Director: Christina Voros
Format: Multiple Formats, Color, Widescreen, NTSC
Number of discs: 1
Studio: MPI HOME VIDEO
DVD Release Date: February 10, 2015
Run Time: 80 minutes
The reviews are out and the ‘most controversial film of the year’ has fallen flat on its face in the attempt to be shocking. Despite rumors of the film being 1/3 sex scenes and a storyline that integrates the world of BDSM fantasies, Fifty Shades of Grey is being called boring by most and inaccurate by those familiar with the world of kink. For realism and accuracy, audiences would do better to turn to the documentary about Kink.com. Those who were offended by the idea of that garbage piece of fan-fiction being turned into a worthless film franchise would be wise to stay away from this entirely, because five minutes of this film is likely to outdo anything in the entire running-time of Fifty Shades.
Kink is released under James Franco’s name, likely because of the relationship he has with filmmaker Christina Voros. She was cinematographer for several literary adaptations Franco attempted in 2013. It is unclear whether he had any involvement in this documentary about a sub-sect of pornography or merely wanted to help Voros with her vision, but it is somewhat strange to see the movie star’s name attached to such graphic and shocking material. More than anything, the film becomes a behind-the-scenes look at the process of making these pornographic films. Although this is done as a way to explain and justify BDSM fetishes, sometimes the behind-the-scenes look at the construction of these scenes is like seeing how the sausage is made.
Despite numerous claims that those who are involved in these videos are participating willingly and have safety precautions set up all through the process, even the strongest of advocates for BDSM must admit that things become complicated when money is involved. This is clear in the discomfort that is visible in many performers behind the scenes. Even when they say that they are alright, it nearly always feels as though they are convincing themselves. The bottom line is money, and it would be much easier to believe that the participants enjoyed the bondage if they weren’t getting paid to endure the pain.
There are likely many who participate in bondage willingly and enjoy it, but this film doesn’t seem as interested in showing those who enjoy the kink as much as it wants to justify its existence. Too much of the film feels like a defense against dissenters, never showing us reasons for making this pornography by giving interviews with those who aren’t profiting from it. Money does complicate things, and it is for this reason that Kink impressed my opinion on BDSM. Though it has not changed my perception of those who enjoy the fetish, it had a negative effect on my opinion of the construction of its pornography. Everyone is free to do what they enjoy in their own homes, but paying people to participate feels far too much like exploitation.
The DVD special features on include the film’s trailer.
Entertainment Value: 2/10
Quality of Filmmaking: 3/10
Historical Significance: 4/10
Special Features: 1/10