All I can say is wow, this was a great documentary. Because of the subject matter it isn't for everyone, and the fact that it has an actual X-rated scene in it doesn't help either. But if you can get past that, this is an insightful, fascinating look at adult films and our society. And there is a lot of humor in it as well. I wasn't surprised that several people in the audience walked out, since even I didn't realize how graphic the language/visuals would be. Showing how Deepthroat brought the "BJ" into the mainstream of adult films was interesting, and the interviews with the people actually making porn were very insightful.
Add a Review
-
dbborroughs18 February 2006This is the story of the film that changed our culture and how our society looks at sex. Inside Deep Throat takes us behind the scenes of the making of the film,tells us how it became a huge blockbuster, and how it changed the lives of all of the people involved.
This is a very good primer to understanding Deep Throats impact on sex and censorship. This film does a very good job at laying out the story of the film and placing it into the context of the times. If you don't know what the big deal was when this film came out, you'll get a very good understanding of just why and how the film became so big that even small kids knew its name (though not its content). You'll also get a good over view of the battle to censor and to keep the film from public view, and an idea of how it shaped our world today.
I really did like this film a great deal. My one real reservation is that this film focuses a too much on the one film. Certainly the with Deep Throat in the title, I expected it to be mostly focused on that, but the censorship wars that were being fought at the same time involved other films and other media,for example the battle over George Carlin's Seven Dirty Words was happening at about the same time and was just as important.
But I'm nit picking. This is a good movie. Its a good starting point for learning about the film and the times that made our times what they are. -
kergillian27 March 2005Sure, there are the corny jokes, the innuendo, and of course, the deep throat scene (you knew that was...erm...coming...sigh), but this film is beyond that. It's about a phenomenon - a phenomenon that changed the way North America views sex, pornography, censorship, and feminism.
Deep Throat changed America. Stop laughing, shaking your head - it's true! After Deep Throat, the government tried to shut down 'lewd' and 'vulgar' behaviour, and tried to keep it from the screens - but it was too powerful. The streets were filled with people who proclaimed their rights to watch the 'filth' if they wanted to - and these people weren't just shady perverts, protest-hungry college students and free-loving hippies, they were the middle class, the bourgeois, the suburban, the housewives and businessmen, older ladies and middle-age soccer moms - they were suburban middle America, and they were hungry to take part in this wave of commercial sexuality. America had been repressed for forty years and they needed to LET IT OUT!
The downside is that the phenomenon won. And one thing led to another, and somewhere along the way it lost its edge and we lost the sensual, leaving us with the sexual alone. The explicit, the clinical, the self-stimulating - we have it all on the click of the satellite remote, the DVD player, the internet - but there's no love in it any more. Deep Throat was hokey. It was crap. But it celebrated sex in a FUN way. And the 70s porn industry loved the body, it loved being sexy, it loved sultriness and sexuality. All you have to do is look at the art-house softcore films of the era - Emmanuelle, Camillle 3000, etc - to see this. Feminists were split - some loved the sexual freedom, others hated the exploitation - but everyone agreed that it was all RELEVANT. In a way, Deep Throat opened doors that desperately needed to be opened, but in a way it ruined what could have been beautiful. We won the right, but lost the passion.
Meanwhile, how often are you gong to have Larry Flynt, Dick Cavitt, Camille Paglia, John Waters, Alan Dershowitz, Normal Mailer, Bill Maher, Erica Jong, Xaviera Hollander and GORE VIDAL (!!!), one after the other lauding the most successful film in history??
This film is fascinating because it looks beyond the porn. It gives the curious, and the porn-hungry, that Deep Throat scene and a little sex thrown in for good measure. But those looking for XXX-friendly masturbation material are in the wrong theater, and will be bored by the talking heads, as they argue the pros and cons of a cheaply made, hokey porn flick that wouldn't elicit more than a half-chuckle from today's film-going audience (or from today's multi-billion dollar porn industry).
We see those who applaud and those who oppose. We see how Andrea True became a one-hit wonder (More More More!!), we see how Harry Reems became the scapegoat/fall guy and was convicted and incarcerated for obscenity (it probably should have been for bad acting...), and we see how Linda Lovelace was used and abused by everyone from her husband to the porn industry to feminists, each with their own agenda. Will the real Linda Lovelace please stand up? (Question: did Gloria Steinem exploit Lovelace any less than the porn industry did...??)
Fact: The porn industry has degenerated into everything it was expected to
Fact: Those in the porn industry who aspire to higher standards are 99% likely to be doomed to fail miserably and get blacklisted in Hollywood
Fact: Inside Deep Throat is the first documentary to really look at the shift within the industry, and where it all went wrong.
