Agrega una trama en tu idiomaA gay porn star's mysterious disappearance becomes an obsession for both a writer and another adult film star, leading them into dark supernatural corners that were never meant to be explore... Leer todoA gay porn star's mysterious disappearance becomes an obsession for both a writer and another adult film star, leading them into dark supernatural corners that were never meant to be explored.A gay porn star's mysterious disappearance becomes an obsession for both a writer and another adult film star, leading them into dark supernatural corners that were never meant to be explored.
- Premios
- 2 premios ganados en total
- Dirección
- Guionista
- Todo el elenco y el equipo
- Producción, taquilla y más en IMDbPro
Opiniones destacadas
Okay, I love psychological thrillers. I love gay cinema. I watched this movie and couldn't figure out what in the hell was going on.
First, I couldn't tell who was who. The movie was so poorly lit that I found myself squinting to see what was going on. All of the main characters looked the same - I guess it was to link the three phases of the movie together to show the different dynamics of the same issue, but good Lord. Turn the lights up so I can distinguish between the leads.
The story was so full of holes and there was nothing intertwining the different stories. It was like they couldn't figure out what direction the movie was going in. I felt the movie should have ended 5 times before it was truly over.
I feel like hours of my life were sucked away and I will never get them back. It wasn't even a movie that was so deep that I reflect on it later. I watched it until the end and all I could say was, "What in the hell was this movie about?"
First, I couldn't tell who was who. The movie was so poorly lit that I found myself squinting to see what was going on. All of the main characters looked the same - I guess it was to link the three phases of the movie together to show the different dynamics of the same issue, but good Lord. Turn the lights up so I can distinguish between the leads.
The story was so full of holes and there was nothing intertwining the different stories. It was like they couldn't figure out what direction the movie was going in. I felt the movie should have ended 5 times before it was truly over.
I feel like hours of my life were sucked away and I will never get them back. It wasn't even a movie that was so deep that I reflect on it later. I watched it until the end and all I could say was, "What in the hell was this movie about?"
My review will be short. The low ratings of this movie have nothing to do with homophobia. In fact, had the characters been heterosexual it still would not cure what ails this movie.
The issue with this movie is the narrative. It is ostensibly three different shorts held together by a plot based on an urban legend.
As another review mentions, the movie starts really slow, you have to stick with it. It then transitions into the 2nd act which is quite interesting in part because the actors , well, they can act and hold the viewers attention.
Unfortunately, the 2nd act ends in a disjointed an unsatisfying way and leads into the final act that also features some descent acting but poor storytelling.
This movie could have been great. Several times I felt that this movie could become at least a cult classic but the director blew it.
Don't be fooled. This movie isn't too high-brow,far from it. There is one, and only one reason to watch and that is to see how badly the opportunity to make a very good movie was squandered.
The issue with this movie is the narrative. It is ostensibly three different shorts held together by a plot based on an urban legend.
As another review mentions, the movie starts really slow, you have to stick with it. It then transitions into the 2nd act which is quite interesting in part because the actors , well, they can act and hold the viewers attention.
Unfortunately, the 2nd act ends in a disjointed an unsatisfying way and leads into the final act that also features some descent acting but poor storytelling.
This movie could have been great. Several times I felt that this movie could become at least a cult classic but the director blew it.
Don't be fooled. This movie isn't too high-brow,far from it. There is one, and only one reason to watch and that is to see how badly the opportunity to make a very good movie was squandered.
"Pornography: A Thriller" starts off as a story about Mark Anton (Jared Grey), a porn star trying to get out of the biz, whose last gig turns out to be the last time he's seen, ever. Fifteen years later Michael (Matthew Montgomery), a writer working on a history of gay porn, and his boyfriend, move into a "New York City" apartment that becomes less and less fabulous as Michael uncovers clues—like "old" camera mounts that just happen to fit modern camcorders— that link it to Mark Anton's disappearance. Things get really spooky until—cut to Los Angeles, where present day porn icon Matt Stevens (Pete Scherer) is determined to make "The Mark Anton Story," surprised to discover Anton was a real person when the whole story came to him in a dream. Weird! Things get weirder as the movie goes into production and Stevens becomes unhinged. One of his stars mysteriously disappears. He starts seeing things. Reality and fantasy become blurred. Will re-enacting Mark Anton's end also be the demise of Matt Stevens? Would some full-frontal nudity help?
Writer-director David Kittredge had some promising ideas for three possible movies. Unfortunately, he failed to finish any of them and tried to cover it up by imitating David Lynch. Several actors occupy dual roles, most prominently Walter Delmar as Michael's boyfriend and Stevens' co-star/lover. Michael receives mysterious photos in the mail, the same photos that were taken by Anton, who was studying photography at the time he disappeared. Then Michael receives photos relating to Anton's murder, and after that, photos of himself in his apartment looking at these photos. There is a ring with a symbol on it, a symbol that links to some underground snuff film producer that may or may not be real. People spout lines of dialog that I'm sure were meant to be profound—like Anton saying he likes doing crosswords because puzzles "have no ambiguity"—but comes off as pretentious horses---t. Viewers will also see nods to David Croenenberg's "Videodrome" and more than a few scenes reminiscent of "Saw."
