VALUTAZIONE IMDb
6,7/10
7174
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
Un esame del famigerato film pornografico La vera gola profonda del 1972, coprendo aspetti dalla creazione del film al suo impatto culturale.Un esame del famigerato film pornografico La vera gola profonda del 1972, coprendo aspetti dalla creazione del film al suo impatto culturale.Un esame del famigerato film pornografico La vera gola profonda del 1972, coprendo aspetti dalla creazione del film al suo impatto culturale.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
- Premi
- 1 vittoria e 1 candidatura in totale
Linda Lovelace
- Self - Linda Lovelace
- (filmato d'archivio)
Dennis Hopper
- Narrator
- (voce)
Ruth Westheimer
- Self
- (as Dr. Ruth Westheimer)
Francis Ford Coppola
- Self
- (filmato d'archivio)
Recensioni in evidenza
"Inside Deep Throat" is one of the most entertaining documentaries I've ever seen. This film doesn't cover all the aspects you may want to see about the porn-film-turned-cultural- phenomenon, but it is fun to watch -a thing you can't say about most documentaries. The tone is light-hearted, which will make people squeamish about seeing a film related to porn less threatened. It is however, one of the few films I've seen well deserving of the NC-17 rating.
The lessons to be learned from watching it are: The Christian Right is the American Taliban. The Republican Party spent too much taxpayer money and time deciding what you should and shouldn't see. Their silly "American values" platform has been around for decades. The silly obscenity laws are still around, though it'll be a big waste of taxpayer money to enforce them, as it was back then. The movie made so much money because it was banned and people were drawn to the controversy. The mafia was the biggest beneficiary, while most people involved in the film became victims of the movie's success.
I read somewhere the late Linda Lovelace said she realized the feminist crusaders used her more than the porn industry did. You can see a bit of that in this movie. In archive footage, Lovelace is being interviewed, but a feminist next to her doesn't let Lovelace speak and answers all the questions for her. Poor Lovelace was used to push whatever agenda she could be used for. In one part you see her defending the porn industry and free speech, the next you see her as the ultimate anti-porn crusader, and at an old age you see her posing nude for Playboy, defending her change of mind.
This will be a great DVD when it comes out. Many people won't agree with the points of view portrayed here, but we all can agree this is good storytelling.
The lessons to be learned from watching it are: The Christian Right is the American Taliban. The Republican Party spent too much taxpayer money and time deciding what you should and shouldn't see. Their silly "American values" platform has been around for decades. The silly obscenity laws are still around, though it'll be a big waste of taxpayer money to enforce them, as it was back then. The movie made so much money because it was banned and people were drawn to the controversy. The mafia was the biggest beneficiary, while most people involved in the film became victims of the movie's success.
I read somewhere the late Linda Lovelace said she realized the feminist crusaders used her more than the porn industry did. You can see a bit of that in this movie. In archive footage, Lovelace is being interviewed, but a feminist next to her doesn't let Lovelace speak and answers all the questions for her. Poor Lovelace was used to push whatever agenda she could be used for. In one part you see her defending the porn industry and free speech, the next you see her as the ultimate anti-porn crusader, and at an old age you see her posing nude for Playboy, defending her change of mind.
This will be a great DVD when it comes out. Many people won't agree with the points of view portrayed here, but we all can agree this is good storytelling.
To get the obvious out of the way, yes, the movie's rated NC-17. Yes, it earns it's rating, in part by graphically showing us how DEEP THROAT got it's name.
I have real misgivings about this movie, although ultimately I'll recommend it to those interested in the period or artistic subcultures more generally. It is very well made, with a lot of interesting archival footage. (I especially liked an interview on what sounded like "60 Minutes" with Jack Nicholson, Warren Beatty, and Harry Reems stuck there right between them.) This is a fascinating story, assuming you like the subject generally. And the filmmakers have dug out all sorts of interesting people, including Gerald Damiano himself (improbably whiling away his twilight years in what looks like Florida) and Harry Reems (who I think comes across really well.) My misgivings basically stem from this: the filmmakers want to simultaneously idealize a moment in time and, at the same time, draw political conclusions from the story. I don't think you can do that; I think that's a contradiction in terms. As such, the movie often comes across as very dishonest. Some of the dishonesty seems unconscious: if you're going to idealize the early Seventies adult film scene as brave busters of restrictive social mores, it seems strange to at the same time castigate those who would uphold them, since it's this very act of upholding them which gives your guys their ennobling quality, no? It's as if the filmmakers want to re-fight the DEEP THROAT wars again, without any sense of perspective.
