CALIFICACIÓN DE IMDb
6.5/10
11 k
TU CALIFICACIÓN
Emi, una maestra de escuela, encuentra su carrera y reputación amenazadas después de que se filtró una cinta sexual personal en Internet. Obligada a encontrarse con los padres exigiendo su d... Leer todoEmi, una maestra de escuela, encuentra su carrera y reputación amenazadas después de que se filtró una cinta sexual personal en Internet. Obligada a encontrarse con los padres exigiendo su despido, Emi se niega a rendirse a su presión.Emi, una maestra de escuela, encuentra su carrera y reputación amenazadas después de que se filtró una cinta sexual personal en Internet. Obligada a encontrarse con los padres exigiendo su despido, Emi se niega a rendirse a su presión.
- Dirección
- Guionista
- Elenco
- Premios
- 8 premios ganados y 21 nominaciones en total
- Dirección
- Guionista
- Todo el elenco y el equipo
- Producción, taquilla y más en IMDbPro
Opiniones destacadas
There are two distinct categories of people who reviewed this film: those who awarded it high marks and those who didn't- at all. The director, Radu Jude- impressed me with his "Aferim!" - a film which gives food for thought by dealing with a very little known and uncomfortable subject in Romanian history: the slavery of gypsies from past centuries.
"Bad Luck Banging or Loony Porn" is just as uncomfortable, but it is set in contemporary Romania. As contemporary as it gets: the pandemic year of 2020. The title itself is misleading; this film is not about sex, though it is the starting point of the plot. For that, one can search Pornhub. This is a film about how sick and ailing the Romanian society is in its entirety; the first chapter of the film takes us on a ride along with the protagonist through the Bucharest of our days: noisy, dirty, unkempt, unruly, impolite, careless, unappealing, selfish, vulgar. If some don't like it, well, why break the mirror if it shows you what you look like? A lot of the filming in this section reminded me of La Nouvelle Vague.
The second chapter has apparently no connection whatsoever with the first. Or has it? An ad libitum dictionary of contemporary notions translated into the Romanian realities of the moment; what can be more hilarious and heart wrenching at the same time?! Considering the way it is put together, Monty Python comes to mind.
As for the third chapter, well, this is Romanian society at its best. First of all, it is not for the parents to decide whether a teacher can be fired or not; it is a state school, hence free for the pupils, so the parents shouldn't have a say in who stays and who goes. This chapter of the film is so full of harsh satire directed at how the Romanians think they have a say in everything, thus displaying a wide range of all kinds of preconceptions, stereotypes and fake news distribution- racial, political, social, sexual- that one doesn't know whether to laugh or to cry.
Yes, this is us, whether we like it or not.
And the grand finale, well... you have to watch it in order to choose which one suits you best. I go for the third, full throttle.
Great job, Radu Jude and his team! A fully deserved Golden Bear!
"Bad Luck Banging or Loony Porn" is just as uncomfortable, but it is set in contemporary Romania. As contemporary as it gets: the pandemic year of 2020. The title itself is misleading; this film is not about sex, though it is the starting point of the plot. For that, one can search Pornhub. This is a film about how sick and ailing the Romanian society is in its entirety; the first chapter of the film takes us on a ride along with the protagonist through the Bucharest of our days: noisy, dirty, unkempt, unruly, impolite, careless, unappealing, selfish, vulgar. If some don't like it, well, why break the mirror if it shows you what you look like? A lot of the filming in this section reminded me of La Nouvelle Vague.
The second chapter has apparently no connection whatsoever with the first. Or has it? An ad libitum dictionary of contemporary notions translated into the Romanian realities of the moment; what can be more hilarious and heart wrenching at the same time?! Considering the way it is put together, Monty Python comes to mind.
As for the third chapter, well, this is Romanian society at its best. First of all, it is not for the parents to decide whether a teacher can be fired or not; it is a state school, hence free for the pupils, so the parents shouldn't have a say in who stays and who goes. This chapter of the film is so full of harsh satire directed at how the Romanians think they have a say in everything, thus displaying a wide range of all kinds of preconceptions, stereotypes and fake news distribution- racial, political, social, sexual- that one doesn't know whether to laugh or to cry.