Not for the overly prude, the overly perverted or the closed minded. For the few of you who are left, it's an easy 7.5/10. -
davidbeecher195621 February 2005Deep 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. -
rosscinema20 February 2005Maybe the strangest recommendation that I have ever made is going to come here because this is a documentary that all young porn starlets should see. Many (if not most) of todays porn actresses have no idea what "Deep Throat" is or of the people that were involved and it would probably enlighten them and make them see that what went on helped open doors to their (so-called) profession. Story is about the making of the most infamous porno movie ever and what those involved had to deal with after the Nixon administration and the FBI decided it was immoral.
*****SPOILER ALERT***** There are interviews with the director Gerard Damiano who had to deal with the mob to get financing since they owned the porno theaters in this country and Harry Reems who starred in it talks of his involvement and how he ended up being an actor and almost going to a federal prison for 5 years after being found guilty of an indecency charge. In old footage and with interviews with family, friends, and co-workers we find out how Linda Lovelace was cast and about her abusive relationship with her then husband Chuck Traynor. Most of the film revolves around how "Deep Throat" became chic and entered the mainstream and why it became the most successful film ever made but it also tells how the FBI went after it with a vengeance by closing theaters and confiscating reels of the film itself.
This is directed by Fenton Bailey and Randy Barbato who together also made "Party Monster" and "The Eyes of Tammy Faye" and the two of them have a long resume in both films and television with documentaries. I don't think this is going to go down as one of the better documentaries ever made but it does an admirable job of showing what went on during a very turbulent time in the 1970's and I think most of whatever power this generates comes from the fact that our society is still trying to combat censorship. With the ridiculousness of the FCC trying to take away freedom of speech this film suddenly becomes more pertinent than originally thought with the debate of what's immoral and what's not. This also shows that the question of how much Lovelace was actually abused will probably never be answered because even though there is no question that Traynor was an incredibly controlling jerk no one could really say that she was forced to be in any porn movie. She did seem to come across as someone who had a hard time dealing with her own decisions and painting herself as a victim but at the same time there is a sadness in her life that is easily seen by all viewers. For those of you that lived through that period this will undoubtedly work better than for others but I still think that younger viewers should still see this film and be taught that many people fought hard against the Government so that they couldn't be told what to see and what not to see which is something that still exists today. -
DICK STEEL14 May 2005This is not a porn movie. It is a documentary about an adult movie; not just any adult movie, but the one which you can answer "who's your daddy?" to. Deep Throat premiered in 1972, in an era of sexual awakening on film, where highlighting and building a film around that one sexual act is a novelty, bringing in an enormous Return On Investment (600 million revenue from a cost of 25K) for the filmmakers, who somehow never got rich from it, monetary and otherwise.
Inside Deep Throat brings us back to that era, exploring what was, and how this one film revolutionized the adult film industry in the USA. This documentary, narrated by Dennis Hopper, interviews both the filmmakers behind the scenes, as well as the lead actor. We only get to watch archived interviews of the lead actress "Linda Lovelace", as she has passed away in 2002 from a road accident. Nonetheless, from the footage, we can see her enjoying her 15 minutes of fame (infamy?), before transforming herself from sex siren to victim to feminist and back to fire one last salvo in Playboy magazine.
The interviews by the cast and crew are earnest, and at times comical, given their reminiscence of the role they had played in contributing to the industry. Even when they came up with the idea of revolving a film around one sex act, they weren't really convinced that it might pull off. In fact, given the government's crackdown on the film, which premiered in NY's Times Square, curiosity from the masses start to propel the film into its legendary status.
We're brought from pre-production all the way to film distribution, which had shady links with the Mob, to censorship, crackdown and prosecution. We also see the (negative?) impact that the film brought on to its filmmakers and cast - life isn't really a bed of roses given the film's huge box office success, and we wonder, did they become victims of their own success.
Viewers in Singapore would still not have the opportunity to see some "action" from Deep Throat, even with the R21 rating - you'll only get to see the safer portions of Deep Throat, and jarring cuts leave the rest to your imagination.
So for those who just want to know a bit more on the adult film industry (hey, I didn't know they had an equivalent of the Oscars!), discussion on censorship and freedom of speech, then you might want to consider this documentary. For those who want to leave your moral values intact, give this one a miss. -
bowlofsoul2312 April 2006How could I not go see this?! Several dejected moviegoers were asking me if I had extra tickets when going in at the Istanbul film festival. I tried to reassure them that the local documentary film channel would probably be showing it in the near future. Luckily, I saw no men in trenchcoats and proceeded in.
I have to give the filmmakers props, they treated the subject with respect and even-handedness. The film isn't about pornography, but rather how this particular movie played a role in America in the 1970s. Obviously, the filmmakers are on the side of freedom of speech, but they treated Linda Lovelace's family with respect. Crisply edited and well-paced, it features such talking heads as Gore Vidal, Norman Mailer, John Waters (who I got to see for a second time this festival- yay!), Dick Cavett (who obviously was having a ball with the whole thing), Camille Paglia, Erica Jong, Dr. Ruth, and members of the crew and cast of this historically important film.
