I have not seen this yet...but was this actual porn? was there ACTUAL sex? I mean like penetration/oral/anal/etc?
I haven't seen it yet, but a lot of people have deemed this as 'cheap porn'...
and it's by penthouse something...so I was wondering.
[deleted]
this movie is a porno, not even a good one at that
shareI watched this movie a few days ago and to me it is porn. There are several close up shots of penetration, oral sex between two women and two men, lots and lots of nudity. Basically it's a lot of sex with some poor plot in between.
What you do for yourself dies with you, what you do for others remains immortal!
[deleted]
I'm sorry maybe I misunderstood her question. I thought she asked if there was penetration and oral, which there is. I never said it was "hardcore" but sex is sex no matter how long it lasts. So to answer her question, yes there is oral sex scenes and penetration scenes. It also depends on which version you watch, I watched the unrated version.
What you do for yourself dies with you, what you do for others remains immortal!
[deleted]
You can see:
Close up fully erect penis.
Close up blow-job with ejaculation
Close up girl licking other girl's vagina
That's about 1/50th of the porn you can see. So yeah, I guess it is a porn film.
Don't bother watching it, there is no merit to this film really. Anyone who says 'you just don't get it' secretly just loves the porn.
Porn is not the reason to watch this because there is not much of it.
I have a feeling these famous actors had no idea hardcore-scenes were to be edited in later, or they would of turned down the film.
I think Bob pulled a fast one.
[deleted]
'that's a really overly simplified, half-truth answer, jimellis.'
-----------------
In what respect?
By saying that the porn is this film was a small element,and that the lead actors may not of known that hardcore sex would added later? That is a half-truth?
Sounds very simple to me. Gee, why are angry?
I went to the theatre to see this in 1980...where were you at the time(?)
[deleted]
Bull!
http://penthousecustom.com/promos/graphics/CaligulaMovieRelease.pdf
[deleted]
"*SIGH* Is it just me, or.."
--------------
Yes, it's mainly just you,sweetie.
Now calm down,everything is going to be alright.
Look. I saw the uncut and unedited version of this movie (spanning over 3 hours) and this movie is not so much a porn film as it is a mess of worthless film making with a lot of nudity and yes, sex, in it.
There is quite a bit of sex, other than Caligula doing it with his sister and a lot of other women, there are lots of scenes of full penetrative shots being thrown in, blowjob (even a gay blowjob, don't deny it), and more nudity than you can shake a stick at. Other than Caligula's ass being visible most of the time, the orgy scene, him stripping naked, the bath and cave scene with Tiberius, the start scene with naked, muscular male slaves working a query... and of course, the 'attack on Britain' scene that featured over 50+ naked men charging at a river...
I could go on all day, really, even if I haven't seen it in months (And I shall never view it again), I can say that it is just a very, very poorly done attempt at a historic film with nakedness and sex thrown in. So I don't consider it porn (albeit if I owned a video store, I WOULD keep it in the adult section due to the sex, and might be obligated to do so by law), but what I can say is, that the Romans were fairly open about sex and a couple having sex in the background might not have attracted all that much attention anyways, so in a perverse, silly way, this movie is 'realistic' in that regard. But anyways, in modern terms I think stuff like that should be mildly covered up at least slightly.
on a technical level, no one can deny that it is porn
the quality (lol) or degree of the sexual acts, is not important
Porn is defined not by what's on-screen, but the purpose of it. Hardcore penetration does not automatically equal pornography (see SHORTBUS), and lack of it does not indicate it's not pornography (Playboy).
share[deleted]
One needs to remember most of the cast in this movie was being paid in cocaine. Look at the work a lot of them have done since they got off the G-rock.
Now I want to ask people something..if you had to spend an eternity in hell watching a Malcolm Mcdowell movie and hells library only had this and Star Trek Generations...how many of you choose STG? That's what I thought, not so terrible a movie after all, huh?
What they didn't know is that Bob Guccione would go behind their back and RE-SHOOT the footage.
-----------------------
Didn't I just convey that?
And what's with the 'urban-myth" term?... kind of pretentious aren't "we"?
And thank Jupiter he did!
shareThe term "urban myth" strikes you as pretentious? Did you ever finish 8th grade?
shareI really hate to change the subject but this really annoys me...
"and that the lead actors may not of known"
whats with the OF?? MAY NOT OF KNOWN?? Where the hell did you learn thats english??
Its may not have known...
"English *beep* do you speak it?!?!" Pulp fiction
As an English major I certainly sympathize, but you yourself are missing multiple apostrophes and instances of capitalization in your post here, my friend.
"Imagination is intelligence with an erection."