Yes, this is us, whether we like it or not.
And the grand finale, well... you have to watch it in order to choose which one suits you best. I go for the third, full throttle.
Great job, Radu Jude and his team! A fully deserved Golden Bear!
'Bad Luck Banging or Loony Porn' is an unorthodox, provocative, scathing piece of moviemaking that due to its low crowd-pleasing coefficient will likely not be for everyone. Since I have no problem with significant amounts of in-your-face-attitude on the director's side, I quite liked it.
Architecturally, the movies borrows from some examples of French Nouvelle Vague Cinema - if I had a better memory, I could tell you exactly which ones - in that the camera frequently and in its center piece completely deviates from the dealings of its protagonists. In this way, a film that starts off with a story about an instance of accidental pornography widens its scope dramatically to become nothing less than a satirical portrait of a pornographic (Romanian, but just Romanian?) society. Using 'pornography' as an abstract (anti-)moral topos reminded me of Samuel Maoz' 'Foxtrot'.
While I think that the dramaturgic fundamentals of the movie are well thought through, I also think the movie could have been even better. Especially in the third part, the discussion of the matter at hand meanders quite a bit, can be tedious, and will probably not escape all charges of weisenheimery.
Bottom line is, that most viewers will probably switch it off at one point in complacent disgust. If you make it to the end, though, you will not see its explosive, weapons-grade finale coming, which is again well in line with its subversive intentions.
Architecturally, the movies borrows from some examples of French Nouvelle Vague Cinema - if I had a better memory, I could tell you exactly which ones - in that the camera frequently and in its center piece completely deviates from the dealings of its protagonists. In this way, a film that starts off with a story about an instance of accidental pornography widens its scope dramatically to become nothing less than a satirical portrait of a pornographic (Romanian, but just Romanian?) society. Using 'pornography' as an abstract (anti-)moral topos reminded me of Samuel Maoz' 'Foxtrot'.
While I think that the dramaturgic fundamentals of the movie are well thought through, I also think the movie could have been even better. Especially in the third part, the discussion of the matter at hand meanders quite a bit, can be tedious, and will probably not escape all charges of weisenheimery.
Bottom line is, that most viewers will probably switch it off at one point in complacent disgust. If you make it to the end, though, you will not see its explosive, weapons-grade finale coming, which is again well in line with its subversive intentions.
The point is clear: our society is shallow and stupid. But the way it was delivered was... Well, shallow and stupid as well. Chaotic scenes, vulgarity just for the sake of 'art', no emotion triggered whatsoever (except a little bit of a disgust actually. Maybe that was the point). Even the quasi-intellectual criticism didn't help. And the third part was intensely tiring trying to fill 30 mins with every typical political discussion full of reading articles from the smartphone. And the three different endings should have been the best part?
Sorry, didn't work out for me. But must say my friend gave it a 10 so... Not for anyone, I guess.
Sorry, didn't work out for me. But must say my friend gave it a 10 so... Not for anyone, I guess.
Because of a leaked sex tape, a teacher finds herself scrutinized and reviled by the system.
Rade Jude is an iconoclast but not a gratuitous director and writer. Halfway through he film he references Pasolini, and that makes perfect sense, the Bunuel from "le charme discret de la bourgeoisie", would have been at home too. This movie is an indictment of our moral hypocrisy, be it pertaining to sexual behavior, but also to social and political constructs, and in a very contemporary manner to all the lies and pretense surrounding our individual ways of handling the Covid pandemic.
This movie is graphic, VERY graphic! If you're easily shocked, see something else. But if you don't mind being provoked, being made uneasy, or even challenged in what you consider proper, as long as it is for a reason, go for it.