Historically important however, because of 20/20 hindsight. Obviously, any director of this subject is bound to suffer from some notions of grandeur. The statement at the end of the film that claims "Deep Throat" was not important because it was the first blow job movie but rather because it served as a crusader for the 1st amendment shows a bit of overreaching. Yeah, many aspects of society converged on the release of the film, but in this age of overanalysis and micro-niche studies of history (e.g. the invention of spandex and how it changed the world!), I often feel that films such as these are less about illuminating the public and more about illuminating the talking heads and mini-industries that spring up around them.
In certain ways however, it is a historically important document. For example, since I don't know the history of the porn industry, I didn't know that this film essentially launched the obsession men have with fellatio. If you look at porn ads (and I have to daily when I check my email) you can easily see the truth in that claim.
I also didn't know about the court cases, how the mafia played such a major role, or just how profitable this film was, particularly when examined in the backdrop of the 1970s, when Nixon was going out and Carter coming in. It's interesting how something as major as a presidential election would affect the outcome of the case, as one lawyer says to "Deep Throat" actor Harry Reems, "If a Republican wins, you're going to jail. If a Democrat wins, you won't." A Republican won, and the lawyer was right.
Sigh. Seeing Reems debate Ray Cohn just honed in for me how much I dislike right-wing nitwits. Obviously, not much has changed between then and now. The culture wars continue, and people still don't want to stay out of others' bedrooms. Now who is more perverse? Note: I was wondering if the filmmakers were going to show an example of Lovelace's amazing oral abilities and was really struggling to think how it could be done tastefully (no pun intended). They did show it and I have to hand it to them, it was done simply, with no big fuss and very quickly. Talking about censorship and then not showing a clip of what made the film so famous would have been problematic, wouldn't it?
cococravescinema.blogspot.com -
RARubin6 February 2006All right, here's the deal. The story about a relatively expensive early X-rated film and how it came to enormous publicity because of political and sociological crosscurrents misses the point. I know censorship got lots of Hollywood stars on board, but really, that's all a bunch of hypocrisy. Essentially sexual acts are a matter of strict regulation in a large society, and it has been since man discovered fire. Men need to know that their children are their children. If not, why go to work in the morning supporting a family that isn't yours? The real story of Deep Throat is the enigma of Linda Lovelace and other young chicks that enthusiastically did their work in front of camera and film crew.
Linda is a bored suburban chick that got into a relationship with a swingin' dude that may or may not have abused her, but he sure wasn't boring. He completed her sexual education, taught her a sword swallow trick, headed for New York where there's plenty of small budget work to be done, and then there's a deal to go to Florida to do a shoot for $600, a week's work; I guess that's the equivalent of $6500 today. According to the director and the film crew, the girls had a ball in front of the camera. They all thought they were making some kind of 60's statement about freedom, and for the porn actors, freedom is in your privates.
The mob takes over, the middle-class goes to a smut movie, and all of a sudden, there's a rash of divorces and alternative sexuality. Nah, all that was there before, but kids got married early, in their teens many of them. The swinger's, other than Hefner, it was a super secret secret. The boomers thought they invented sex.
Linda, she went along with the publicity, newscasters asking her what the secret of life is. She didn't know, but parroted a few ideas about censorship and the First Amendment. Then she disappeared into the belly of America to be a homemaker. Sure, she couldn't keep a real job because of her past, but she had a family. When the anti-porn babes showed up like Gloria Steinem, all of a sudden, in the limelight again, speaking before Congressional Committees and afternoon talk shows, she declared herself abused and raped. Then the public said, nahhh, and she went back to being a Denver homemaker. A decade later, Hugh Hefner offered her a photo spread. They took away her age spots and stretch marks, put her in lingerie, and the fifty-year-old smiled to the voyeurs. Ten years later, she died in a car crash. Her lifetime persona was a sexual trick, making her synonymous with prurient activity. -
movieman_kev23 October 2006More than just a documentary on the triple X porn classic,"Deep Throat". This film is about the time of it's release, political motivations played an extremely huge hand in how well the porn movie did. And because it was released at just the right moment in history is one of the only reasons it's as highly regarded and made an unbelievable profit. There are a great many better porn films (New Wave hookers, Debbie does Dallas, Devil in miss jones 3, etc...) But I digress, the documentary is pretty interesting, if the subject matter does stretch a bit thin. When the people who were directly involved with the film are being interviewed the film's fascinating. When those on screen have nothing at all to do with anything (Wes Craven, John Waters, Bill Maher, and so on) not so much. The film as a whole is flaccid and nothing i would watch again. And this from a guy who isn't above pornography in the least. It still remains good in short spurts
My Grade: C+
DVD Extras: Audio commentary with directors Randy Barbato & Fenton Bailey; collection of audio outtakes from the film; 14 Deleted scenes (some exclusive to the NC-17 rated version); and Theatrical trailer -
diane-3417 November 2005I was impressed with this marvelous doco after watching it yesterday and unlike Dick Cavett I remember watching the film in the heady days of the 70s in San Francisco-perhaps not as brave and revolutionary as watching it in Oklahoma City but a political statement none the less.
