>In 1985, the hardcore version of Caligula was broadcast in France on Canal+, making it the first film with unsimulated sex scenes ever shown on French television. The film, which had been broadcast as a test, became the starting point of Canal+'s tradition of showing one pornographic film at midnight every month.
What else did they show?
Dunno, but it looks kino
https://www.leparisien.fr/societe/du-carre-blanc-au-film-porno-de-canal-une-breve-histoire-du-sexe-a-la-television-30-10-2021-C3ALWXK5GBDUJBTL3IHGKL4YYY.php
https://www.liberation.fr/debats/2019/10/14/a-la-recherche-du-porno-perdu_1811200/
>What else did they show?
This
homosexual ass shit
Is that the guy from Blue Thunder?
>Yo Lil Donnie, I just stuck my hand up your ass. How bout them apples?
Basic porn slop.
>Italians influencing the French to be even bigger coomers
Based
Also young Helen Mirren's BIG breasts OOOOOOO
She's smoking hot in that film. Love her bored look as she gets nailed in doggie. Shit movie though. Would not willingly sit through the whole thing again.
Why are her boobs so saggy?
That's how they're supposed to look
No bra.
Real large breasts are heavy. You wouldn’t know because yours are not made of breast tissue but are hormone induced gynecomastia.
Nta but some would say that because you can’t make a post without referencing .01% of the population, you’re obsessed and projecting.
I had gyno and those breasts are more like solid blocks than girls jiggly breasts. getting my b***hbreasts cut off really raised my quality of life.
A bit of sag is classy and kino
Because they are large. That's how boobs look and Mirren has prime breasts.
>clueless tranime eunuch
Gb2 pedocord
She's got some heavy hangers.
Kanna's puffy dicky
She's british
Nah, she's Russian
All big naturals are going to have a bit of sag to them.
because they're real and they're spectacular
They released an Ultimate Cut of this recently fyi
I want to know what happened to this chick after Caligula killed her hubby.
Pretty sure he had her exiled to Spain after Macro's death.
do you mean actual porn movies or movies that has some pornographic elements
Uncut Caligula > cut Caligula > Ultimate Caligula
impossible, my gf tells me that cut is always better than uncut
Your gf is moronic and doesn't like having a greatly increased rate of orgasm. Do not trust her with your sons.
Is it porn first or movie first?
Seems like movie first. In the uncut version you see a few scenes of actual penetration and more extended scenes of oral sex. Seems like at the end a guy nuts in a woman's mouth as well. Call me uncultured but the inclusion of uncensored and unsimulated sex scenes in a film just seems to be to be an attempt to appeal to people who think they appreciate 'art' and consider themselves too high brow to just watch porn to get off.
To quote Orson Welles when Dick Cavett asked him whether a masterpiece porn film could ever be made…
>”i think it could only be a masterpiece of pornography, not a masterpiece which was pornographic, if you understand what I mean. In other words if what you’re after is yo excite people sexually, overexcite them or stimulate them, then it should be possible to make a film which is exciting, and therefore a masterpiece of excitation, but you cannot make a film masterpiece which is pornographic because the material is antipathetic to the film. You can get as dirty as you want but not also excite people because exciting people during the course of a story, exciting them sexually, is changing the subject so completely, that you have no more narrative form.”
Well said
>opens goon folder and puts on vr headset
>Seems like movie first. In the uncut version you see a few scenes of actual penetration and more extended scenes of oral sex. Seems like at the end a guy nuts in a woman's mouth as well. Call me uncultured but the inclusion of uncensored and unsimulated sex scenes in a film just seems to be to be an attempt to appeal to people who think they appreciate 'art' and consider themselves too high brow to just watch porn to get off.
The movie was supposed to be based on a script by Gore Vidal, maybe in the stule if I, Claudius.
Then the film was given a much larger budget, due to the set designer who hot hired, and the cast.
Tinto Brass got hired, and presumably made the film more pornographic.
Helen Mirren made some comment about the film being about murder genitals.
