Vashirdfel Simply A Masterpiece

Freaktana A Major Disappointment

Forumrxes Yo, there's no way for me to review this film without saying, take your *insert ethnicity + "ass" here* to see this film,like now. You have to see it in order to know what you're really messing with.

Logan By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

Poseidon-3 It's pretty unlikely that in 1968 a heavily explicit depiction of the life of the infamous Marquis De Sade would hit cinema screens, but even taking that into consideration, this is a mostly pallid and ludicrous film. Dullea (horribly miscast) portrays the sexually depraved figure, a man who wrote works which shock people even today. The film opens with the Marquis taking refuge in a dilapidated castle where his life is reflected upon in a series of flashbacks and surreal theatrical performances, presided over by Dullea's uncle, an Abbe (played by Huston.) Time and place are distorted and conjoined erratically as the viewer is shown key moments in Dullea's childhood and young adulthood. He witnesses Huston whipping a young lady's bottom and is in turn whipped by her at the insistence of Huston. He marries Palmer's homely daughter Massey, though it is Massey's voluptuous sister Berger he really wants. Despite his marriage (and children), he continues a lifestyle of whoring and playing, which confounds Palmer. He spends a significant amount of time in prison for his immoral offenses until he is shown as an old man being seen to by a nun. Dullea (who is undeniably handsome and has sensational blue eyes, which are highlighted lovingly) is all wrong for this part. He isn't dynamic enough to shed any light on the man he's portraying and plays his orgy scenes like a fraternity brother, with a broad grin on his face and his tongue sticking out. He's clearly wearing bikini briefs under his period pants, something that was doubtfully part of De Sade's wardrobe! (In fact, most of the "sex" scenes involve a lot of frolicking about with the men mostly dressed and pouring wine all over. Not exactly most peoples' idea of a good time!) Huston tries to inject a lascivious touch into his role and succeeds somewhat, but it's all too choppy and sketchy to add up to much. Palmer looks sensational in the period clothes and wigs and probably comes off best since she is allowed to register indignation and despair regarding Dullea. Massey is appropriately resigned and unhappy, though the script gives her precious little to do. The biggest asset to the film is the positively stunning presence of Berger, who likely never looked better in a movie. Unfortunately, her role is limited mostly to tiny moments of appearing and disappearing and the camera doesn't linger on her as much as one might like. When she's there, though, there's a whole new life to the otherwise downbeat proceedings. There were debates about whether to present the story in a straightforward, linear fashion or to tell it in piecemeal flashbacks. The result is a disjointed, sometimes confusing mishmash, which is not saved by the allegedly titillating sequences that most often come off as foolish. There are indeed healthy servings of bare breasts and bottoms from a bevy of females, but it certainly doesn't add up to anything very provocative or even interesting. The costumes are elegant and the sets are sometimes very arresting, but the project was doomed from the start thanks to the script and the misguided casting of Dullea. Touches which mark the film as a 60s project make it a little bit more visually entertaining, but not, perhaps, for the reasons intended. Ditto the animated opening credits and the score. And for a film about one of the most notorious authors ever, why are there so few, if any, scenes of the man writing anything?!

Eegah Guy American International Pictures rarely made dull movies. Their movies may have been junk food but they were very tasty. This was AIP's attempt at a thinking man's exploitation film. Lavish sets, Masterpiece Theater dialogue and an overall air of pretentiousness makes this film a real snooze. The fact that the film uses a fractured non-narrative structure makes the film even more pointless and boring. Only during the last 15 minutes does the film come to life as De Sade and his cohorts embark on an orgy of destruction and sex (rendered in hilariously psychedelic 60s fashion).

nunculus I haven't seen Clark Gable in the now-mythic PARNELL, but KeirDullea, surely recruited for his hotness in 2001, takes the cake inthis 1969 A.I.P. telling of the life of the great whippersnapper. Theidea of translating the agonies and ecstasies of Sade into drive-interms is mouth-watering, but, aside from a few Jess Francozooms into undulating backsides (shot through whorehouse-redfilters), you're stuck in snoozeville with an empty tank of gas.Worse (or perhaps better?), Dullea manages to make everyeighteenth-century line sound like a college basketball player'sattempt not to cry in front of Coach.

William Looking at it today, this film is a pretty tame story of the infamous DeSade, but at least it is the most highest budget version of th story, with a much better cast for this sort of material. What was once deemed X is pretty tame R by todays standards. Keir Dullea makes a very convincing DeSade without overacting, and John Huston brings integrity to the film with his powering presence. And the soundtrack is very good, the only thing odd is the beginning credit animation sequence, which looks like it came out of a psychedelic film, as you see a shadow painting of a bird man juggling a ball, then turning into a guy and a chick and a horse!!! Looks like it belongs in an animation short or something. Still check it out if you want to see a "Hollywood" version of the infamous character, told way too many times in cheapo Euro versions!