[go: up one dir, main page]

    कैलेंडर रिलीज़ करेंटॉप 250 फ़िल्मेंसबसे लोकप्रिय फ़िल्मेंज़ोनर के आधार पर फ़िल्में ब्राउज़ करेंटॉप बॉक्स ऑफ़िसशोटाइम और टिकटफ़िल्मी समाचारइंडिया मूवी स्पॉटलाइट
    TV और स्ट्रीमिंग पर क्या हैटॉप 250 टीवी शोसबसे लोकप्रिय TV शोशैली के अनुसार टीवी शो ब्राउज़ करेंTV की खबरें
    देखने के लिए क्या हैसबसे नए ट्रेलरIMDb ओरिजिनलIMDb की पसंदIMDb स्पॉटलाइटफैमिली एंटरटेनमेंट गाइडIMDb पॉडकास्ट
    OscarsEmmysSan Diego Comic-ConSummer Watch GuideToronto Int'l Film FestivalIMDb Stars to WatchSTARmeter पुरस्कारअवार्ड्स सेंट्रलफ़ेस्टिवल सेंट्रलसभी इवेंट
    जिनका जन्म आज के दिन हुआ सबसे लोकप्रिय सेलिब्रिटीसेलिब्रिटी से जुड़ी खबरें
    मदद केंद्रयोगदानकर्ता क्षेत्रपॉल
उद्योग के पेशेवरों के लिए
  • भाषा
  • पूरी तरह से सपोर्टेड
  • English (United States)
    आंशिक रूप से सपोर्टेड
  • Français (Canada)
  • Français (France)
  • Deutsch (Deutschland)
  • हिंदी (भारत)
  • Italiano (Italia)
  • Português (Brasil)
  • Español (España)
  • Español (México)
वॉचलिस्ट
साइन इन करें
  • पूरी तरह से सपोर्टेड
  • English (United States)
    आंशिक रूप से सपोर्टेड
  • Français (Canada)
  • Français (France)
  • Deutsch (Deutschland)
  • हिंदी (भारत)
  • Italiano (Italia)
  • Português (Brasil)
  • Español (España)
  • Español (México)
ऐप का इस्तेमाल करें
  • कास्ट और क्रू
  • उपयोगकर्ता समीक्षाएं
  • ट्रिविया
  • अक्सर पूछे जाने वाला सवाल
IMDbPro

Porcile

  • 1969
  • Not Rated
  • 1 घं 39 मि
IMDb रेटिंग
6.6/10
4.2 हज़ार
आपकी रेटिंग
Porcile (1969)
A man wandering in a volcanic desert forms a band of murderous cannibals. A post-war German industrialist learns that his son is unable to make decisions or form relationships.
trailer प्ले करें2:40
1 वीडियो
22 फ़ोटो
ड्रामा

अपनी भाषा में प्लॉट जोड़ेंA man wandering in a volcanic desert forms a band of murderous cannibals. A post-war German industrialist learns that his son is unable to make decisions or form relationships.A man wandering in a volcanic desert forms a band of murderous cannibals. A post-war German industrialist learns that his son is unable to make decisions or form relationships.A man wandering in a volcanic desert forms a band of murderous cannibals. A post-war German industrialist learns that his son is unable to make decisions or form relationships.

  • निर्देशक
    • Pier Paolo Pasolini
  • लेखक
    • Pier Paolo Pasolini
  • स्टार
    • Pierre Clémenti
    • Jean-Pierre Léaud
    • Alberto Lionello
  • IMDbPro पर प्रोडक्शन की जानकारी देखें
  • IMDb रेटिंग
    6.6/10
    4.2 हज़ार
    आपकी रेटिंग
    • निर्देशक
      • Pier Paolo Pasolini
    • लेखक
      • Pier Paolo Pasolini
    • स्टार
      • Pierre Clémenti
      • Jean-Pierre Léaud
      • Alberto Lionello
    • 21यूज़र समीक्षाएं
    • 52आलोचक समीक्षाएं
  • IMDbPro पर प्रोडक्शन की जानकारी देखें
  • वीडियो1

    Trailer
    Trailer 2:40
    Trailer

    फ़ोटो22

    पोस्टर देखें
    पोस्टर देखें
    पोस्टर देखें
    पोस्टर देखें
    पोस्टर देखें
    पोस्टर देखें
    + 16
    पोस्टर देखें

