"Inside Deep Throat" is overall a very unforgettable documentary. It's always intriguing, sometimes devastatingly sad, but one of the most unique documentaries of this decade so far. However, those who don't know anything about the film "Deep Throat" should be cautioned: I had a friend who picked up the documentary thinking it was about Mark Felt, the C.I.A. operative who aided Bob Woodward in bringing down Nixon's administration. Needless to say, that friend was in for a big surprise.
I went into this movie not knowing too much about "Deep Throat". I'm not a big fan of porn anyway. Although I respect the business for free speech reasons, and think that anyone who wants to watch or work in porn has every right to do so, I don't like watching it. Plus, it's a business that's historically corrupt, with direct links to organized crime, drug use, misogyny, and sexual abuse. Watching this documentary confirmed some of these previous concerns.
It's worth it to note that I was born after the 1970's. So it was interesting to me to see footage of all these people waiting in long lines to see a cheap, seedy movie with incredibly unattractive people having sex. I thought, and sometimes still think, "Why would anyone want to see this movie? It's not good, nor is it sexy. Why the fuss?". I was a little disappointed that the filmmakers didn't attempt to answer this question, because it would have answered questions of people like me who weren't around when it was released.
The editing of this film was excellent, and they had some great archive footage and good people to interview. I expected to see Hugh Hefner and Larry Flynt interviewed, but certainly not insiders like Harry Reems, Gerard Damanio (sp?), and family members of the late Linda Lovelace.
The first half of the movie was for the most part fun, as it probably should have been. There was a good balance of footage between the success of the film, and the ensuing controversy it caused. What I didn't expect was how sad the movie would ultimately be. I wasn't disappointed by the second half of the movie at all, but it did traumatize me a little.
Harry Reems' story was unfortunate, but not quite as sad as Linda Lovelace's because he eventually turned his life around successfully. It was just painful to hear the story of Linda Boreman, who really got the short end of the stick after the hype of this movie died down. The footage of her post-1980 was really hard to watch, and I actually found myself averting my eyes from the screen during her interviews on "Donahue" and "The Tomorrow Show with Tom Snyder" because she looked horrible! She seemed as though she was physically deteriorating, which in a sense she was. As I would read in an article by Joe Bob Briggs written shortly after she died in a car accident in 2002, what this movie details isn't even all of her tragic circumstances.
But anyway, back to this documentary. This movie was good in organizing archive footage, and covering all sides of the controversial film from opponents, supporters, organized crime allegations, and the like. It really just told a story, and I credit it for not trying to cover everything, which in reality could be the length of a Ken Burns series.
Having said that, however, there were some other areas I wished the movie delved into. For instance, it never seemed to answer the question as to why this movie was so popular, especially given the reasons I mentioned above. Second, it should have offered some sort of explanation or theory as to why some of the people involved with its making faced so much bad luck afterwords. Should they have been involved because it was a counterculture success? Or was being in this movie cause for their eventual demise? Or were other factors involved in their demise? Lastly, I would have loved to have heard commentary by movie critics, both those who saw the movie when it came out, and those that didn't. Roger Ebert had some very interesting things to say about both this movie and its basis, since he saw both. Having that incorporated into the movie would have been helpful, and may have even clarified how on God's green earth this movie made $600 million.
But perhaps I'm being too picky. Overall, although this movie had some weaknesses, it was overall very intriguing. I recommend it, but I caution anyone who hasn't seen it about the parts involving Linda Lovelace. And I don't mean just that one scene which made this film NC-17, although that one was difficult to watch too.
I went into this movie not knowing too much about "Deep Throat". I'm not a big fan of porn anyway. Although I respect the business for free speech reasons, and think that anyone who wants to watch or work in porn has every right to do so, I don't like watching it. Plus, it's a business that's historically corrupt, with direct links to organized crime, drug use, misogyny, and sexual abuse. Watching this documentary confirmed some of these previous concerns.
It's worth it to note that I was born after the 1970's. So it was interesting to me to see footage of all these people waiting in long lines to see a cheap, seedy movie with incredibly unattractive people having sex. I thought, and sometimes still think, "Why would anyone want to see this movie? It's not good, nor is it sexy. Why the fuss?". I was a little disappointed that the filmmakers didn't attempt to answer this question, because it would have answered questions of people like me who weren't around when it was released.
The editing of this film was excellent, and they had some great archive footage and good people to interview. I expected to see Hugh Hefner and Larry Flynt interviewed, but certainly not insiders like Harry Reems, Gerard Damanio (sp?), and family members of the late Linda Lovelace.
The first half of the movie was for the most part fun, as it probably should have been. There was a good balance of footage between the success of the film, and the ensuing controversy it caused. What I didn't expect was how sad the movie would ultimately be. I wasn't disappointed by the second half of the movie at all, but it did traumatize me a little.
Harry Reems' story was unfortunate, but not quite as sad as Linda Lovelace's because he eventually turned his life around successfully. It was just painful to hear the story of Linda Boreman, who really got the short end of the stick after the hype of this movie died down. The footage of her post-1980 was really hard to watch, and I actually found myself averting my eyes from the screen during her interviews on "Donahue" and "The Tomorrow Show with Tom Snyder" because she looked horrible! She seemed as though she was physically deteriorating, which in a sense she was. As I would read in an article by Joe Bob Briggs written shortly after she died in a car accident in 2002, what this movie details isn't even all of her tragic circumstances.
But anyway, back to this documentary. This movie was good in organizing archive footage, and covering all sides of the controversial film from opponents, supporters, organized crime allegations, and the like. It really just told a story, and I credit it for not trying to cover everything, which in reality could be the length of a Ken Burns series.
Having said that, however, there were some other areas I wished the movie delved into. For instance, it never seemed to answer the question as to why this movie was so popular, especially given the reasons I mentioned above. Second, it should have offered some sort of explanation or theory as to why some of the people involved with its making faced so much bad luck afterwords. Should they have been involved because it was a counterculture success? Or was being in this movie cause for their eventual demise? Or were other factors involved in their demise? Lastly, I would have loved to have heard commentary by movie critics, both those who saw the movie when it came out, and those that didn't. Roger Ebert had some very interesting things to say about both this movie and its basis, since he saw both. Having that incorporated into the movie would have been helpful, and may have even clarified how on God's green earth this movie made $600 million.
But perhaps I'm being too picky. Overall, although this movie had some weaknesses, it was overall very intriguing. I recommend it, but I caution anyone who hasn't seen it about the parts involving Linda Lovelace. And I don't mean just that one scene which made this film NC-17, although that one was difficult to watch too.