Mirren and the well known actors like O’Toole and McDowell weren’t supposedly involved in the shooting of the actual porn sequences, so the actual Tinto Brass footage must still have been close to porn.
The pornographic sequences were shot by Bob Guccione, after the regular crew went home for the night.
Gore Vidal sued to have his name removed from the film, since the film fidn’t follow his script, but after seeing some films made from Vidal’s writing, I suspect the movie would have been shit if it gad followed Vidal’s script.
There was supposedly an original cut of the film that was close to an hour longer than the current longest cuts of the film, but most people who have seen the long cut saw a cut that was either shown at private screenings, or likely illicitly copied onto 16mm and smuggled out of one of the film processing companies.
The long cut was supposedly way more pornographic and was not released for fear of prosecution.
I presume it’s still hidden in a private collection somewhere.
As for the finished film, there are multiple different cuts, with different original versions for the UK, Australia, Italy, the USA.
>The long cut was supposedly way more pornographic and was not released for fear of prosecution.
RELEASE THE LONG CUT!
I thought Caligula was one of the prime examples of the mafia trying to exert their influence onto Hollywood and the resulting clusterfrick was due to them forcing stupid decisions that no one could say no to
>I thought Caligula was one of the prime examples of the mafia trying to exert their influence onto hollywood and the resulting clusterfrick was due to them forcing stupid decisions that no one could say no to
Helen Mirren is descended from Russian nobility.
Peter O’Toole, and Malcolm McDowell were both major actors.
“Someone” might have bern trying to force “Porn” on the general populace, but it wasn’t a bunch of “poor” Italian mobsters.
The period saw the end of a bunch of obscenity laws, which had caused books like Moll Flanders to be restricted in the USA and UK, and Italy, but the “Golden Age of Porn” basically got quashed in the mainstream when Reagan and Thatcher took over in the USA and Britain.
I’m not really sad about it in most cases.
Even during the “Golden Age of Porn” most of the major porn movies were crap, and directed by people who had no directing skill.
A movie. The producers had to add unrelated porn scenes because the directors version wasn't porno enough.
I don't watch movies with nudity in them
Based.
It's porn pretending to be a real film. Never watching it in its entirety because I'm not fricked in the head.
Historybros, did they actually have a big moving wall on wheels that had spinning blades to chop people up like something out of a Saw flick?
It's real.
This is the dumbest shit I've seen all week
Zoomies will never understand the before times, when we didn't have mobile phones and the internet and you had to make your own fun outside
kids are still outside causing havoc at least here, but what does that has to do with stupid overly complicated apple gathering machine?
less options = more elaborate plans
You're responding to a bot post.
wasted dubs
so when there's 4 it's called quads. and even more it's 4 of 4 so it's quad quads lurk a little more and you'll fit right in anon
Why are you avoiding the mirror?
imagine if one of the extras with the fans fell off
>imagine if one of the extras with the fans fell off
why... why are there people holding fans? what are they even doing
The reshoots for this scene killed hundreds of extras
They had those kinds of machinery in ancient rome?
absolutely like those bullshit eagle and bear holocaust stories.
Why didn't Hitler build one of these?
blew his budget on masturbation machines and holocoasters
This part is just incredible, I've forgotten literally everything else that happens in the movie
This looks cool as frick. The Roman Empire was awesome
I don’t know specifically but the Romans did have machinery and it was employed by the wealthy for frivolity
So yes
Augustus had boats with wheels to simulate navel battles in the colosseum
>navel battles
Sounds gay as frick.
It was on a boat, of course it's gay.
The Roman Empire had a level of technology that is difficult for modern humans to understand. Not because it's too complex or that we are incapable of imagining technology of that level. No, the reason modern humans struggle to understand their level of technology is because it was almost wholly WASTED. They had steam engines, but there was no industrial revolution. They understood hydraulics. Yet there was no mechanized construction. They had clockwork machines but built no computers or calculators. They even understood ELECTRICITY, of all marvels, and yet they did nothing with it! They made TOYS and little amusements. They could have created a society of unimaginable progress, but they didn't.
