Print this article E-mail this article More articles by this author

Country: USA Distributor: Universal Director: · Fenton Bailey · Randy Barbato Cast: · Norman Mailer · Harry Reems · Linda Lovelace Related Sites: · IMDb Grade: D

Narrated by Dennis Hopper, the newly released documentary based on the 70s porn film, "Deep Throat" is a disaster on a number of accounts. First and foremost, there is no level of objectivity in the documentary and such a clearly overt liberal political agenda, that by the end of the movie I found myself more sympathetic to the Religious Right and censorship laws. The moment that solidified my stance happened somewhere between Linda Lovelace (the film's infamous star) comparing porn censorship in the US to Adolf Hitler's Nazi Germany and Harry Reems, the film's male lead, hailing "Deep Throat" as a film which exemplified a courageous and revolutionary feat. Since when is a woman giving a guy a blow job progressive or "courageous" for that matter? Isn't this all just oxymoronical. Speaking of nonsensical words, esteemed feminist Camille Paglia's use of "epical" in the same context as "Deep Throat" had my head spinning as well. There are "epic-making" events in pop culture history, but last time I checked some cheeky porn flic wasn't one of them

I retract my previous statement. For some reason, "Deep Throat" did spur a whole lot of controversy in the U.S. amongst divided groups. On the one hand you had the "artistic expressionists"/Hollywood types (think Hugh Hefner) who fancied sexual perversion because not only did it equate to a whole lot of group sex/orgies all in the name of sexual liberation, but it also capitalized on this trend in film-making to make more $$. On the other end you had the Bible thumping, extreme right Nixonites/government officials in the film, such as Keating and Parrish, who were portrayed as far from sympathetic, in their quest to hunt down and prosecute anyone involved in the production and distribution of the film. As Alan Dershowitz says in the film, the police shutting down the film was the best PR the film could have gotten and it's true. Ticket sales boomed and for a film which cost $25,000 to create and grossed over 600 million, you got to ask yourself "why, why, [and lastly] why?"

There's the obvious reason why people went and saw this film. It was daring and different and subversive and that spells "provocative" and heightens our curiosity levels. There is also the intriguing fact that the movie held mass appeal. It not only played in smutty and arty theaters in Times Square in NYC but filtered across America's heartland. Even more telling of the ill nfluence of mass media was when The New York Times dubbed "Deep Throat" porno chic, members of the Park Avenue set came a flocking to the theatres all in the name of high brow art. I take no issue with people seeing the film of their own accord and evaluating it as such, but when you start calling a film of this caliber "high art," I think you run the risk of teetering on a form of hypocrisy that is a little too self- serving.

While on the topic of self-serving, Harry Reems, has an active presence in the documentary. The now born again Christian/Real Estate agent living in Park City Utah has come a long way since his days performing in adult films. As testament to his gross transformation, at the end of the film when the credits rolled and mentioned where all the people affiliated with the film were now, my fellow filmgoers in the theatre applauded Reems. I guess he was intended as some sort of martyr figure in the documentary and in some ways, art actually reflects life, in this instance. Reems was prosecuted for starring in "Deep Throat"-almost as a last ditch attempt on the part of the government to go after the movie and the porn industry as a whole. For this, I felt bad for the man, especially as he was pretty much blacklisted in Hollywood for his affiliation with the film and this led to years of drinking and drugging. Where are socially conscious actors Warren Beatty and Jack Nicholson when you need a friend in the biz anyways?

In the end, Reems seems the one bright light of the rotting carcass that this movie's legacy spawned. Linda Lovelace came out with a tell-all book of her role in the book, Ordeal and was interviewed by Donahue and Tom Snyder in late 80s regarding the abuse she endured at the hands of her boyfriend who forced her to do "Deep Throat." Gloria Steinem, a champion for downtrodden women everywhere, (or maybe just well publicized ones), rallied to Lovelace's side comparing Lovelace's ordeal to the hostages in Iran, in the 80s. Tom Snyder didn't see the connection and neither do I.

The film has its better moments. Interview footage with "Deep Throat"'s director, Damiano, seemed the least affected and most genuine. You didn't end up loving the guy, but he also wasn't quite the pretentious, self-righteous hypocrite that everyone else in this documentary seemed to be. Dick Cavett's lines were memorable and kept the film grounded as did John Waters. I never thought I'd be saying John Waters kept this documentary a little more real for me, but that just goes to show you how one-sided this film was. To sum "Inside Deep Throat" up, in the end it came down to a disproportionate number of those being interviewed (film Industry people and social theorists/intellectuals) somehow making excuses for the film and their affiliation by rationalizing its intent as something that contributed to our social greater good vs. right-wingers wanting to inflict their evil brand of censorship. On a personal note, the biggest fault I find with most documentaries is this preoccupation with creating heroes and villains. It either dumbs generations of film-going audiences down or creates a resentful, reactionary response in those that do like to engage in free will and form their own opinions. Either way, it's a lose-lose situation, much like this film.