Many of the people involved in making "Pornography: A Thriller" were also involved in the gay sci-fi/horror "Socket." By comparison, "Pornography" has slightly higher production values—and I emphasize slightly—with stronger acting and some moody cinematography, though much of it looks flat and cheap. Truth be told, there are actual porn videos made with more finesse, which left me wishing Kittredge and crew just collaborated with, say, the folks at Raging Stallion or Titan Media, making an experimental porn video instead of a rambling "art" movie. At least a porn movie would have a climax. Several of them, in fact.
Writer-director David Kittredge had some promising ideas for three possible movies. Unfortunately, he failed to finish any of them and tried to cover it up by imitating David Lynch. Several actors occupy dual roles, most prominently Walter Delmar as Michael's boyfriend and Stevens' co-star/lover. Michael receives mysterious photos in the mail, the same photos that were taken by Anton, who was studying photography at the time he disappeared. Then Michael receives photos relating to Anton's murder, and after that, photos of himself in his apartment looking at these photos. There is a ring with a symbol on it, a symbol that links to some underground snuff film producer that may or may not be real. People spout lines of dialog that I'm sure were meant to be profound—like Anton saying he likes doing crosswords because puzzles "have no ambiguity"—but comes off as pretentious horses---t. Viewers will also see nods to David Croenenberg's "Videodrome" and more than a few scenes reminiscent of "Saw."
Many of the people involved in making "Pornography: A Thriller" were also involved in the gay sci-fi/horror "Socket." By comparison, "Pornography" has slightly higher production values—and I emphasize slightly—with stronger acting and some moody cinematography, though much of it looks flat and cheap. Truth be told, there are actual porn videos made with more finesse, which left me wishing Kittredge and crew just collaborated with, say, the folks at Raging Stallion or Titan Media, making an experimental porn video instead of a rambling "art" movie. At least a porn movie would have a climax. Several of them, in fact.
Slow and boring — a badly told story: are the two objections reviewers here reiterate in different ways over and over. And yet, the film I saw couldn't be more enticing. PORNOGRAPHY: A THRILLER is methodical, character driven, but certainly not boring; and considering its ambitious three part narrative, I'd say this seamlessly rendered film ends up being the engaging puzzle it was intended to be. Writer/director, David Kittredge has clearly thought about his subject long and hard, for the kind of cubist back and forth he's cooked up brilliantly exploits thriller hooks to explore the relationship between hardcore sex acted for the camera and the imagination of those who get off on watching it. Even with the ghost of David Lynch in obvious attendance, Kittredge's thriller plot does not seem stolen or manufactured, as others would have you think; it reflect the artist's ambiguous relationship to the subject. The film is saying that pornography arouses us, body and mind, with temptation and dread; two sides of the same coin. Here's a gay film that truly challenges its audience to think. No gay bar clichés, no stupid, camp posturing pandering to a marketable demographic. If someone says this is boring or not well done, it means the film went over their heads.
The first half of the film is pretty exciting, let be a bit cheesy, but that's part of the genre. Then it just gets weird in a "it was just a dream - or was it?" kind of way. Boring.
I got the impression the writer didn't believe in his own script, thinking the basic story was too over the top to make it on its own. So he made a twist to save face as a serious movie-maker. Or something like that.
Sorry to be so negative about it, but just like another reviewer pointed out, this movie could have been so good with so little extra work done to it.
Technically it was well done, the acting/directing is okay too, I really just object to the script.
I got the impression the writer didn't believe in his own script, thinking the basic story was too over the top to make it on its own. So he made a twist to save face as a serious movie-maker. Or something like that.
Sorry to be so negative about it, but just like another reviewer pointed out, this movie could have been so good with so little extra work done to it.
Technically it was well done, the acting/directing is okay too, I really just object to the script.
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaThe director of Pornography (2009), David Kittredge is referenced on screen in Michael's research notes for his book on porn, written as: "Dave Kittredge - porn director, highly uncooperative, drugs?, bi polar?"
- ErroresWhen Harry calls Michael's cell phone, to tell him about the busted old video tape that he restored for Michael, the call is disconnected, and Michael clearly hears a fast busy or "phone off the hook" signal. "Phone off the hook" signals are not heard on cell phones when the other party disconnects, the line just goes silent and the call is ended.
- ConexionesReferences Boys in the Sand (1971)
- Bandas sonorasA CREATURE OF THE 70S
Written and Performed by Michael Cudahy
Courtesy Combustible Edison, LTD.
From the Wrangler: Anatomy of an Icon (2008) soundtrack
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
- How long is Pornography: A Thriller?Con tecnología de Alexa
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- País de origen
- Sitios oficiales
- Idioma
- También se conoce como
- Pornography: A Thriller
- Locaciones de filmación
- Productora
- Ver más créditos de la compañía en IMDbPro
- Tiempo de ejecución1 hora 53 minutos
- Color
- Relación de aspecto
- 1.66 : 1
Contribuir a esta página
Sugiere una edición o agrega el contenido que falta
Principales brechas de datos
What is the Spanish language plot outline for Pornography (2009)?
Responda