Pier Paolo Pasolini's "Salò o le 120 giornate di Sodoma" ("Salò, or the 120 Days of Sodom" in English) turned out to be his final movie, and got released a few weeks after his murder. Since he was known for movies that riled the authorities, this was a natural choice for him. While the main thing that one notices is the shock value, Pasolini noted that he intended the movie as a look at the relation between power and its subjects. Indeed, for what reason did Mussolini turn Italy into a police state but to let the ruling class be able to do whatever they wanted? To be certain, the middle-aged prostitutes who tell the young men stories to sexually arouse them are the equivalent of bread and circuses.Basically, it's a story of humanity's base impulses taken to their horrific extremes. It's easy to view this as one of the most disgusting movies ever filmed, but Pasolini made it to indict fascism and Italy's ruling class in general. I recommend it, but only watch it if you have a strong stomach.

Hey there! Guess what?! You're not going to believe that I have actually watched this film. I have not heard of it until late 2010 when it had been recommended to me here on IMDb because of my interest in Gaspar Noe's Irreversible. I really am into film, however I would like to state that I would never, ever watch Cannibal Holocaust, really. No thanks. Supposedly there are similarities, but I must say that this is about as far as I am likely to go in regards to watching a disturbing film.Initially I was ignoring the recommendation. I disregarded it as being some obscure film that had come out in the 70's. I had never heard of Pier Paolo Pasolini. I am not going into his demise as you probably have your theories. Besides this is basically a film review.Let me tell you: for a long time I felt I just was not ready to watch this; unsure if I ever would be. The reason being is that after everything I have read about it, (which you probably should do also, if you are seriously thinking about watching this) I was hesitant that I could really sit through it. My main concern was that it could be too graphic considering the subject matter. On and off I have contemplated it for three years. Yes, three years wondering whether or not to watch a movie! By the final year, I have thought about it more and more. So you want to know how I watched this? From Netflix. And you want to know something else? I watched it…a couple of times…in like six weeks maybe. That was it really. I just wanted to watch it a second time to get a little more familiar with it from the first time. Actually speaking of the first time; afterwards like the next day, I remember actually feeling a bit queasy from even thinking about what I had watched. Since I recoiled during the explicit scenes, it was a brief feeling of mental disturbance. I wouldn't say I was absolutely ready for my first viewing, although I was as ready as I ever could have been, I was a little more composed on the second viewing. I still could not watch the really graphic parts.It doesn't take either side of right or wrong. It is not a dramatic film. It isn't really all that violent either, not by horror movie standards. The DVD/Blu-Ray cover showing the side of a long blonde haired naked girl on her knees with her face in her hands is misleading. There is not a scene in the film that shows that. I was expecting something like the scene showing Marilyn Burns freaking out with her hands tied to a chair at the one end of a dining table towards the ending of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974) but there wasn't a scene that was like that, although there are moments in the film where I had to look away, such as: A scene when one nude victim wearing only a dog collar is fed a piece of cake with small razor blades in it.In addition, a young woman is forced to eat human feces, the seven minute scene where everybody eats human feces at a dinner event, some are smiling and loving it while others are disgusted. The ending when a young man's tongue is cut off and a young person's eye is cut out with a knife.It is a rather talky film. I remember thinking after I made it up to the 42:00 mark that it really was not all that bad.It is best to research the film before viewing it. The homosexuality aspect of it makes it interesting. What made it even more compelling is that I found myself attracted to Paolo Bonacelli, even although he plays one of the fascist libertines.

Despite my rating, this is actually a well made film. It has high production values, decent acting, stunning sets, and great sound. In the technical aspects it is well directed. Regardless, it was one of the most tormenting films I've ever seen. It was such a struggle to get through. I was checking how much longer I had left like seventeen times a minute, because I just couldn't take it.This is a film that's told smart, executed well, but the portrayal itself is horrible. Long story short, fascism is wrong, end of story. But like the Purge, it's not enough to just say it, we gotta go through a whole mess of stuff to show you why it is. Basically fascists sexually torture nine boys and nine girls for four months in a mansion. And we're talking urinating in mouths, eating poop, three way intercourse, ejaculating on each other etc. The whole film is literally just scene after scene of that. It's nonstop. All of that, as we constantly are forced to endure stories about people going through the same stuff, but enjoying it. This film loves to emphasize each character's feelings on each scene. When they eat poop, the film describes in detail everybody's experiences with eating poop, and why they are fine with it. In a strange sense, it's well told and has some interesting insight, but that does not make it any easier to watch.Honestly though, the film as a whole is kind of boring. It really is just a matter of how shocking can we be. When it's not being depraved, it's just people in a room telling stories. There's really not much else to it.The problem with the film is that since it's on its own sick mindset, we as an audience aren't really on the same page, so we're just seeing random acts of violence, and not really anything else. There's no clear picture or goal the film projects, just that. David Lynch films do the same thing, but at least he gives us enough symbolism to let us know what to extract from the film. This one is just showing us that these people get off on this stuff, and that's it.One thing I found interesting was how the perspective is of the fascists themselves instead of the victims. Instead of being a standard psychological thriller about escaping, it's simply just these fascist's sick perversions and their opinions on it. They're the main characters, and they're the ones we follow. I thought that was rather interesting.At the end of the day, this is not one of the worst movies I've ever seen, but it's one of the hardest films I've ever had to sit through. It's pretty easy to hate this film. I don't hate it, but I would never want to watch this again, or would never recommend it to anybody ever. It's a well told film with an interesting insight, but it's way too hard to sit through and it's a one note theme that they just milk for an hour and 56 minutes.

This movie is about a group of children who attend a boarding school. Each day the children all sit around and listen to their headmistress, Madam Salo, tell stories of her childhood days, growing up in an orphanage and what it was like as a teenager during World War 2. The film is shot beautifully, and gives an authentic 1980s feel. Would recommend this movie to a high school student studying German history at school, or a history buff who is looking for an insight into the lives of young people during WW2.