-Victor Hugo
thank you very much, isnt that annoying?? i mean... english is not even my first language and i can tell you its not an easy one to learn... then this guy comes and changes the entire meaning of the sentence... i understand nite=night but this guy changed one word with an entirelly different one. and i am aware of my missing "apostrophes and instances of capitalization" my friend, im not an english major. thanks though.
shareAt least get your spelling right before you post off-topic garbage.
shareI had heard that John Gielgud was so disgusted that he petitioned to have his name removed from the credits and have his scenes removed.
shareListen to Malcolm MacDowell's interview in the Imperial Edition and it's quite interesting hearing him talk about the different stuff that went on. Sure, there was nudity in the movie, but it's obvious after watching the pre-release and the final cuts where Guccione stuck the hardcore stuff, and just how unnecessary it was to the overall movie. There was more than enough nudity in there without it, but none of it would've counted as hardcore. MacDowell says Gielgud saw it three times and loved it, and even paid for it the last two times. Nonetheless, it's hard to imagine serious actors not feeling a bit blindsided by the addition of the hardcore stuff in post-production, even if they knew full well how risque the rest of the movie was.
shareYou're correct.
Malcolm McDowell didn't even see Bob's changes until 1982, and hated the movie at that point.
also there is a scene where a woman has a group of men ejaculate into a bowl or jar so she can cover her entire naked body in it. you see the men actually cum into the jar. now if that aint porn i don't know what is...
shareWell, that's disgusting! Where can I see the film?
shareJust because a film has real sex in it, it doesn't make it a porn. A porn is made purely to sexually stimulate people, this wasn't, just as other films with real sex in aren't, for example Shortbus. I personally love this film, i think it's an interesting look at a fascinating figure, i have seen enough porn to know this isn't porn (yeah, it's no secret with me, i watch porn). Open your mind a bit, and you might see some films that, while including real sex, are more than worth seeing.
shareIt is a period, costume piece which is completely concerned with sex, from beginning to end. I don't think there's a scene without some focus on gratuitous nudity or sexual activity ... from soft core to the hardest of hard core. It has no redeeming historical value. If you want to see Ancient Rome well done, watch the British TV mini-series Rome. It's got it all and makes Caligula look like a cheap porn flick.
On its favour, the sex scenes are more creative than most porn flicks ... mainly because of the budget, I'd assume. For the most part, it's nothing more than a series of loosely connected vignettes with either staged, gratuitous brutality or staged, gratuitous sex. I watched it when it first came out ... and modern standards plus the Internet have altered its impact. Now it's merely pantomime.
The Penthouse Pets were hot. I love women from the 1970's -- no plastic on them like now!
shareone could expect no less.
Civil and topical debate - http://jaguarv2.proboards88.com/
rjfme that was a great synopsis of this movie :)
shareI once heard that this movie has "every excess imaginable".
A pretty firm recommendation against seeing it if you're easily offended.
If you're going to label this movie porn you wouldn't be incorrect. But it's definitely more than that. The acting in this film is decent, If you're not easily offended it's a definite must see. In response to a previous poster, I find it laughable that anyone would believe that Rome is what is it like in an HBO Special. To call this movie porn is to really elevate porn to a level that it doesn't deserve. It has good acting, the story if followed is very compelling. Some of the sex does serve a purpose to the story but some of it is thrown in just for fun too. But if you look at this movie as a whole it's definitely something more than just a porn.
shareNo this is no porn; it is Rome.
shareI actually bought Caligula in a porn store.
Today I am dirty, tomorrow I'll be just dirt.
See also 'Salo' and some of Passolini's junk. Caligula represented absolute power corrupting itself and, together with Nero represented the height of Rome, and the nadir of virtue. Without any checks, Caligula could indulge himself and anyone he wished with any action he wished; sex, death, elevation, slavery. The only checks on his activities were old age or a knife. Preferring not to wait for old age to put a halt to his nefarious activities, the knife became the check to Caligula's reign of terror.
Some were poisoned. Some stabbed. There was little escape. If you were strong, you were a threat to someone. If you were weak you were a threat to the state. Everybody had a piece of the action. Go back over a century; when Julius crossed the Rubicon, the Republic which had a modicum of checks and balances was overthrown. Of course, Julius met his knife too.
Well, It is Basically Porn Because there are very graphic explit detail scenes of sex. I mean Its Not The Type of penthouse you will see these days but there are alot of very graphic scenes in this film if you are over 18 i am sure you will be fine with it. There is Graphic things such as Penetration,
oral,Masturbation And much violence so basically A S&M Movie (Sex & Murder)