Pink Flamingos

I first saw Pink Flamingos in the mid 70's, back before VCRs. A college dorm had rented a print, and in a drunken state I've not achieved again this past quarter-century, I went to see it. Having finally seen it again only recently, this time sober, I'm here to tell you... it looks a hell of a lot better when you're drunk. Those who call it "great" or a "masterpiece" are plain wrong, they don't recognize what they are seeing. The camera work is a hair's breadth above home movies; the acting and story are... well, they are better than in porn flicks and even some straight-to-video movies, but, jeez, not by much. And then there is the primary purpose behind Pink Flamingos -- to make the most disgusting, revolting movie possible, perhaps even conceivable.

But... BUT... Pink Flamingos is distinctive. Even if you - yes YOU out there - the reader, wanted to make the most disgusting movie in the world and even if you had the money and the skills that John Waters lacked in 1972, you couldn't make a film as good as he did. Yes, GOOD! You couldn't because, first of all, I doubt you have the same quality of acquaintances that Waters had and put into into his early movies. And it's not just a matter of WHAT they will do, but HOW they do it. Waters' actors had a style, no matter how bizarre, that is rarer than most depravities. Could YOU recognize the virtues of, let alone even find, someone like Edith Massey? I doubt it. Which leads to the second point.

Pink Flamingos has panache! It has a free-wheeling sense of daring-do that borders on innocent fun. So, although the movie is so disgusting that I wish it had never been made, it is not a squalid film. And I don't think YOU, the reader, or anyone other than Waters could have pulled that off. It doesn't make Pink Flamingos a masterpiece. It does make it unlike any other film.

Before watching this film, keep in mind that it is not for the faint of heart, it includes, but not limited to: Chicken brutality, Chicken uhhh intercourse, dog feces consumption, feces, vomit, cannibalism, and more. Hopefully that paints a picture.

The film, if you're into films, is very notorious. Before watching this movie a day ago it was always brought up that dog feces had something to do with this movie. They were not lying, nonono not one bit. What a way to buy my first Criterion film huh?

If you ask me, this film isn't too funny. The humor, for me, was mainly just gross-out-- which isn't all that funny, i was just sort of laughing at how absurd it was and how uncomfortable i was. For reference, this isn't my first rodeo with disturbing, nasty, and shocking films. I've seen the Japanese Guinea Pig movies alongside many others that pop into your head when i mention that. This film always seemed to be recommended to me , due to me enjoying the shock value.

There are so many things to say about this film and i'm not interested in spoiling it. My main problems are : Strange drawn out scenes, done only for shock--parts in the movie that just make no sense and don't need to be there-- and every scene Crackers is in. Crackers somehow happens to make every scene he's in (i'm exaggerating, i'm talking about two in particular) uncomfortable and needless.

Now what this film has going for it is John Water's visuals, dialogue, quotables, and bizarre plot. If you were to attempt at explaining this movie from start to finish to somebody, scene for scene, it would be quicker to just show them the damn movie. Its definitely a cult classic, not perfect, but not bad and i look forward to doing a rewatch in the future.

Although i don't love this movie as much as most, if you can handle it, id consider giving it a watch.

"Pink Flamingos" will always be known as the film with "that doggie-poop scene". Starring the divine Divine, the film explores the outer limits of sick humor. Divine and her brewd compete with another family to see who is "the filthiest person alive". Have a guess at who'll win that one!?

John Waters' early "camp" films are not for the average viewer. You must appreciate this man's form of art, but it definitely IS art! Later films like "Hairspray", "Cry Baby" are geared at a main stream audience, for which the filmmaker had to "tone it down" considerably. For the College Camp Scene though, there is no substitute for the original 70's camp mastrpieces.

For anyone who is a John Waters virgin and would like a recommendation for the next "project", I suggest "Female Trouble" . There's so much more to John Waters' vision, realized through his muse Divine. The visually stunning, grotesquely overweight transvestite is quite credible as "Dawn Davenport", the high schooler who burned her small-town bridges when she didn't get her "cha-cha heels" for Christmas in "Female Trouble". There are many scenes that are definitely not for the squeamish, highlighted by the moment where Dawn gives birth (alone) and bites the ambilical cord (like primates would do), then, without losing a beat, gets up to confront the newborn's father via a pay phone.

If "Pink Flamingos" entertained you without giving your stomach a turn-over, then you can handle anything delivered by the creative genius John Waters. As all directors, Waters has had a few duds, even if they were box office successes. Avoid the made-up-as-they-go "Pecker", a total waste of time. The musically sparcling "Cry Baby" was trashed by critics, but the sound track makes up plenty for a lousy script. The one to beat is the 1988 "Hairspray", Divine's swan song. "Pink Flamingos" is the ONE that started it all and put Waters on the cult-city map of the world! Just to be safe, have the movie first -- then the dinner!

Babs Johnson (Divine) lives in a trailer with her son Crackers, her daughter Cotton and her mother Edie (Edie Massey). She's in competition with a couple named Connie and Raymond Marbles (Mink Stole, David Lochary) to be named the filthiest person alive. The film shows their attempts to outdo each other.

This film is very much NOT for everyone. It's a in your face no holds barred assault in bad taste. Crackers has sex with a woman with a live chicken between them while his sister watches; the Marbles pick up female hitchhikers, impregnate them, keep them chained in the basement and sell the babies to lesbian couples; Divine and family have a party which includes cannibalism etc etc. It's disgusting but, in a way, not unwatchable. It's SO over the top and is so unapologetic about it that it's kind of fascinating. As director John Waters might say, it's bad taste done well. Also it's kind of amusing to watch--the acting is so wretched (especially by Massey) that you just watch it in disbelief. A friend laughed out loud at how bad Massey was (she improved in later pictures).

This is NOT for people who are easily offended. Even though it's over 30 years old it's STILL shocking. However if you have an open mind and can take a lot of extreme behaviour this is a must-see. The only part that really was too much is what Divine does at the very end.

The Divine and Doggie bit at the end is a bit much for me; I have to turn away. But a lot of it's pretty hysterical -- and it obviously works since folks are complaining why anyone would make a movie like this.

The answer, of course, is: to annoy folks who would complain why anyone would make a movie like this.

Don't be fooled by those who would have you believe that there's some deep meaning in, or mark of genius on, this film. There isn't. There is, though, a kind of bizarre, kinetic and desperate energy to this nonsensical enterprise.

I didn't hate it. There, that's my review: I didn't hate it.

I tend to agree with Ebert in this regard: this film is an object. It simply "is," and no amount of explaining will settle your nerves after you've seen it, nor convince you to see it in the first place.