My thoughts about the film are coloured by this historical connection but that in no way diminishes the strengths of the film. After all these years to see the players in the flesh talking about such a phenomenon made for an enjoyable morning of film watching. You cannot view the film without seething anger at the religious conservatives that made virtually all the player's lives far more difficult than those lives should have been.
If there was a villain in the movie it would have been the Tennesee prosecutor who doubled as a lay preacher when he wasn't trying to make America into his own little brand of religious conservatism. Their kind of dead-head sociology and politics is still rampant in the States and the only difference is they've changed their target from sex to terrorism-or at least their definition of political terrorism.
The directors, Bailey and Barbato, have crafted a superb film inter-cutting old film clips with current interviews in order to create an excellent vision of all the threads between the personalities and opinions of the players. The hilarity of these characters come through when they speak with a forthrightness that generally ends up on the cutting room floor.
If you are an old guy like me-see the film for its historical look at a time that we can remember. If you are a young person interested in politics, look at the film to see the nature of the bad guys around us now but with new crusades to fight. -
lastliberal10 September 2007This was a fascinating documentary about the movie Deep Throat, which was made for $25,000 and grossed over $300 million. While it does present a clip or two from the movie, it is mainly focused on the impact the film had on America, the people involved, and the film industry.
I have not seen the original movie. I was in Vietnam when it came out, and by the time I got my first VCR 10 years later, there were many more interesting films such as Debbie Does Dallas, that I never went back to view the pioneers like Deep Throat or The Devil in Miss Jones.
But, it is not the movie that is important, but what it did to open up discussion of sexuality in America. There was even a merger of sorts between the new independent filmmakers" in the porn industry and Hollywood over the trial of Harry Reems, the male lead in the film. I would think that all the publicity and trials over this film had to contribute to Hollywood loosening up a bit in films.
The people involved in the film did not fare so well. Reems became a drunk and drug user, Linda Lovelace died penniless, and the principles in making and showing the film seemed to be running away from organized crime, who provided most of the original $25,000.
This was an interesting look at the industry and movies and changing mores in America. Yes, it does show the deep throat, which may turn some off, but the rest of the skin is pretty tame. It is the discussion that is interesting. And, you gets to see scads of Hollywood people in the discussion. -
vocal_warchild20 April 2006i 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. -
spludwig2619 April 2005In 1972, a cheaply made pornographic film named "Deep Throat" shook up the United States. It featured the then-unknown Linda Lovelace giving oral sex to Harry Reems so she could pleasure herself. The film clocked in at 62 minutes and was the first of its kind to be marketed at couples rather than shady old men in trench coats.
"Deep Throat" supposedly made $600 million at the box office and was produced for only $25,000, making it the most profitable movie of all time. The money to make the film came from the Columbo crime family in New Jersey and those ties made it even more notorious.
Now we have "Inside Deep Throat," a sharp, stimulating documentary that explores the making of the "Deep Throat," its effects on society and the implementation of obscenity laws in United States.
Co-directors Fenton Bailey and Randy Barbato, whose last film was "Party Monster," take viewers back to a time when porn could be seen only at seedy downtown theaters. They present us with interviews from numerous unattractive people in their 50s and older who experienced the events first hand. The interviewees range from trivial talk-show hosts to the man who prosecuted Harry Reems.
Through this series of interviews and porn clips, a slightly one-sided narrative develops that makes the moral-seeking right look more flawed than the film's supporters. The film would have been better with a little more balance.
The audience is first introduced to "Deep Throat" director Gerard Damiano, a hairdresser-turned-filmmaker who believed hardcore porn would slowly integrate into mainstream cinema. He is presented as a regular guy who took chances in the newly developing pornographic film industry and cared more about art than profits.
After delving into the film's problematic production in Florida, "Inside" shifts its focus to the film's success and persecution by the government. The government picked the highly popular "Deep Throat" as its example in a larger battle against obscenity. The publicity, however, only fueled more demand.
The film was narrated by Dennis Hopper and produced by Brian Grazer, who has credits including "8 Mile" and "Friday Night Lights" to his name. This should give you the idea that isn't an average, boring documentary. "Inside" takes an entertaining MTV-like approach to the important subjects of censorship and government intercession and, surprisingly, pulls it off.
Although I wish the film had dug even deeper into the personal lives of Lovelace and Reems, it is a perfect length, 92 minutes. This is more than just a dirty documentary; it's a short history lesson for those who weren't alive in the 1970s and a reminder of how little the social climate concerning sex has changed in 30 years. -
scorseseisgod-112 November 2005There's an old maxim about censorship in Hollywood: If you show a naked woman in the act of making love it's filth and should be rated 'X.' However, if you take a chainsaw and disembowel that same woman, it's rated 'R' and the kiddies can attend if mommy and daddy can't afford a babysitter.
