Inside Deep Throat

If it's possible for a movie to be intriguing and tedious at the same time, Inside Deep Throat has mastered the art of it. Having a famous porn film that cost $25,000 to make and went on to make over $600 million as your subject could make any movie intriguing. But the intrigue wears off about a half hour into the movie. It's clear that the film-maker knew he had a good idea for a documentary but as time went on, he found that there was not nearly enough interesting material to last over 45 minutes. It would have been just the perfect amount of time to fill an hour of E True Hollywood Story, but the NC-17 rating would make that hard.

The best thing about the movie is the vivid creation of the sexual revolution that spun through the US during the time of the film's original release. The life of the main character was also interesting. But these two things don't drive the movie. The rest of the movie may be fascinating, but the story telling is not fascinating. The script is scattered and choppy. The interviews are hardly believable also. Who actually believes that a bunch of porn movie makers who made a porn with such a stupid subject matter actually did it to try and change how Americans thought about sex? They were making a porn! They wanted money, among other things. Nobody sat down and thought about changing America with Deep Throat.

In the end, the movie is something you won't forget, but even a few hours after seeing it I can't remember why I found it interesting anyway.

Deep Throat changed America. It legitimized porn, creating a billion dollar industry in the process, and sent the sexual revolution to dizzying heights. Love it or hate it, Deep Throat was an historical event.

Inside Deep Throat looks back at that amazing phenomenon, it's causes and effects, and how it changed America and the lives of those who made it.

Interviews with Throat director Gerard Damiano & male lead Harry Reems give much insight into the porn biz of those bygone days, a dark world of sex & drug addiction, fly by night productions, and mafia money men. Sexperts Erica Jong, Dr. Ruth & Helen Gurley Brown offer their takes on how society reacted to and was affected by this new sexual openness, while 70s porn queens Georgina Spelvin & Andrea True offer quick sound bites that explain what drew people to the business.

The film covers many bases & covers them well. We see the hypocrisy of Jesus-inspired DAs, who waste millions of taxpayer dollars on frivolous prosecutions of actors, theater managers, and anyone else they see as an easy target in their crusade to "clean up America".

Censorship and free speech issues are discussed by the likes of Norman Mailer, John Waters, Dick Cavett and others, while Gloria Steinen & Susan Brownmiller offer their views on how porn degrades women. Both sides are eloquent and make valid points.

We see the tragedy of Linda Lovelace's wasted life. Unable to escape the stigma of being the film's star, she joined forces with the Women's Movement in denouncing porn. Shortly before her death in a traffic accident, Lovelace briefly returned to the biz because she was flat broke.

Inside Deep Throat is a brilliant film. It takes a time, place and event, a cultural phenomenon of it's day, and puts it under a microscope. Future generations may look at Deep Throat the film and wonder what the big deal was.

Inside Deep Throat explains it all to them.

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.

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 am an unashamed porn fan, not in the sense that i sit around all the time watching th stuff, but in the sense that i find the people involved in the making and distribution of the stuff to be very interesting, if not somewhat shady and bizarre people but none the less they have a story to share that not many people can lay claim to and so i like to give any material broaching the subject, particularly in its formative years, a listen.

so i haven't seen deep throat, and i don't really want to, if I'm going to watch people engaging in sexual acts i will buy something a little more intense and modern without all the premise of having a plot for arts sake. but this documentary is not about the film persae, it is about the people involved with it and how it affected their lives.

we see and hear from a lot of people who's lives have been both positively and negatively affected by this film over the years and it gives the viewer an insight into what really makes these people get involved in the business to begin with, and surprisingly enough its not just the money as there wasn't much money in it for the actors as such back in the 70s.

so i suggest that anybody that has an interest in rights and freedoms should really watch this as it gives a deeper appreciation of these simple gifts that we have to live by today and are so readily taken for granted.

if you like this kinda stuff also check out a film called Wadd which is about the life and death of john Holmes and also read How to make love like a porn star, the autobiography of Jenna Jameson.