I don't want to go in spoiler mode, the movie deserves to be discovered as you see it. However it has three parts, each with its own cinematographic language and esthetics. Each part invites us to consider a different angle of the same issue: our relationship to images, their meaning, and the value, or infamy, we attach to them.
From the opening right in your face use of them, through a contemplative approach of the disconnect between what we see and what we're told we see or what we're told to watch, through an exploration of the lies or over-meaningfulness we create when we associate images and comments on these images, to the absolute hypocrisy of the morally woke and conservative puritans alike when it comes to confronting ourselves to the beyond the surface value of images.
And despite the content it is not at all a boring intellectual movie, it is fun, it is in your face, it is masterfully shot, and it solicits your eyes as much as your brain.
Rade Jude is an iconoclast but not a gratuitous director and writer. Halfway through he film he references Pasolini, and that makes perfect sense, the Bunuel from "le charme discret de la bourgeoisie", would have been at home too. This movie is an indictment of our moral hypocrisy, be it pertaining to sexual behavior, but also to social and political constructs, and in a very contemporary manner to all the lies and pretense surrounding our individual ways of handling the Covid pandemic.
This movie is graphic, VERY graphic! If you're easily shocked, see something else. But if you don't mind being provoked, being made uneasy, or even challenged in what you consider proper, as long as it is for a reason, go for it.
I don't want to go in spoiler mode, the movie deserves to be discovered as you see it. However it has three parts, each with its own cinematographic language and esthetics. Each part invites us to consider a different angle of the same issue: our relationship to images, their meaning, and the value, or infamy, we attach to them.
From the opening right in your face use of them, through a contemplative approach of the disconnect between what we see and what we're told we see or what we're told to watch, through an exploration of the lies or over-meaningfulness we create when we associate images and comments on these images, to the absolute hypocrisy of the morally woke and conservative puritans alike when it comes to confronting ourselves to the beyond the surface value of images.
And despite the content it is not at all a boring intellectual movie, it is fun, it is in your face, it is masterfully shot, and it solicits your eyes as much as your brain.
This NSFW satire can be hilarious (and insightful) sometimes. But, aside from being a commentary about the collective hypocrisy or the decay of humanity, its unconventional style in the story-telling tends to hinder the film to be more than just a didactic and somewhat preachy (if not pretentious) rhetoric.
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaInternational distribution deals spiked after the film won the Golden Bear for best film at the 2021 Berlin International Film Festival, but producer Ads Solomon expressed concern that a U.S. deal could prove tricky, as the movie contains several scenes of hard-core sex. She said in an interview that the film's depictions of sex should be seen in context, especially given the often lax attitudes towards on-screen violence in U.S. movies. "It's happening more and more that violence is accepted [but] nudity is not," she said. "For me, violence affects me emotionally much more than nudity. I'm not saying we should censor this as well; we should consider [the sexual content], not through an algorithm. Things should be considered in their complexity -there is no complete black and complete white."
- ErroresThe film crew is reflected in the windows and doors of a bus that passes in front of Emilia.
- Bandas sonorasThe Battle Hymn of the Republic (Glory, Hallelujah)
Music by William Steffe (1856)
Arranged by James E. Greenleaf, C.S. Hall and C. Marsh (1861)
Lyrics by Julia Ward Howe (1861)
Performed by Jura Ferina & Pavao Miholjevic
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- Países de origen
- Sitios oficiales
- Idiomas
- También se conoce como
- Bad Luck Banging or Loony Porn
- Locaciones de filmación
- Palace of the Paliament, Strada Izvor 2-4, Bucarest, Rumanía(guided visit of Ceausescu's former palace)
- Productoras
- Ver más créditos de la compañía en IMDbPro
Taquilla
- Presupuesto
- EUR 930,000 (estimado)
- Total en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 72,342
- Fin de semana de estreno en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 7,672
- 21 nov 2021
- Total a nivel mundial
- USD 476,347
Contribuir a esta página
Sugiere una edición o agrega el contenido que falta
Principales brechas de datos
What is the streaming release date of Sexo desafortunado o Porno loco (2021) in Australia?
Responda