As the sniggering title suggests, don't come expecting too much in the way of sexual politics or modified feminist thinking in this soft-core examination of the world of hard-core. This is the work of producer Brian Grazer, Ron Howard's spiky-haired partner and the head of Imagine Entertainment. From the man who bankrolled "Parenthood," "My Girl" and "Kindergarten Cop" comes the first (and hopefully only) feel-good documentary ever made about the porno industry.
With the exception of a handful of exhibitors, the mob and one evangelically enlightened 'actor,' everybody associated with "Deep Throat" hasn't exactly profited from the experience. The first player we meet is director Gerardo Damiano. Only a former hair stylist turned smut peddler would attempt such a hideous salt and pepper (now entirely salt) weave on his head. This, coupled with a pair of hiked-to-the-nipples Sansabelts, gives the impression of a retired furrier, not a revolutionary adult filmmaker. Claims by the director that he was a radical on the front line of the sexual revolutions are nonsense. If ever a guy landed in the right place at the right time, it's Damiano. Judging by the finished product, the director didn't know which end of the camera he was looking through.
Then there's the film's male lead, Harry Reems who signed on as one of the crew and wound up a star. He also came closest to serving hard time but was spared, the film argues, by a new democratic administration. Long before Traci Lords, Reems was the first porn actor that tried to cross-over into mainstream cinema. Producer Alan Carr wanted to give Reems the role that eventually went to Sid Caesar in "Grease." When Paramount studio execs caught wind of of a porn star sullying their retro-teen musical they immediately put the kibosh on the casting. After years of self-medication, Reems not only went straight, he became a minister in Utah.
The reason that "Deep Throat" was such a mainstream hit had little to do with pornographic content. Basements across America were already equipped with portable screens, Super 8 projectors and stag reels. The one major point "Inside Deep Throat" completely overlooks is the fact the Linda Lovelace was the first reasonably attractive woman to appear in pornography. Say what you will about the film's attempt to incorporate a story, its "ground-breaking" sense of humor and the fact that it was shot on 35mm film. This film hit it big because prior to it, all you saw were zaftig maidens servicing plumbers framed in uncomfortable long shots.
There are a few nuggets of gold gossip to be mined along the way. Helen Gurley Brown loves a protein-enriched facial and horror hack Wes Craven got his start in pornos. Why am I not surprised? The only true pornographic artist was the great Russ Meyer, yet even he knew to stay soft core.
The directors keep the interviews moving with loads of cute, flashy bridging shots. Not surprisingly, the film offers up more than a few behind-the-scenes oddballs. Aside from Damiano there's his assistant director, an unhealthy cross between Charlie Callas and Prof. Irwin Corey. who is all too kind when confessing that as a filmmaker Damiano is a safe distance from "Luke Goddard." Then there's location manager Lenny Camp, a cantankerous, stone-deaf octogenarian with his hand permanently cupped to his ear. Not one for revisionist thinking. Lenny"s mantra is simple: "It was s**t then and its s**t now!" Showing Ms. Lovelace doing what she's most famous for was a must, yet I'm still surprised by the film's overall timid depiction of sexually explicit material. There is one quick shot of Linda swallowing. Even though the title explicitly refers to oral sex, the filmmakers' rapid editing approach to the more overt sexual material comes off a bit cowardly.
The film is crammed with witnesses to the time. Norman Mailer, John Waters, Helen Gurley Brown, Dr. Ruth, Erica Jong, Gore Vidal, Larry Flint, Dick Cavett and Camille Paglia, Hugh Hefner all add insight, but alas, the film's major player died in a car crash in the early nineties. Initial interviews with Lovelace show an "actress" proud of her work and notoriety. With the publication of her autobiography "Ordeal," Lovelace changed horses and began riding a feminist bandwagon. A key target in her book is Hugh Hefner, a man who Lovelace claimed like to force Playmates to have sex with dogs while he watched. The only thing more offensive than his calm, fatherly presence here is the filmmaker's refusal to call Hef on the carpet, presumably in exchange for his compliance to appear.
One of the first times we see Lovelace is in a clip from the "Donahue" show where she claims that everyone who saw the film basically watched a rape. By all accounts, husband Chuck Trainor drove Linda almost as hard as Paul Snider pressured Dorothy Stratton. Indeed, at various times in "Deep Throat" one can detect bruises on Lovelace's body. Sadly, her testimony is dubious as several years prior to her death she once again turned to the world of porn, this time doing a spread in ultra-skanky Legshow Magazine.
So if it's not sexual politics or feminist thinking that sparked curiosity about this nostalgic bit of smut, what is it? Before mentioning politics, before we're introduced to the film's motley band of players, even before the opening credits are done rolling, we are hit with the point that I think impressed producer Grazer the most: a film that cost a paltry $25,000 went on to gross over $600 million. -
dj_bassett26 February 2005To 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. -
stensson15 October 2005It was nearly 35 years ago. Some of the involved are dead and some of them are really old now. The director is still alive however and it's interesting to hear the story from "inside".
