille.
why can't porn be art?
many people would consider the writing of Georges Bataille pornographic. many people would consider the films of Richard Kern or even of Bertolucci to be pornographic. underground cinema always has pushed the envelope of our sensibilities and i think Story Of The Eye is no different. i think calling something porn has more to do with the way it is made than what exactly is being shown. pornography is cheaply produced for a buck. it is exploitative of its talent and its audience. this film is neither. the filmmaker is no hack, his imagery is subtle, symbolic, and often sublime. granted, subtlety is tossed out the window at times when penetration and bodily fluids take center stage, but those are jolts that intend to shock. i was shocked by this film, and i am so rarely shocked that it was actually refreshing. i've seen enough to not be shocked simply because the film is so explicit, but because it is so gorgeously photographed and interestingly designed AND so explicit. i highly recommend this for anyone interested in checking out a film that really goes there.
Sexually Arousing But Disappointing
Okay, the sex scenes (read: the entire film minus one boring staircase walking scene) were well done (by porn standards), "classy", "artsy", etcetera. Having not read the novel yet I was hoping that there would have simply been more to this film other than pornography. I knew that the novel was supposed to be very erotic and unapologetically so, but is that all there is to it? Does the novel simply narrate a bunch of screwing and blow jobs? Here's how simply this film can be broken down, scene-by-scene, without leaving anything out:
--Stock footage of a woman giving birth while the narrator reads a brief biography about Georges Bataille.
--Two guys have sex.
--Two women have sex.
--Girl stumbles up flight of stairs for like 15 minutes while other women scream from somewhere.
--Girl pisses on the floor/stares out filthy window.
--Two girls and some guy have sex.
--10-15 minutes of black screen and electronic noise.
--The End.
Perhaps if there were at least some interesting narration from the novel during this stuff it would have had more of an impact as a piece of compelling art rather than a slightly artsy porn flick. I guess I just need to read the book.
--Stock footage of a woman giving birth while the narrator reads a brief biography about Georges Bataille.
--Two guys have sex.
--Two women have sex.
--Girl stumbles up flight of stairs for like 15 minutes while other women scream from somewhere.
--Girl pisses on the floor/stares out filthy window.
--Two girls and some guy have sex.
--10-15 minutes of black screen and electronic noise.
--The End.
Perhaps if there were at least some interesting narration from the novel during this stuff it would have had more of an impact as a piece of compelling art rather than a slightly artsy porn flick. I guess I just need to read the book.
brilliant transgressive artcore
This is artcore. leave your preconceived notions of cinema at the door.
open yourself to the images.
let this film digest you.
Did you know
- TriviaThe movie is the subject of the academic monograph, REALISM, REAL SEX, AND THE EXPERIMENTAL FILM - MEDIATING EROTICISM IN 'GEORGES BATAILLE'S STORY OF THE EYE' by Dr. Beth Johnson (Palgrave MacMillan, 2009).
- How long is Georges Bataille's Story of the Eye?Powered by Alexa
Details
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content