But more seriously, I think the movie shows a lot of bad faith. It's one thing to properly make fun of a ridiculous evangelical prosecutor who spearheaded the DEEP THROAT trial; it's another to make fun of an FBI agent, who after all (as the movie reluctantly admits) was investigating the Mob's connections with DEEP THROAT. It's one thing to celebrate Hollywood's defense of the movie and Reems when he was in trial, but the movie makers rather glibly skate over the fact that Reems's descent into alcoholism was kicked off by his realization that Hollywood wouldn't hire him. As for Linda Lovelace, the movie has convinced me (rather unwillingly, frankly, and I'm not sure they intended to do it themselves) that she was at least pressured into performing in the movie. There's a still of her with bruises that's hard to gainsay.
Most importantly, the movie acknowledges that porno is a huge industry nowadays, but doesn't seem to want that realization to clutter up it's thesis that things are more repressive now. One could argue, after all, that the success of the current adult industry means that Damiano and friends have essentially won. The movie seems to want to say just the opposite, that these guys were doing more artful stuff that isn't represented by current fare, but leaving aside the question of whether that's true or not, the movie begins with a clip of Damiano himself admitting that the movie isn't that good. And the merits of DEEP THROAT seem linked to it's more-busting power, not anything intrinsic in the film itself.
I would have preferred either a straightforward idealization of that adult film era, with Waters, Jong et. al. commenting, or a straightforward examination of DEEP THROAT's sociological impact, which would have meant a more unsparing look at the realities, I fear. As it is, the movie makers try to straddle things too much. Still, if you're interested in the era, adult films or more generally "underground art" you'll probably want to check this out. Has a limited release, but I think will eventually play on HBO.
I have real misgivings about this movie, although ultimately I'll recommend it to those interested in the period or artistic subcultures more generally. It is very well made, with a lot of interesting archival footage. (I especially liked an interview on what sounded like "60 Minutes" with Jack Nicholson, Warren Beatty, and Harry Reems stuck there right between them.) This is a fascinating story, assuming you like the subject generally. And the filmmakers have dug out all sorts of interesting people, including Gerald Damiano himself (improbably whiling away his twilight years in what looks like Florida) and Harry Reems (who I think comes across really well.) My misgivings basically stem from this: the filmmakers want to simultaneously idealize a moment in time and, at the same time, draw political conclusions from the story. I don't think you can do that; I think that's a contradiction in terms. As such, the movie often comes across as very dishonest. Some of the dishonesty seems unconscious: if you're going to idealize the early Seventies adult film scene as brave busters of restrictive social mores, it seems strange to at the same time castigate those who would uphold them, since it's this very act of upholding them which gives your guys their ennobling quality, no? It's as if the filmmakers want to re-fight the DEEP THROAT wars again, without any sense of perspective.
But more seriously, I think the movie shows a lot of bad faith. It's one thing to properly make fun of a ridiculous evangelical prosecutor who spearheaded the DEEP THROAT trial; it's another to make fun of an FBI agent, who after all (as the movie reluctantly admits) was investigating the Mob's connections with DEEP THROAT. It's one thing to celebrate Hollywood's defense of the movie and Reems when he was in trial, but the movie makers rather glibly skate over the fact that Reems's descent into alcoholism was kicked off by his realization that Hollywood wouldn't hire him. As for Linda Lovelace, the movie has convinced me (rather unwillingly, frankly, and I'm not sure they intended to do it themselves) that she was at least pressured into performing in the movie. There's a still of her with bruises that's hard to gainsay.