Whatever you might think of porn, "Deep Throat" is an important although disregarded part of film history, because it started a new genre and it not only started it, it created a lavine. The interesting thing here is not really the interviews with the expected people like Norman Mailer or Erica Jong for example. It's obvious what they are about to say. The interesting part is what the mob did.
The gangsters saw the money and they made sure they got it. A man could turn up at a cinema demanding 50 % and it happened everywhere. One cinema owner is still frightened after all these years and he says that no money could compensate the fear he felt.
What this documentary lacks is an analysis of porn industry today. Is it honest or is organized crime still in it? That's not unimportant, because the industry is big. -
nobbytatoes22 March 2006June 12th, 1972, Deep Throat was released to the paying public. One of the first pornographic films to be release in a movie theater, Deep Throat was hit with massive controversy and banned in twenty three states. Before it's release, the sexual revolution was exploding; with films of The Graduate, Last Tango in Paris and Midnight Cowboy. Hard core sex was still stuck in the closet, only allowed in educational films, Deep Throat change all that becoming the highest grossing, adult independent film ever made.
Even before it's release, the world of sex and politics were clashing heads. Towards the end of Richard Nixon's first term, his commission on pornography, which sought to find if pornography was damaging for people, failed to find conclusive answers; answers they didn't want. On re-election for another term, Nixon smashed head first to clean up smut; it was the easiest way to boost political image. Theaters were raided; police film seized and signs taken down, yet still failed to stop people seeing the film; forbidden fruit. Deep Throat was dramatically different from other pornographic films. Deep Throat had a story line; as farcical as it was, witty dialog and changed the notion on oral sex.
Sex, politics, censorship and who to blame has always been a hot topic in movie making; my eye looks at Michael Winterbottom's film 9 songs, which was nearly banned in Australia for its depiction of actual sex on screen. What can and can not see is always a thin line to cross, as Deep Throat dare to take, allowing people to see "smut" on their own accord. As you think the blame for any film would fall at the directors feet, the terrible twists of actor Harry Reems taking the fall; while director Gerard Damiano and actress Linda Lovelace both on immunity.
With so many facets to explore of censorship, sex and politics, Inside Deep Throat doesn't really dig that deep. This only really scratches the surface, not reaching the storming undercurrent this film caused. It feels a lot of information was stepped over, not really delving into Linda's life in the aftermath, as too with Reems tormented life, brief glimpses of his struggle of drug and alcohol abuse. The feminist movement is pushed aside, basically shown irrelevant.
Deep Throat stopped people wearing trench coats to theaters and change the pornographic industry forever, becoming the highest grossing industry, yet Inside Deep Throat, needed to go that whole lot more deeper. -
Inside Deep Throat delves into the fascinating background of the most profitable film in the history of cinema; it's a story that features political machination, cultural revolution, moral uproar, censorship, obscenity lawsuits, the women's liberation movement, claims of sexual abuse, and the mafia—but most importantly, a lady with complete control over her gag reflex.
Linda Lovelace (real name: Linda Susan Boreman) shot to fame in Deep Throat, the porn film that became a phenomenon by capitalising on its star's outstanding ability to perform fellatio; in the permissive climate of the early '70s, Deep Throat became the first blue movie to be embraced by the middle-classes, briefly making it chic to go see a sex flick. Unfortunately, for the people involved in the making of the film, not everyone was so open-minded: the Moral Majority (i.e., religious right) were soon up in arms and launched a crusade against the film with the full backing of the current administration, led by that beacon of morality, Richard Nixon.
Interviews with the film's cast and crew, including it's male star Harry Reems and director Gerard Damiano, shed a lot of light on the movie, and opinions are also given by such luminaries as Al Goldstein, Dr. Ruth, Hugh Hefner, Larry Flynt, John Waters, Wes Craven, Norman Mailer and Gore Vidal; however, perhaps the most interesting aspect of the whole Deep Throat affair—Lovelace joining the feminist anti-porn movement and subsequently revealing that she was forced to take part in the film against her wishes by her controlling and violent husband—is only briefly touched upon.
Whether or not Linda was really a victim of abuse, or merely a puppet of feminist activists, is still the subject of much conjecture, and with the actress having died as the result of a car crash in 2002, we shall probably never know for certain; but watching Linda enthusiastically performing her signature move (this documentary shows snippets of the notorious act), listening to her proudly promoting the movie in interviews, and knowing of her intent to return to the world of porn, I do find her claim of unwilling participation rather hard to swallow (snigger, snigger, fnar, fnar!).
6.5 out of 10, rounded up to 7 for IMDb. -
D_Burke3 November 2008"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. -
littledevilshortfilm16 March 2022'Inside Deep Throat' is lightweight documentary on the infamous movie "Deep Throat" released in 1972, starring Linda Lovelace. The documentary blends archival footage with present day interviews of those involved in the movie, including the director, Gerard Damiano.
The filmmakers collected about 800 hours of interviews and archive footage and condensed this into 90 minutes of what is basically a review of the movie-making process and the impact it had when released, and what an impact that was.