    टॉप कलाकार12

    बदलाव करें
    Pierre Clémenti
    Pierre Clémenti
    • Cannibale
    • (as Pierre Clementi)
    Jean-Pierre Léaud
    Jean-Pierre Léaud
    • Julian Klotz
    • (as Jean Pierre Leaud)
    Alberto Lionello
    Alberto Lionello
    • Signore Klotz
    Ugo Tognazzi
    Ugo Tognazzi
    • Herdhitze
    Anne Wiazemsky
    Anne Wiazemsky
    • Ida
    Margarita Lozano
    Margarita Lozano
    • Madame Klotz
    • (as Margherita Lozano)
    Marco Ferreri
    Marco Ferreri
    • Hans Günther
    Franco Citti
    Franco Citti
    • Secondo cannibale
    Ninetto Davoli
    Ninetto Davoli
    • Maracchione
    Luigi Barbini
    Luigi Barbini
    • Soldato nel deserto
    • (बिना क्रेडिट के)
    Sergio Elia
    • Servo
    • (बिना क्रेडिट के)
    Antonino Faà di Bruno
    Antonino Faà di Bruno
    • Vecchio (scena della sentenza)
    • (बिना क्रेडिट के)
    • निर्देशक
      • Pier Paolo Pasolini
    • लेखक
      • Pier Paolo Pasolini
    • सभी कास्ट और क्रू
    • IMDbPro में प्रोडक्शन, बॉक्स ऑफिस और बहुत कुछ

    उपयोगकर्ता समीक्षाएं21

    6.64.2K
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10

    फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं

    7zetes

    Too obscure, but I can't help but like a Pasolini film

    With this, I only have one more Pasolini feature to go and I have seen all of them (the missing culprit being Accatone). Porcile does not represent Pasolini at his best. It's far too abstract and obscure. Two stories alternate, one taking place in a quasi-legendary time and one in modern times. The quasi-legendary scenes concern a young cannibal, some rapists and murderers. The modern sequence concerns some former Nazis living in Italy. One of their sons, played by French actor Jean-Pierre Leaud, is sick of the evil, bourgeois lifestyle he leads. At one point, since he lacks any ambition, he throws himself into an intentional coma. I don't get it, especially how the two parts work together. Still, as a Pasolini fan, I have to admit that it is a strikingly made film. I especially liked the scenes set in the past. Pasolini regulars Franco Citti and Ninetto Davoli (the only actor, I believe, who appears in both parts of the film, although I have no clue why) come along for the ride. Pasolini fans should certainly see it, others should avoid. 7/10.
    5RobertF87

    Bleak, Brutal and Bizarre

    This is one of the strangest works of Italian writer-director Pier Paolo Pasolini. It interweaves two story lines: The first, almost dialogue- free, tale takes place in an unknown volcanic landscape at an unspecified historical period and involves a young cannibal who leads a band that rapes and murders the local populace. The second tale is set in 1967 Germany and involves the son of a wealthy industrialist who is used as a pawn in a power game between his father and a business rival.

    It's well-made with several striking images, but it is very slow, very obscure and challenging. It is a bleakly savage satire on human nature, which will certainly not appeal to everyone. In fact it's a film that is easy to admire, but hard to like.

    It is certainly a powerful work of art, but certainly don't expect to enjoy it.
    6Rodrigo_Amaro

    The pollution of ideas almost ruined this. Good film but hardly accessible.

    "Porcile" is fine if you have the patience and the will to endure its lost and bizarre images or its strange deviate messages. Reactions about it will be mixed, rarely reaching some certainty, but the one that's definitely is that this is one of weakest films ever directed by Pier Paolo Pasolini. It's too pretentious, looks like his own version of Godard's "Week End" but less brutal, less gross yet more confusing in its speech. Both films deal with world going to its ending, total destruction all around and all hope lost, and Socialism seems to be the good alternative for our better sake. The directors of both films mixed their political speech in the middle of the controversial and shocking images.

    Two stories form the whole: 1) one young man (Pierre Clementi) who has killed his parents and ate their flesh walks around from village to village after being sentenced to perish in the vast desert. The only thing he'll be able to do is to kill whoever show up on his way and then eat them too. That's the story of the young cannibal, marvelously presented without words (he only has one spoken line repeated towards the ending). Beautiful cinematography, scary and thrilling sequences in it. 2) this story, very talky and quite messy brings Jean-Pierre Léaud (who was also in "Week End") as the son of an German industrialist who can't connect with people, preferring the company of the pigs ("Porcile" translates to "Pigsty"). He tries some involvement with a girl (Anne Wiazemsky) but with no luck. And there's his father (Alberto Lionello) business deals with a former Nazi of name Herdhitze (Ugo Tognazzi) also businessman but a rival of his, who hasn't aged through the war years after successful plastic surgeries. Foggy speeches about life, politics, mankind are dissolved into this other story and it's very hard to form a whole idea.

