Very Cool!!!

It's easily one of the freshest, sharpest and most enjoyable films of this year.

Great movie. Not sure what people expected but I found it highly entertaining.

This is a gorgeous movie made by a gorgeous spirit.

what can i say? its like a wannabe salò meets some of the worst 80's era Jess Franco with a little bit of "we've all heard it before politics". The plot makes no sense whatsoever, the pacing is super slow, it tries way too hard to shock with dumb and pointless scenes, such as the vomiting pooping banquet orgy thing.And oh the sex on sugar scene insults my intelligence. To be fair the first 20 or so minutes were fairly entertaining and funny , but after that i just got bored.

This was the movie Makavejev made after his previous, WR:Mysteries of the Organism, got him exiled from his home country.I'm surprised this one didn't get him exiled to the moon.It is truly one of the most bizarre movies you will ever see, an orgiastic feast of sugar, blood, urine, faeces, vomit.It's a creative explosion, and ranks up there with Salo in terms of revolting content - in actual fact, it tops Salo. At least they didn't really drink urine.The story has two narratives: a beauty queen voted "best hymen" is urinated upon by a billionaire with a golden penis. A humungous black man takes her to his house inside a giant milk bottle and packs her up in a suitcase and sends her to Paris. There she has sex with a Latin singer and their genitals lock together. Somehow she ends up at a commune where men and women eat and spit food into each other's mouths, drink each other's urine and defecate onto silver dishes. The beauty queen is breast fed; indeed it seems that the purpose of the commune is to help people revert to childhood; one man is naked and has food rubbed all over his body while he urinates to the applause of his audience.The beauty queen ends up acting in an ad for chocolate sauce where she is covered, completely naked, in the stuff, writhing around as though masturbating.And I haven't even gotten to the other part of the story yet: a woman piloting a boat with Karl Marx's image on the front filled with sugary treats, luring men and boys to their death inside. At one point, in what may be the movie's most controversial scene, boys no older than twelve sit stationary while she dances almost naked, grinding her genitals on one boy's forehead.I may have little idea what all this means, but I've certainly never forgotten it, or failed to be enraptured by it.

Back in the days when I was a sapling - by which I mean I was still developing and the sap was constantly on the rise - I was always up for a good Art film. This was because it was the late 60s, and it was a good bet that I would find something in an Art film which wasn't easily available elsewhere, namely moving images of naked women. The endless quest for naked women, though not yet extinguished, has abated somewhat over the years, and I am now better able to assess Art films without such matters obscuring my judgement. And my conclusion is as follows: some of them are, indeed, art, but many of them represent their maker following a particular vision which is not necessarily obviously apparent to the audience. I am not a deep person, obscure visions do not suddenly reveal themselves in clarity to me, and Art films therefore frequently strike me as pretentious rubbish.Dusan Makavejev has certainly been among the trailblazers of personal visions, and that is the case here. I do not have the vaguest idea what he is trying to convey in this strange, almost plot-free collection of sequences, many of which seem calculated to make the audience challenge their conceptions of what can be considered acceptable viewing. The extraordinarily beautiful Carol Laure goes through a series of increasingly odd experiences until she ends up pleasuring herself while writhing around stark naked in liquid chocolate in a sequence which surprised me at how explicit it was, particularly for 1974, and especially given that it was intended for public exhibition. And this was one of the the "normal" bits. Murder, war crimes, borderline paedophilia, and bodily waste all feature as one continues trying to a) keep one's dinner down and b) figure out what it all means.I'm no wiser, but I am sure that it's not entertainment.

Staring at those three d1cks and a vag1na or two, the most of audience missed the movie. Yes, there's plenty of subtle, there are many ways to take this trip, there's an insane amount of beautiful cinematography. This movie is sweet, rotting sweet, sh1t, blood, sugar, sperm, milk, and flesh mixed in the sweet sweet flavor of life-death. The most organic, yet a masterpiece of art. This movie is simply true. And when "paperyatka" starts playing and "let's think of these things always and speak of them never" pops up, i see Makavejev more precise than Jodorowsky or Buñuel in their cuts through real, and there is a lot of background here to be understood or misunderstood, and it's a couple of steps away from those d1cks. How do you see that Lenin pipe? Isn't that beauty contest just a regular one, exaggerated to outline the clear? Your eyes really didn't water? Then we didn't see the same movie, the one I've seen was beautiful.