Put together in a very short time and on an incredibly small budget, "Deep Throat" has become one of the most profitable movies ever and continues to provide a source of conversation, not the least of which is admitting one has actually seen the movie.
This is where the movie broke new ground having so-called prudes lining up desperate to see what all the fuss was about and sending the purists desperately trying to have it banned.
Meanwhile, as the movie was released, the documentary reveals that most of the profit from its phenomenal success was actually being syphoned off to fund criminals and their activities via a process know as "checkers and sweepers".
Prints of the movie were hand delivered and headcounts were taken at cinemas and the cash profit was collected with serious repercussion for those cinema owners who did not comply. What the documentary fails to reveal is where this money really went and it does feel like a vital piece is missing.
Original footage is shown, including a graphic and infamous moment with Linda Lovelace's character and the reason how she became known as 'Deep Throat'. Damiano also reveals that the title at one stage was going to be 'The Sword Swallower'.
Of course, Lovelace later went on to recant her voluntary involvement with the movie and she tells her side of the story.
A relatively harmless exposé of one of histories truly infamous movies, 'Inside Deep Throat' is a fairly innocuous peek into the behind-the-scenes action of a movie that caused a moral revolution in the USA. -
elcopy13 February 2005"Inside Deep Throat" is one of the most entertaining documentaries I've ever seen. This film doesn't cover all the aspects you may want to see about the porn-film-turned-cultural- phenomenon, but it is fun to watch -a thing you can't say about most documentaries. The tone is light-hearted, which will make people squeamish about seeing a film related to porn less threatened. It is however, one of the few films I've seen well deserving of the NC-17 rating.
The lessons to be learned from watching it are: The Christian Right is the American Taliban. The Republican Party spent too much taxpayer money and time deciding what you should and shouldn't see. Their silly "American values" platform has been around for decades. The silly obscenity laws are still around, though it'll be a big waste of taxpayer money to enforce them, as it was back then. The movie made so much money because it was banned and people were drawn to the controversy. The mafia was the biggest beneficiary, while most people involved in the film became victims of the movie's success.
I read somewhere the late Linda Lovelace said she realized the feminist crusaders used her more than the porn industry did. You can see a bit of that in this movie. In archive footage, Lovelace is being interviewed, but a feminist next to her doesn't let Lovelace speak and answers all the questions for her. Poor Lovelace was used to push whatever agenda she could be used for. In one part you see her defending the porn industry and free speech, the next you see her as the ultimate anti-porn crusader, and at an old age you see her posing nude for Playboy, defending her change of mind.
This will be a great DVD when it comes out. Many people won't agree with the points of view portrayed here, but we all can agree this is good storytelling. -
fertilecelluloid14 November 2005This doco is much more entertaining than "Deep Throat" itself. It re-assembles all the cinematic miscreants involved with the production of the infamous pioneering porn flick and gets some of the lowdown on its making and aftermath, political and personal.
The strangest aspects of the doc, for me, were the twenty-years-later-re-appraisals of the film's merits. One or two interviewees talked about the film's "witty dialog" and its "originality". Please, let's get some perspective here, folks. "Deep Throat" was never and never will be a good movie. It's hardcore scenes are sweaty and ugly, it is barely technically adequate, and the dialog (if you are generous enough to call it that) is puerile. The reason the film entered popular culture was because it was first. It wasn't the first hardcore feature film, but it was the first to be widely distributed and widely discussed. On top of that, it was busted for obscenity over and over again. But, it didn't become a better film because of the trouble it caused.
The doco is so polished you can't believe it's about the making of "Deep Throat"; it's a clever gimmick, actually, because it, too, like "Deep Throat", got wide distribution (by Universal in this case) with an NC-17 rating.
Damiano makes an interesting subject, as do the massive pants he wears that he pulls up to his nipples to hide his girth. A distributor from Florida (and his nagging wife) are memorable, too. Harry Reems, the male star of "Throat", and star of better skinflicks such as "Society Affairs", is open and honest discussing the negative impact starring in the film had on him.
As the film was mob-financed, we get the sense that the entire "Deep Throat" story has still not been told. Nevertheless, this accomplished film is an illuminating look at the film's voyage into 70's American culture. -
Review by: Todd David Schwartz, Arts & Entertainment Correspondent for "The Paul Mitchell Show," a newly launched, nationally syndicated talk radio program. INSIDE DEEP THROAT gets Four Stars (highest rating). DEEP THROAT, released in the early 1970's, is considered the first major porn film. It became, to say the least, quite a "cause celeb." This documentary, INSIDE DEEP THROAT, explores the impact of the film on society, and shows how sex, culture, politics, and morality all collided to explosive effect. INSIDE DEEP THROAT is an utterly fascinating cinematic experience, amazingly thorough, ceaselessly entertaining. I grew up during the time depicted in the film (over 30 years ago), but for those of you young 'uns who weren't around then, this will prove particularly eye-opening. The filmmakers were able to gather an impressive group of big-names to throw in their two-cents worth on the subject: Norman Mailer, Camille Paglia, Erica Jong, Dick Cavett -- names, again, that may be unfamiliar to those of you who weren't around during the time of DEEP THROAT's release. My only complaint about the film (an admittedly minor one) is that the filmmakers don't spend more time delving into allegations made by Linda Lovelace (DEEP THROAT's star) in her book ORDEAL, where she essentially claims that she was forced at gunpoint to perform in the film by her husband/manager Chuck Traynor. ORDEAL is quite a juicy read. It was originally released by a major publishing house, but has long been out of print. INSIDE DEEP THROAT certainly mentions the book, and shows how Lovelace did a turn-around and became an unexpected spokeswoman for anti-porn feminists. But the documentary generally leaves unexamined just how accurate ORDEAL's claims may have been. In the documentary, Hugh Hefner pontificates grandly about DEEP THROAT's cultural impact. NOT mentioned in the film is the allegation Lovelace makes in ORDEAL that, at the height of her popularity, she was invited up to the Playboy Mansion where Hef tried to get her to have sex with a dog, while people stood around and watched. Rather exploitive of you, Mr. Hefner, is it not? (Assumimg the allegation is true.) Also in the book and not mentioned in the film, is Lovelace's wild sexual relationship with entertainer Sammy Davis, Jr. Not only did Davis have Lovelace demonstrate her deep throat fellatio technique on him (according to Lovelace), but Davis performed fellatio on Lovelace's hubby Chuck Traynor! I would have personally liked to see the film examine the book's allegations a little more closely. As it is (and as I indicated earlier), the film IS impressively thorough with the information it does provide, and it's presented with tremendous flair. INSIDE DEEP THROAT is rated NC-17 for a reason: The film includes an explicit scene from DEEP THROAT of Lovelace performing the fellatio technique for which the porn film was named and for which she became famous. Including this scene was a smart and important choice on the part of the filmmakers. It would have been a cop-out to have people sitting around talking about one of the primary reasons why DEEP THROAT became a must see, without actually showing it.
-
turkam24 September 2006I have seen two other films by documentarian (well, he is not exactly in the Frederick Wiseman mode) Fenton Bailey_ "Monica in Black and White" and "The Eyes of Tammy Faye." All of his film that I've seen focus on sex and scandal, and "Inside Deep Throat" proves to be no exception. This film is a fairly solid period piece_ taking place in the 1970s, and there are very startling interview clips with those involved with the original adult film, including 'actor' Harry Reems, and from celebrities, like John Waters and Hugh Hefner, who comment on the film's cultural impact. The doc also shows how both feminists and right-wingers attacked "Deep Throat." Ultimately, it seems that the controversy and the actual banning of the film in the United States made it more of a commodity with the public. There is actual footage from the original adult film, and while I seriously doubt that it has any artistic merit at all (have not seen "Deep Throat"), the political debate it stirred still seems relevant today and the film illustrates this well. Bailey is no serious documentary filmmaker, like Barbara Kopple, at all- he's even used sock puppets in his films_ but this material is a perfect for this formula. "Inside Deep Throat" also shows America's psychological hangups about sexuality though it does not examine why we are collectively more uptight about sex than most Europeans. This film would also make a great companion piece to Caveh Zahedi's surreal, narrative doc "I'm a Sex Addict." I have personal reservations about adult films. A PBS documentary "American Porn" revealed how abusive the industry is towards its 'actresses,' in a very brutal, shocking manner. But, one also realizes that ultra-conservatives' efforts to use the issue to legislate morality has dire consequences which lead to political/creative censorship in more legitimate documentary forms. For this reason alone, Bailey's latest film is quite a thought-provoking one.
-
strong-122-47888513 July 2016Yes. As titillating and naughty as the subject of "hard-core" porn may be - I found "Inside Deep Throat" to be a decidedly "soft-core" documentary, on all counts.
Instead of being all wet'n'juicy - This was a very dry and sanitized presentation. And, all that it did was lifelessly chronicle "Deep Throat" from its production, to its popularity, to its cult-status, to its inevitable battle with the self-righteous censors.
You know, I've actually seen 1972's "Deep Throat" some years ago - And, if you ask me - It was, pretty much, just tiresome, z-grade garbage that didn't deserve (even one iota) all the attention that it got (and still gets).
The only reason why this laughable film (about a woman whose clitoris was in her throat) has garnered so much undo attention for itself all comes down to the negative publicity that it's generated.
You can be sure - Without all of this negative backlash, "Deep Throat" would have remained just another piffle-of-porn that would have quickly faded away into obscurity faster than an average ejaculation.
Anyway - I don't completely write off this documentary as being a waste of time. It does contain some worthwhile moments. But, if you're expecting "Inside Deep Throat" to be a real hard-core production, then you are in for a big disappointment - 'Cause it's, pretty much, 90% talk-talk-talk, and, perhaps, 10% action.