Why? Because to the upper class, the wealthy, the 1%, they didn't NEED to. They had steam engines? So what. Why bother with that when you can throw slaves at a problem. For the rich the outcome is the same. Food and lots of it. They had clockwork machinery and advanced mathematics? Why build a calculator when you can ask a slave to calculate for you. In the end, it's all the same. The wealthy elite of Rome were all poisoned by lead and leisure. They held ALL the power and could envision nothing better than fricking, feasting, and torturing other humans. If you read about some crazy marvel of technology that the Romans are rumored to have had just know that they very likely DID have that. It just didn't matter anywhere else in their society because the rich people in charge were too brain-rotted to do anything with it besides shove it up a slaves ass.
Yeah so much better nowadays where everyone is constantly staring at a little black box in their hand and all of our food is saturated with chemicals
Are you two braindead? The societies of today are definitely advancing, even if not every member of those societies are contributing to technology. You wake up every morning and there's new tech available that makes your life easier and it's being shared to the masses. That' different than elites making toys for themselves while commoners live like animals
>You wake up every morning and there's new tech available that makes your life easier
Like what?
goon caves
Dogecoin
Just because you aren't out buying things every day that doesn't mean there aren't new things to make consumer's lives easier being produced. It's not practical for everyone to own everything but the release things that improve quality of life happens at lightspeed compared to the time of ancient Rome. Even if you exclude comsumer level releases there are utilities and other services that you benefit from that are implementing those things in order to provide better services to you.
>You wake up every morning and there's new tech available that makes your life easier and it's being shared to the masses.
Name 6 times this has happened this week
How is that any different to today? You have humanity's entire wealth of knowledge at your fingertips as you read this and what are you doing with it?
> They had steam engines,
this plebbit shit again.
No they didn't have steam engines moron.
Toy that slightly moves with steam is not a steam engine. Even if they somehow had one it still would not be enough to create industrial revolution because of other inventions that they lacked.
Same applies to clockwork machines.
I swear rome worshipping troons are plebbit cucks of history.
>No
>And even if they did, not enough
>And even if it was, so what
>And even if
Wow.
??
your moronic post does not even make sense moronic romantroony.
First point was that they didn't invent steam engine. And second point was that even if they invented it it would not result in industrial revolution so anon's point that they wasted technology was mronic.
>Nuh uh!
>So what!?
>Doesn't matter!
>Not their fault!
>They can do what they want!
>You're a moron!
It's... uncanny~
you are getting desparate moronic reddit troon.
Posting same lazy nonsense is not an argument.
Crazy how they translated this from the original Hebrew.
Seethe more g*rmcuck.
lmao germanics actually built steam engine and actually startted industrial revolution. Go jerk of to your troony emperors homosexual.
OK Hanz. Its nice of Muhammad to look after your wife's daughter while you are busy posting on Cinemaphile.
> Its nice of Muhammad
romans already had arab emperor.
Very globohomosexual of them.
Nice non-argument btw shitskin.
>plebbit
>plebbit
>plebbit
Someone is obsessed, have you thought about going back?
>n-no u go back
you are not fooling anyone troon
>They achieved the same level of expertice on clockwork like devices as the reinassesance
no they didn't moronic homosexual.
There never was a clockwork clock made by them. Best you have is antikythera mechanism, which is not roman and which was not clockwork
to you
>Same applies to clockwork machines.
They achieved the same level of expertice on clockwork like devices as the reinassesance had, the roman could have gone the punk way if they hadn't been lazy homosexuals
It would have been a reverse slippery slope
not really too impractical and weak for that.
There were Roman factories, using hydraulic power, to run continuous production machinery, for cutting stone, and other large scale, difficult, manual labor jobs.
A lot of the techniques likely survived in one form or another thru the “Dark Ages”, and became the basis for early medieval technology, including the mechanical forging hammers used to produce wrought iron, and the systems eventually used to process old rags into pulp for producing paper.
yes but hydraulic power is far cry from steam engine and it's full potential.
Those technologies not only survived in dark ages but medieval improved on roman technology, especially metallurgy and glass which were foundation of future industrial revolution.