Most importantly, the movie acknowledges that porno is a huge industry nowadays, but doesn't seem to want that realization to clutter up it's thesis that things are more repressive now. One could argue, after all, that the success of the current adult industry means that Damiano and friends have essentially won. The movie seems to want to say just the opposite, that these guys were doing more artful stuff that isn't represented by current fare, but leaving aside the question of whether that's true or not, the movie begins with a clip of Damiano himself admitting that the movie isn't that good. And the merits of DEEP THROAT seem linked to it's more-busting power, not anything intrinsic in the film itself.
I would have preferred either a straightforward idealization of that adult film era, with Waters, Jong et. al. commenting, or a straightforward examination of DEEP THROAT's sociological impact, which would have meant a more unsparing look at the realities, I fear. As it is, the movie makers try to straddle things too much. Still, if you're interested in the era, adult films or more generally "underground art" you'll probably want to check this out. Has a limited release, but I think will eventually play on HBO.
All I can say is wow, this was a great documentary. Because of the subject matter it isn't for everyone, and the fact that it has an actual X-rated scene in it doesn't help either. But if you can get past that, this is an insightful, fascinating look at adult films and our society. And there is a lot of humor in it as well. I wasn't surprised that several people in the audience walked out, since even I didn't realize how graphic the language/visuals would be. Showing how Deepthroat brought the "BJ" into the mainstream of adult films was interesting, and the interviews with the people actually making porn were very insightful.
This is the story of the film that changed our culture and how our society looks at sex. Inside Deep Throat takes us behind the scenes of the making of the film,tells us how it became a huge blockbuster, and how it changed the lives of all of the people involved.
This is a very good primer to understanding Deep Throats impact on sex and censorship. This film does a very good job at laying out the story of the film and placing it into the context of the times. If you don't know what the big deal was when this film came out, you'll get a very good understanding of just why and how the film became so big that even small kids knew its name (though not its content). You'll also get a good over view of the battle to censor and to keep the film from public view, and an idea of how it shaped our world today.
I really did like this film a great deal. My one real reservation is that this film focuses a too much on the one film. Certainly the with Deep Throat in the title, I expected it to be mostly focused on that, but the censorship wars that were being fought at the same time involved other films and other media,for example the battle over George Carlin's Seven Dirty Words was happening at about the same time and was just as important.
But I'm nit picking. This is a good movie. Its a good starting point for learning about the film and the times that made our times what they are.
This is a very good primer to understanding Deep Throats impact on sex and censorship. This film does a very good job at laying out the story of the film and placing it into the context of the times. If you don't know what the big deal was when this film came out, you'll get a very good understanding of just why and how the film became so big that even small kids knew its name (though not its content). You'll also get a good over view of the battle to censor and to keep the film from public view, and an idea of how it shaped our world today.
I really did like this film a great deal. My one real reservation is that this film focuses a too much on the one film. Certainly the with Deep Throat in the title, I expected it to be mostly focused on that, but the censorship wars that were being fought at the same time involved other films and other media,for example the battle over George Carlin's Seven Dirty Words was happening at about the same time and was just as important.
But I'm nit picking. This is a good movie. Its a good starting point for learning about the film and the times that made our times what they are.
Yes, there is fellatio depicted inside the documentary Inside Deep Throat. About 3 seconds. So go see the original groundbreaking porno flick of 1972, Deep Throat, if you want to be deeply titillated and experience a poorly made movie that grossed over $600 million and sparked a sexual revolution that resulted for exhibitors and actors in stiff penalties that carry through today in Nikon's' wet dreams.
Today fortunately is also a world where videos allow private viewing of private parts and only a handful of "art" houses even try to offer porno films. So why go back to those carefree days of free love and iconoclasm? Because conservatives have taken up Nixon and Reagan's call for a purer world, a world suited to George Bush's values-laden regime. Inside Deep Throat is a cautionary tale that implicitly argues, sometimes humorously, that young Jack Nicholson and Warren Beatty are on to something when they complain our rights are being stolen.
