Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

I Am Curious Yellow


sfpcc2
 Share

Recommended Posts

Unless you were involved or interested in the Swedish political scene in those times, or have some historical interest in the Swedish political scene of those times, I wouldn't bother.

 

I do now believe it was the promise of some rare movie nudity that made this flick a "sensation" at the time. Other than that, it's a lot of psuedo-intellectual tripe.

 

Sepiatone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, Dobbsy...I watched all of IACY and it only confirmed what Wilhelm Reich had been saying all along about Orgone Energy and the connection between sex and revolution.

 

Now I'd direct you to some of his books, if you are not into him but I think most of them are still banned.

 

I could have recorded this film, but decided to make myself stay up and watch it, and some parts of it were kind of interesting. Like when the characters begin arguing and make it obvious that they are just actors and not really living the scenes. All the political rhetoric seemed to be filler for the sex scenes or maybe the sex scenes were filler for the prosaic proselytizing.

 

All in all, though I am very tired today as I got only three hours of sleep, it was a good experience and the film did not really seem to be sexually motivated but it was just the glue which gave the director the license to spout forth his views on ideological issues. Kind of like how Ed Wood's "PNFOS" was an insurrectionist take on the validity of extraterrestial visitations masked by an idiotic script and fake tombstones as a distraction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

< I thought I was dreaming and went back to sleep >

 

babes' ...there are so many soft core/hard core Porn movies on TV anymore, it makes I AM CURIOUS YELLOW seem like 'child's play' !

 

The fact that you went back to sleep, tells me it couldn't have been much of a movie ! ;)

 

Twinkee :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>it only confirmed what Wilhelm Reich had been saying all along about Orgone Energy and the connection between sex and revolution.

 

The "revolution" is on the screen, in the media, showing sex to the public in uncensored pictures. That's what's "revolutionary" about these films.

 

People have sex whether or not there is a revolution going on. But sex shown in photos to the public comes with modern leftist type revolutions.

 

See *Carne de Fieras* on YouTube. Made by a Spanish anarchist in 1936, but never released until the 1990s. Too revolutionary for the 1930s, but not too revolutionary for the 1990s or YouTube.

 

Go 28 minutes into the film, to the lion and tiger act.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>All the political rhetoric seemed to be filler for the sex scenes or maybe the sex scenes were filler for the prosaic proselytizing.

 

 

If I recall correctly, there was a Supreme Court ruling back in that era that said if a new film with a lot of sex and nudity had "no social redeeming value", then it could be censored, so some X-rated film makers started putting some political and social discussions and rhetoric in their films to get them past the censors.

 

But I recall that in San Francisco, with this film, it was all the sex-related advertising, newspaper articles, and gossip that packed the audiences into the theater to see this film. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, but that wasnt the case with this film as it was Swedish......

 

It became the film to see (in places like NY where it was allowed to be shown) Even Jackie O. was seen attending a showing (LOL)........

 

Edited by: Hibi on Oct 16, 2013 4:24 PM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look it up. :)

 

"It is plaintiffs' burden to prove that the film is utterly without redeeming social value. They have failed to do so. On the basis of all the evidence I reluctantly and with regret conclude that "I Am Curious (Yellow)" does possess a modicum of redeeming social value."

 

http://www.leagle.com/decision/1969127108NJSuper19_1125

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, but I dont think the film was made anticipating legal implications in the American market. I agree about the legalese. I remember all that......

 

I'm sure the film was made at least a year before it even opened here......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>I'm sure the film was made at least a year before it even opened here......

 

Normally films are made in other countries before they open here.

 

I've never heard of a film opening here and then being made in another country. :)

 

This film was first banned in this country, and then later un-banned.

 

The term "no redeeming social value" was taken from a much earlier case, about 10 years earlier, regarding a banned book. The use and re-use of this term in the 1960s and 70s caused more films to be made with blah, blah, blah talk in them so as to make use of the redeeming social value clause that had become popular in court hearings by the late 1960s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>All the political rhetoric seemed to be filler for the sex scenes or maybe the sex scenes were filler for the prosaic proselytizing.

 

Yes, this has been common with pornographic films and literature all along, to make it seem to have some value other than sex. The same was true of Carne de Fieras in 1936. The same was probably true about old nude paintings from the 1600s, and nude sculptures going back to ancient Greek times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My point was I very much doubt the Swedish film makers threw that political stuff in the film to circumvent legal problems in the U.S. I'm assuming it was filmed for the Swedish market. Some canny U.S. distributor probably saw market value in the nudity and picked up the U.S. rights....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> FredCDopps said:" If I recall correctly, there was a Supreme Court ruling back in that era that said if a new film with a lot of sex and nudity had "no social redeeming value", then it could be censored..."

 

 

 

Various courts, including here in New York often ruled against different films using the "of no redeeming social value" standard.The thing that put the stake in the heart of film censorship was the U.S. Supreme Court ruling that, like books, films were a form of "free speech" and thus were protected under the First amendment of the Constitution.

 

From that point on it was virtually impossible for a government body to ban or censor films.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

© 2022 Turner Classic Movies Inc. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...