Flaming Creatures

I'm sure I could make up something about how this is an astute commentary about sexual ethics and gender roles, but honestly I don't 'get it.' It does have some interesting surreal imagery and shot selection and the short length makes it watchable, but I didn't get much out of it.

A fascinating underground film. She/hemales, poly-gendered people and men in drag participate in an orgy, one that can disturbing in one scenes and in another a joyous celebration of multi-sexual joy. People will hate it, with no narrative and a rough production, made on damaged film and with music that can abruptly skip, but for me it is more than empty camp and has an atmosphere to it many of these works failed to have. Along with Kenneth Anger, it also sows the seeds for David Lynch.

The earthquake scene is kind of interesting, and I admire how bold this was for the time--it definitely has a place as an historical artifact. It pretty much sucks as a movie, though. Probably of interest to people who like stuff by Brakhage and Kaufman and others (I do not.)

It's good that this exists, but you probably don't need to see it twice.

Whether it's tits or dicks, Jack Smith likes 'em floppy.

Once I got over some initial misgivings, I was transfixed and fascinated by the film's charming innocence and joyfulness. It's perversely beautiful and beautifully perverse. There's love in this film, you can feel it. Those scratchy old tunes and overexposed film make it feel like a lost relic, a secret recording of secret bacchanalia. It subverts Hollywood standards of elegance while celebrating them. It's outsider art that longs to be in. Some wonderful paradoxes at play and memorable imagery.

More interesting for its obscene reputation and hard-to-find status than for its merits as an actual film. Mostly just kinda boring. There are some memorable images and motifs, but it's not entertaining or profound so it hinges on its value as shock schlock. And I can find shit eighty times more obscene on Google in five seconds so whatever.

proudly trash

Like, the Ed Wood of trashy art films, maybe? Fucking hell. Stunningly earnest and raw.

I have seen just a poor videocassette recording, but I did not found anything special or revolutionary out of it. Sure it contains explicative imaginary, though from the eyes of 2011 it did not strike much.

Pretty relentless, but feels incredibly pointless, especially the (visually and audibly) broad second half.

Esperava mais

756

feels like something bressane would do, if he decided to abandon narrative altogether. or if he got really really high.

It's 40 minutes long, and while the second half just treads water, I think the first 20 minutes are classic. I can see why this was so shocking to the establishment of its time, the sexual revolution was still in diapers and here was Jack Smith mixing hardcore tranny rape orgies with dadaesque avant-garde.

A really low quality gonzo style 43 minute movie of a not so sexy chaotic orgy involving vampires and hermaphrodites and drag queens and a relatively large dose of genitalia and sexual ambiguity (especially for 1963). So for its daring nature and chaotic qualities, I can appreciate it on some levels. But I'm gonna be honest: it's kinda boring and I watched this mostly because John Waters admires it and I think John Waters is cool. Yep

Mahu art film. I don't have anything against mahus (transvestites in Hawaiian). I just didn't think the visual power of the film was enough to interest me--although there are interesting overhead camera shots and positioning of actors. I also enjoyed the beat-up black-and-white film stock--but not enough to have a high regard for the film.