Much bigger mirth arrives with the interviews of the retired director and project manager, among others, in their cheesy Florida print shirts and garish bungalows pontificating about the film's greatness emerging out of a mere $25,000 into film history. Not funny is star Linda Lovelace's return to the business, after disavowing it by taking an anti-porn feminist position with Gloria Steinem to speak for her and then going back to make a buck.
Sadder still is star Harry Reems' long association with substance abuse after being hounded by the feds as a scapegoat eventually cleared of obscenity charges. His current license to sell real estate in Park City, Utah, is a rich bit of irony. However, the humor continues with profundities by pop culture stars John Waters, Erica Jong, and Gore Vidal. Only a wry Dick Cavet puts it all into ironic perspective to ask if he could see the original now since he missed it and to aver that he always does what Nicholson and Beatty recommend.
Inside Deep throat is not as artful as Boogie Nights or as thoughtful as Kinsey; it is, however, a light look at a dark world that still thrives on privacy regardless of the public hunger for sex.
Today fortunately is also a world where videos allow private viewing of private parts and only a handful of "art" houses even try to offer porno films. So why go back to those carefree days of free love and iconoclasm? Because conservatives have taken up Nixon and Reagan's call for a purer world, a world suited to George Bush's values-laden regime. Inside Deep Throat is a cautionary tale that implicitly argues, sometimes humorously, that young Jack Nicholson and Warren Beatty are on to something when they complain our rights are being stolen.
Much bigger mirth arrives with the interviews of the retired director and project manager, among others, in their cheesy Florida print shirts and garish bungalows pontificating about the film's greatness emerging out of a mere $25,000 into film history. Not funny is star Linda Lovelace's return to the business, after disavowing it by taking an anti-porn feminist position with Gloria Steinem to speak for her and then going back to make a buck.
Sadder still is star Harry Reems' long association with substance abuse after being hounded by the feds as a scapegoat eventually cleared of obscenity charges. His current license to sell real estate in Park City, Utah, is a rich bit of irony. However, the humor continues with profundities by pop culture stars John Waters, Erica Jong, and Gore Vidal. Only a wry Dick Cavet puts it all into ironic perspective to ask if he could see the original now since he missed it and to aver that he always does what Nicholson and Beatty recommend.
Inside Deep throat is not as artful as Boogie Nights or as thoughtful as Kinsey; it is, however, a light look at a dark world that still thrives on privacy regardless of the public hunger for sex.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizThe film discusses how La vera gola profonda (1972) was actually distributed to theaters. Prints would be hand-delivered and employees would count heads of moviegoers and then collect the cash profits from the theaters. This process was known as sending "checkers and sweepers."
- BlooperEarly in the film, an unseen projectionist starts the film and we can see the projected image through the projection room window. He carelessly allows the leader to show on the screen. A frame marked "FOOT" is shown. Unless he is running the film backwards, this is wrong. The beginning of a film is marked "HEAD".
- Citazioni
Herself - Linda's Sister: [about Chuck Trainor] I curse the day she ever met Chuck Trainor. Unfortunately, he died before I could kill him. Lucky for him.
- Curiosità sui creditiDeep Throat Was Made For Just $25,000 It Grossed More Than $600 Million
- ConnessioniFeatured in At the Movies: Episodio #2.38 (2005)
- Colonne sonoreCrime of the Century
Performed by Supertramp
Written by Rick Davies and Roger Hodgson
Courtesy of A&M Records
Under license from Universal Music Enterprises
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paese di origine
- Lingua
- Celebre anche come
- Inside Deep Throat
- Luoghi delle riprese
- Paramount Studios - 5555 Melrose Avenue, Hollywood, Los Angeles, California, Stati Uniti(exterior shot of the famous Paramount Studios arch over the entrance to the studio lot)
- Aziende produttrici
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Budget
- 2.000.000 USD (previsto)
- Lordo Stati Uniti e Canada
- 691.880 USD
- Fine settimana di apertura Stati Uniti e Canada
- 88.709 USD
- 13 feb 2005
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 709.832 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione
- 1h 29min(89 min)
- Colore
- Mix di suoni
- Proporzioni
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti