Most would immediately identify the name with the most controversial film of all-time- ‘Salo’, but the graphic nature of that film takes precedence over his vision. Some might say that he became mad; hated the world, people, even rejected his homosexual lifestyle. Taking a look at his ‘Trilogy of Life’ (‘The Decameron’, ‘Canterbury Tales’ and ‘Arabian Nights) we see that his vision was yet to be unveiled. The beautiful was made to be murky. The beginnings of this could be seen in ‘Porcile’ (aka ‘Pigpen’) and the son in ‘Momma Romma’ is a little too reminiscent of Christ. The church hated him. The government hated him. He still did what he did. He rejected all forms of bodies and institutions. Ironically, he created perhaps the best representation of Jesus with ‘The Gospel According to St. Matthew’ despite being atheist.
PPP was a writer, poet, playwright, philosopher, painter etc. He was prolific. He was able to create a film world that was sacred in and of itself with no need to look beyond and this made him unique. He added to the organic nature of his films by using actors with little or no experience. His ‘Trilogy of Death’ (starting with ‘Salo’) would have taken us much deeper into this world. He died a martyr.
What are your thoughts on the one and only, Pier Paolo Pasolini? Your thoughts on 'Salo'? Does anyone think he fed us sh!t?
PPP was a writer, poet, playwright, philosopher, painter etc. He was prolific. He was able to create a film world that was sacred in and of itself with no need to look beyond and this made him unique. He added to the organic nature of his films by using actors with little or no experience. His ‘Trilogy of Death’ (starting with ‘Salo’) would have taken us much deeper into this world. He died a martyr.
What are your thoughts on the one and only, Pier Paolo Pasolini? Your thoughts on 'Salo'? Does anyone think he fed us sh!t?
