Destricted

If anybody takes a brief look at the filmographies of the persons who directed the segments of "Destrictred", he or she will discover that only a few of them are full-time directors. Marco Brambilla, for example, made a couple of movies in the 1990s, while others had never directed a film. So it comes to no surprise that this is a worst-than-irregular film, and that there is little elaboration and sometimes no originality at all in the string of segments that pretend "to illuminate the points where art meets sexuality". Gaspar Noé and Larry Clark are probably the best known directors of the lot, but it is experimental artist Matthew Barney who in my opinion has made a visually striking erotic film piece (that deserves a much higher rating than the 2 points I have given to the whole film), that has little to do with narcissistic penetrations, oral somersaults and other jaded depictions of sex. His art works have already dealt with the matter on the table, and maybe he knows best. Not a good film if you ask me, and a little on the "waste-of-your-time" side.

Most of the films in this collection are simply silly. One is at least artistic in the old, wan sense of visual oddity.

There is one interesting one, though. Larry Clark's "Impaled." Its rather clever: young men seeking to get into the "business" are interviewed. All of them are sad losers and that saddest sack of the bunch is selected. He then interviews several women to select the one he wants to screw. They are all pros, and their stories and manner are every bit as sad, but posthope instead.

He selects the oldest; she obviously tries the hardest to entice him. She's 40 and desperate to appear alluring. If we had nothing but her manner, we'd have enough to damn.

He's most excited about anal sex. He ends up getting defecated on, but they soldier on until the end.

Its a great take on the ugly behind of the industry.

Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.

I came across this compilation due 2 directors that I knew and have in my collection. Larry Clark, controversial due using kids picked up from the street and let them do things normal kids won't do or are forbidden to do. His most famous flick is Kids (1995° made in the grunge heydays and Ken Park (2002) were a teenager goes down beneath the mother of his friend to give her some pleasures. A lot of viewers were shocked and the film was never released in the US.

The other director is Gasper Noé which I knew due made also some controversial flicks like Irréversible (2002) and Enter The Void (2009).

Both directors are always on the edge of explicit forbidden nudity (Clark with 18 year old girls going full frontal and Noé by showing a rape going on for minutes) but here in Destricted they go beyond that together with some other directors.

This compilation is called an art-erotic flick but all i can say is that some were indeed art, one short flick is just a fast editing, cut every second of porn flicks. you just don't see anything but it works. To be honest, it only clocks in over 2 minutes and it's worth seeing for the editing alone. But the rest isn't art at all. Maybe Noé's entry is a bit arty. But it's pure porn for minutes made with a strobo. But it's downhill with the art from here. For example Clarks entry clocks in at 39 minutes and it's just guys talking about porn. One guy is ready to talk with porn actresses and while talking to the girls they take of their clothes talking what they do best. But one of the girls wants to show the 22 year old one what it's all about so she seduces him and asks to undress. From their on the guy doesn't know what is going on, first she gives him a blow job, then he may go inside her and even goes in her brownie, then he may do what he wants to end with another blow job.

The worst entry is the Death Valley part, 9 minutes of jerking off and that's it, is that art?

The other entries except for the Balkan story are pure porn. The Balkan story is a bit funny to hear and see and isn't believable even as it is true what the girl is saying.

Overall pure porn here and there and a bit of art. Kleenex lovers will enjoy some parts but again people who thought like me to see an art compilation as promised will be shocked. Hard core it is.

Gore 0/5 Nudity 5/5 Effects 2/5 Story 0/5 Comedy 0/5

I just watched this film at Sundance. Clearly the most challenging portion of this film for the audience was Gasper Noe's use of strobe for his part of the film titled We F--- Alone. A good fifth of the audience cleared out during We F--- because they were bothered by the strobing. During the Q&A following the film when asked why he used the effect Noe replied, "Because it looks better." The style used in We F--- Alone may not appeal to most audiences, but the premise of the film promised shorts by director's giving their impression of the world of porn and We F--- Alone was obviously Gasper Noe's take on the world of porn.

Other engaging portions of the film included Matthew Barney's Hoist, which involved a man having sex with a industrial machine lifted a dozen feet off the ground; Larry Clarks Doc/ Porn, hosting try outs for young men willing to satisfy their dreams of being a porn star; Marco Brambilla's amazing short splicing together frames from his own porn collection. The rest of the other shorts mixed in seemed to lack depth and were rather bland with the exception of Marina Abramovic's vignettes on superstitious Balkan sexual behavior which was very funny.

The movie is all that is promised and is an absorbing take on porn from these artistic talents. This isn't something to watch on a television and should be experienced in the theater environment.

Certainly politically correct, that is a danger sign in any film. Politically correct by focusing mostly on men and porn. This film was almost just like any other porn film. The tiny difference being the "art". Strobe light was the "art" in We f...ck alone (it was way too long. I got the "message" after 5 minutes). The "art" in Death Valley was none what so ever. Just a guy masturbating outdoors. I read on IMDb that the "art" was the fact it was shot in that particular valley. If you use your imagination, you can see art in everything. That is wonderful. Hoist was least like a porn, but 15 minutes of a man rubbing his penis to a machine shaft was OK ("art" and everything) for 5 minutes. In the film Impaled we saw the audition room instead of the "bed". It was amusing to see the young guys expressing their sexual desires. The "art" in Impaled was the bad lighting. I would have chosen the virgin. I went to the film expecting nothing, and I got nothing. A man cannot ask for more on a night at the movies.