Une jeune fille est amoureuse d'un homme plus âgé. Il exige qu'elle aille dans une maison close pour lui prouver son amour.Une jeune fille est amoureuse d'un homme plus âgé. Il exige qu'elle aille dans une maison close pour lui prouver son amour.Une jeune fille est amoureuse d'un homme plus âgé. Il exige qu'elle aille dans une maison close pour lui prouver son amour.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
Georges Wilson
- Narrator
- (voix)
Maria Meriko
- The death
- (voix)
Avis à la une
The two main characters are taken from The Story of O. As is the initial premise in the novel, O submitting (to a brothel in this film) to Sir Stephen to prove her devotion. This movie takes place in China in the 1920's. A major side story is the uprising by some Chinese citizens. A smaller side story is a young man who has become infatuated with O. Even more side stories on other smaller characters.
The acting is good but none stand out. There are some very brief scenes of unstimulated sex but I would not call it hardcore. The camera work is excellent. I love how often the camera pans across a scene. A picture says a thousand words but this is ten thousand.
I like movies that have several pieces to make the story as this one does. Several interesting characters from each piece. Some might be put off by the sex and S&M scenes but they just were vehicles to help tell the story.
The acting could have been better tho wasn't bad. While O was the central character, it felt like something was missing. Still, I enjoyed watching.
The acting is good but none stand out. There are some very brief scenes of unstimulated sex but I would not call it hardcore. The camera work is excellent. I love how often the camera pans across a scene. A picture says a thousand words but this is ten thousand.
I like movies that have several pieces to make the story as this one does. Several interesting characters from each piece. Some might be put off by the sex and S&M scenes but they just were vehicles to help tell the story.
The acting could have been better tho wasn't bad. While O was the central character, it felt like something was missing. Still, I enjoyed watching.
This film is sometimes called 'The Story of O-Pt.2',which tries to pass itself off as a sequel (of sorts)to the French erotic S&M thriller 'The Story Of O'. Although I've never seen the original version, I did, however get to see this sorry mixed bag of sexual & social politics. I guess the 'O' angle comes from the occasional S&M overtones (which were never as explicit (and unpleasant to watch) as the ones in 'Mistress'. Klaus Kinski is the only recognizable face in this French/Japanese production (but speaks his lines in English--at least in the version I saw). The unnecessary use of surrealism only manages to make this some what boring example in pseudo porn even more pretentious (what are they trying to prove with depicting a piano floating in water?). It's obvious that after the whole "porno chic" trend in cinema petered out (ouch-sorry,bad pun!)about 1975, producers had to scrape the bottom of the barrel trying to please the mavens of adult cinema,not to mention Foreign/Art Cinema,so film goers had to contend with dreck like 'The Last Woman',and others like it.
I really like Kinski he is a great actor. I've seen this movie because I've heard that there are autobiographic aspects in this movie.
The film is full of symbols like a piano sinking in a river or strange shadow-pictures at the walls. Then the narrator always says abstract sentences like: "A kid sells fortune, but her box is empty now." This is really disturbing and wasn't really necessary, because everyone understands what this movie is all about. The movie shows how Kinski's character treated woman, and how he kept them under control. If there are really some aspects of Kinski's life in this story - then he really was an swine. So there is no need to watch this movie, unless if you want to see Kinski naked or if you like sick trash movies to laugh about.
The film is full of symbols like a piano sinking in a river or strange shadow-pictures at the walls. Then the narrator always says abstract sentences like: "A kid sells fortune, but her box is empty now." This is really disturbing and wasn't really necessary, because everyone understands what this movie is all about. The movie shows how Kinski's character treated woman, and how he kept them under control. If there are really some aspects of Kinski's life in this story - then he really was an swine. So there is no need to watch this movie, unless if you want to see Kinski naked or if you like sick trash movies to laugh about.
The movie maker wanted to make a kinki movie. Then he decided to make an artistic movie. He makes neither. The movie is suppose to take off where The story of O left. It never took off. Sir Stevens takes O to a Hong-Kong brothel so that she can prove her submission by whoring for him. She finds a love of her own. There is no erotism, there is no logic, there is no beauty. Be aware though, there are some very explicit sex scenes but still the movie remains very stale till the end. A disappointment.
I bought this film on DVD despite the "stale" review and that was idiotic... That review was completely accurate and I have never seen any worse "erotic" film in my long life! Even if it partly was lovely filmed and had interesting surroundings, plus a nice cover... But my own Extreme Erotica (c) films are over 100 times more erotic (just in the soft delicious aspect) with probably less than 100 times of this films budget! The story have no logical connection with the first film or the famous book... Or any new (exciting) element of slave training, except some very strange and sad developments... Then did the main male character - Klaus Kinski - not look a bit like the second Master of "O" he try to play... And not even lovely Arielle Dombasle, did look delicious in any scene!
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesIn an interview that she gives to a magazine, Arielle Dombasle looks back on her film career and in particular an erotic film, titled Les fruits de la passion (1981), which she would have preferred to forget. "It was something that made me suffer horribly. I was too young to do that, and then Kinski ... he was crazy" she says. Arielle shot this film in 1981. She was then 28 years old. There she play opposite to Klaus Kinski. According to the artist and muse of Bernard-Henri Lévy, playing the opposite to the German actor was hell. "He's a guy who crushed the weak, the nastiest trait there is. Someone who liked relationships by force, who absolutely wanted to be loved and who did everything to not love him. Unbearable ".
- Versions alternativesThe 1998 VHS tape had 19 secs cut by the BBFC these cuts removed woman being whipped whilst on a wheel, a rough sex scene and sight of oral sex. The 2005 DVD was passed uncut.
- ConnexionsFollowed by Histoire d'O: Chapitre 2 (1984)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Fruits of Passion?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
- Durée
- 1h 19min(79 min)
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 1.66 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant