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
No comments:
Post a Comment