Sesso sfortunato o follie porno

There are three categories of people rating this movie. Those who understand satire and symbolism , those who don't and those who are so enraged that their country is being trashed by an unrealistic depiction of the current society.

Guys, it's a movie which is supposed to be fictional and not realistic. Even movies based on real life events fall in the fictional category because no matter the context, a movie will never depict reality as it truly happened but through the lens of the story teller. So people have to chill and look at this movie from an artistic point of view and the message is sending out there (for those who get it of course).

And for those enraged about this director hating his country, maybe you should look at some of Hollywood's greatest directors who made many movies depicting the decadent part of the American society. Does that mean they all hate their country ?

Romania is truly a great country and regardless of the comment by an ignorant reviewer who said and I quote "there are other countries more developed than. Romania which are not part of EU" , I think those guys should actually go and visit Romania where they will quickly realized that the Country has earned its place in the EU.

To be honest I have never heard of this Romanian director until I saw this movie and IMO he has artistic talent. The fact that he was able to produce a movie like this shows that Romania is truly a democratic society where artists can express themselves without being censored.

This movie is not for everyone but it's definitely not a 1,2 or even a 3 star movie. I think it is at least a 7.

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.

This film is a artistic criticism of Romanian society. Chapter 1 is all porn and boredom. Mainly it's main character walking under the ads of film sponsors. Chapter 2 and 3 are pure art. Chapter 2 is a pure satire on all world societies. Chapter 3 is a ode to hypocrisy of all human kind. It's worth watching, but don't expect much. Just try to bare the 1. Chapter. Rest of the film is good.

'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.

Jude is the most experimental, controversial and radical romanian filmmaker: his films never cease to offer a poignant satire of society, irredentism, or his country.

His latest film is a prime example of his peculiarities. The subject is a leaked sextape of a teacher, and the scandal it rises among parents.

The opening of the film features the actual footage of an explicit, unsimulated sextape, not for the purposes of realism (as it could have been with any other Romanian New Wave director), but to force the viewer in the act of voyeurism that will be very blatantly shown in the third act: this chapter of the film features a sort of "trial", in which the teacher is forced to face the parents of her students. When one of the parents shows the video to the others with the purpose of "showing things for what they are", the other parents mock the teacher, laugh, or watch with perverse passion. Through this external sight, the viewer is thus confronted with the reaction they probably displayed at the beginning, a very clever way to involve the audience.

The previous two chapters of this three-chapter story each have their own purpose. The second chapter is a sort of glossary/collection of anecdotes, which introduces briefly all the notions that are later mentioned in the discussion of the third act: not only sex or equality related concepts, but domestic violence, history and romanian historical episodes (as that is the teacher's subject), philosophical concepts, even a metacinematic consideration, all with the goal of preparing the viewer for the final act. It is not only a way to put all viewers on the same page, but also to make explicit the thematic range of the film.

The first chapter features Emi (the teacher) walking around Bucharest doing chores. Through her journey, Jude shows the city as it is under the pandemic (the film was entirely shot last year) and its effects of distress on people, more and more nervous, without disdaining some subtle visual digressions.

While Jude makes very clear which side he supports in the debate of the third chapter, he chooses to give three different endings to the story, which I won't disclose, maybe to thus imply that the viewer has to judge for theirself.