    They're apart in time but what they have in common? World going to an end, the destruction and corruption of societies, with everything out of control. Those are recurring themes in Pasolini works ("Teorema", "Salò" just to quote a few) but in here there isn't much going on to make them feel useful for all of us. This is a case that might look better in a book/screenplay/written work than filmed. The experience is distractive, confusing, rarely captivating even with the two known main stars, who had their voices strangely dubbed in Italian (I have my doubts about Pierre, I believe he really learned his lines in the other language). I like the film even though I can't connect with much of what's shown in it. The cannibal story is interesting; the one about the industrialist's son isn't all that much. The final result is chaos. Chaos in this problematic world that doesn't seem to get better. Well, at least in those predictions the master wasn't all that wrong.

    Enjoyable but unsustainable for more than one view. 6/10
    chaos-rampant

    The seer who brings vision

    I thought I was going to be confronted with minor Pasolini here. I was wrong. The same caution applies here though for casual viewers. With Pasolini we come to the foot of a cave where a sage is rumored to live, we can either turn back because there's no ornate ceremony, go back to where we can be told riveting stories about heroes wrestling fate; or sit and listen (not all of it may be intelligible), enter and divine vision.

    It opens with young intellectuals in a lush villa ruminating on their exasperations like out of Godard, from the time when revolutions were felt to be afoot. Oh the cause may be worthy in Pasolini's eyes, most likely is; but he makes it a point to show the modern self secluded from it in idle comfort, obsessed with analyzing himself in the scheme of narratives, dissatisfied, full of unrequited cravings and contradictions.

    In a separate medieval story we see man as only one more beast of prey alone in the wilderness, reduced to eating a butterfly to stave his insatiable hunger. We see what lurks behind that civilized self that always expects to be pleased, or better, all that had to transpire for endless time in the wilds. It's important here to see both the contrast and the continuity. The cruel nature in man as nature.

    And then in a breathtaking scene we're sent scurrying through windswept volcanic rock to see the human beast confronting itself in the crossroads, someone else much like him, alone and wary. There are few scenes more primal than this in cinema.

    Back in the modern portion, the same meeting between rivals takes place now with a lot of coy evasion, irony and duplicity, in a palace instead of the wild, over drinks. We see how human structures in place foster collaboration in the end; but it's a corporate one for profit that puts the beast in fine clothes, changes his face even, but leaves the hunger intact.

    Pasolini gives us the same barbs about modern life as he has elsewhere, relishing the opportunity, but he's not a sweeping fool; in the medieval portion he makes it a point to show that it's civilized structures, church and army, that go out in the wild to punish wrongdoing, install a semblance of order.

    We could be talking for days about what he has woven here. Sin that you control and sin that you don't. Law as necessary civilization. Bartering as control over the narrative (pigsty / WWII in the film). Love that you provide for versus the abstract calling from inmost soul.

    So okay, his camera seems sloppy from afar; he wants it to be you who has the chance encounter in these wilds instead of something bled of its reality on a lavish stage, wants it to be primal, madness the gods whisper to you. You'll see near the end some marvelously elliptic narrative as he conjures visions, no accident of sloppiness there; Pasolini is once more anticipating Malick.

    And he's aghast at the base nature he sees in him and things, impurity weighs him down; the whole film says, I have these things gnawing inside of me that I'll pay the price for even if I didn't put them there myself. Pasolini at his rawest makes the rocks crack open.

    The most riveting thing about it is that we have this seer in the wild of soul, who can bring vision back. He is the one who can't stay for love because something more abstract calls his name. He is the one who strays in the pigsty at nights, who has sinned in the wilds, ate the flesh.
    10oOgiandujaOo_and_Eddy_Merckx

    Oblique yet brilliant satire

    So instead of having a party and drinking and such, I thought I'd see in the new year by watching two offerings from Pasolini, Le Mura di Sana / The Walls of Sana'a (1964) and Porcile (1969).

    There are DVD versions out there which have scenes from Porcile in the wrong order, so, at the time of writing, if you want to see Porcile properly you have to have the Region 2 UK Tartan Pasolini box-set.

    Porcile, I will say, is a great film. There are two stories that are played alongside each other. Pierre Clémenti is a... well... who knows, a sprite perhaps, in a barbarous medieval setting. It's clear Pasolini has chosen him because he has a hard-on for him, he looks like he's come straight out of a Caravaggio painting. Our sprite and some buddies run around the black slopes of Etna being mad, it's very entertaining, and almost wordless. You can't really believe what you're seeing, it appears that Etna is actually active when they're on it, there is black smoke spewing forth, and the actors run past the most awesomely evil sulphurous cave you've ever seen. So you get to see some fornication, cannibalism, volcanism, and our sprite throwing a human head into the aforementioned evil hole. It's the most purely primal thing I've ever seen, and I've watched Matthew Barney films.

    The other half of the movie is set in an Italianate villa in Germany, it concerns on the one hand Mr Klotz and Mr Herdhitze, two industrialists vying with each other for superiority, and on the other hand Julian (playde by Jean-Pierre Léaud), Herr Klotz's son. Julian is portrayed as withdrawing from the human race almost entirely, this is shown to be down to his parents, who self-describe themselves as the type of people who would be painted as pigs by George Grosz, an elitist, although entirely accurate and most wondrous piece of scriptwriting. Julian has no concept of the joy of living or of functional human relationships at all, and so this child of the rich takes to copulating with pigs. Who can blame him as he has only the example of his parents' ruinous and obscure preoccupations, specifically the pursuit of wealth. At one point Julian describes a dream where he walks along a road searching for something at night, the road is filled with shining puddles, and then a little piglet comes a long and playfully bites four of his fingers off, and it doesn't hurt, they come off, as if they were made of rubber. At one point Julian's mother and his girlfriend stand opposite one another describing him, as if he were two completely separate people. And yet he's both. This shows how ideology and prejudice only allow you to see someone, as if through murky water.

    इस तरह के और

    Edipo Re
    7.2
    Edipo Re
    Medea
    6.9
    Medea
    Uccellacci e uccellini
    7.2
    Uccellacci e uccellini
    Comizi d'amore
    7.5
    Comizi d'amore
    Teorema
    7.0
    Teorema
    Accattone
    7.6
    Accattone
    La ricotta
    7.3
    La ricotta
    Mamma Roma
    7.8
    Mamma Roma
    Il vangelo secondo Matteo
    7.6
    Il vangelo secondo Matteo
    Calabuch
    7.3
    Calabuch
    The Decameron
    7.0
    The Decameron
    Topaze
    7.1
    Topaze

    कहानी

    बदलाव करें

    क्या आपको पता है

    बदलाव करें
    • ट्रिविया
      Pier Paolo Pasolini offered the role of the young cannibal to Klaus Kinski, who turned it down because the salary was too low.
    • गूफ़
      In one of the shots related to the medieval cannibal plot, we see a dust cloud rising in the distance behind the characters. It is a car driving across the mountain landscape.
    • भाव

      Young cannibal: I killed my father, I ate human flesh, and I quiver with joy.

    • कनेक्शन
      Edited into Pier Paolo Pasolini (1995)

    टॉप पसंद

    रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
    साइन इन करें

    अक्सर पूछे जाने वाला सवाल14

    • How long is Pigsty?Alexa द्वारा संचालित

    विवरण

    बदलाव करें
    • रिलीज़ की तारीख़
      • 10 अक्टूबर 1969 (फ़्रांस)
    • कंट्री ऑफ़ ओरिजिन
      • इटली
      • फ़्रांस
    • आधिकारिक साइटें
      • distributor's official site for individuals
      • Distributor's official site for professionals
    • भाषा
      • इतालवी
    • इस रूप में भी जाना जाता है
      • Pigsty
    • फ़िल्माने की जगहें
      • Mount Etna, कैटेनिया, सिसिली, इटली
    • उत्पादन कंपनियां
      • I Film Dell'Orso
      • Internazionale Nembo Distribuzione Importazione Esportazione Film (INDIEF)
      • IDI Cinematografica
    • IMDbPro पर और कंपनी क्रेडिट देखें

    तकनीकी विशेषताएं

    बदलाव करें
    • चलने की अवधि
      • 1 घं 39 मि(99 min)
    • ध्वनि मिश्रण
      • Mono
    • पक्ष अनुपात
      • 1.85 : 1

    इस पेज में योगदान दें

    किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें
    • योगदान करने के बारे में और जानें
    पेज में बदलाव करें

    एक्सप्लोर करने के लिए और भी बहुत कुछ

    हाल ही में देखे गए

    कृपया इस फ़ीचर का इस्तेमाल करने के लिए ब्राउज़र कुकीज़ चालू करें. और जानें.
    IMDb ऐप पाएँ
    ज़्यादा एक्सेस के लिए साइन इन करेंज़्यादा एक्सेस के लिए साइन इन करें
    सोशल पर IMDb को फॉलो करें
    IMDb ऐप पाएँ
    Android और iOS के लिए
    IMDb ऐप पाएँ
    • सहायता
    • साइट इंडेक्स
    • IMDbPro
    • Box Office Mojo
    • IMDb डेटा लाइसेंस
    • प्रेस रूम
    • विज्ञापन
    • नौकरियाँ
    • उपयोग की शर्तें
    • गोपनीयता नीति
    • Your Ads Privacy Choices
    IMDb, एक Amazon कंपनी

    © 1990-2025 by IMDb.com, Inc.