There were roman steam engines used to power automatons and other “amusements” in various temples.
Hydraulic power is arguably way more efficient than steam power, as far as resources used.
Large scale machinery, running continuous saws or hammers, or pumps for pumping sea water to refine salt, are hardly minor industrial endeavors.
Up until maybe 100 years ago, there were plenty of glass works that still had glass blowers hand blowing glass milk bottles, and sheet glass.
There were supposedly far fewer people alive during the Roman Empire, so even if you could increase productivity, there was little advantage in many cases, since the market for the goods wouldn’t have been large enough.
>There were roman steam engines used to power automatons and other “amusements
no they were primitive toys
>Hydraulic power is arguably way more efficient than steam power
not really, also it's impractical.
>Large scale machinery
romans didn't have this.
>There were supposedly far fewer people alive during the Roman Empire
irrelevant, they had more people then british that's for sure.
What they lacked was practical and working steam engine, plus metallurgy to contain it without exploding, also economy that's not slave based and multiple other things. Rome was never industiralising.
https://www.worldhistory.org/article/907/roman-mills/
Another thing they stole rom the greeks
I don't know what you are trying to prove with that link.
It's not even relevant to my post.
None of those are steam powered machines and they are more impractical then them. Middle ages improved on those machines but that didn't cause industrial revolution.
Steam power existed, the Romans just didn’t find it practical, when water power could be used instead.
“Industrial” manufacture, equivalent to the early Industrial revolution in Britain, existed during the later Roman Empire, if not during the early Roman empire.
The romans used aqueducts to transport water, which could then supply public and private residences with water, as well as public baths.
These aqueducts were also used yo supply water to water wheels, which then powered mills, which could grind grain, or cut stone, or grind ore, or cut timber or stone, etc.
the mills weren’t necessarily a single wheel and grindstone, the mills were sometimes built in succession, with multiple wheels, for massive industrial production.
Sorry, forgot link.
http://researchingfoodhistory.blogspot.com/2014/10/barbegal-super-roman-flour-mill-complex.html?m=1
Another link.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbegal_aqueduct_and_mills
why didnt they accelerate like the world did in the industrial revv
>why didnt they accelerate like the world did in the industrial revv
Most of these complexes date to the Late Roman Empire.
The split up of the Roman Empire in yo East and West, might have caused issues, resulting in shutdown if trade wasn’t needed.
There were also plagues, and invasions from “barbarian” tribes.
Destruction of infrastructure is common during wartime, and it’s possible there weren’t knowledgable individuals yo rebuild the works if partially destroyed.
most of this complexes can't cause industrial revolution. medieval societies developed these watermill even more plus windmills but it didn't usher industrialisation moron
>most of this complexes can't cause industrial revolution. medieval societies developed these watermill even more plus windmills but it didn't usher industrialisation moron
Yes it did you stupid idiot.
During the midfle ages, iron was produced in standardized bars, in mechanized forges.
These standardized iron bars were then exported to blacksmiths in areas without iron ore, or without the labor or knowledge to refine the ore into iron.
Cloth was also produced to standard widths for export.
During the Roman Empire, glass was produced in large batches in certain areas, and this glass was exported to various areas of the empire, were local artisans melted and shaped and formed the glass to local needs and uses.
During the Middle Ages, when trade ceased or was minimal, local artisans had to re-melt and recycle broken glass, because they couldn’t acquire new “raw” glass, and they didn’t know how to produce the glass from raw materials.
no it didn't moronic Troon. medieval glass making was much superior to roman but that didn't end in industrialization which happened 3 centuries after middle ages moron
>no it didn't moronic Troon. medieval glass making was much superior to roman but that didn't end in industrialization which happened 3 centuries after middle ages moron
Glass production in Europe did not recover to significant quantities in Europe, till the later middle ages, or renaissance, from were glass production had been during the late Roman Empire.
http://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/67862
quantity is not useful when quality is needed. you don't know what you are talking about
your blog does not even compare quantities
because you can't start industrial revolution of such scale with watermill that anon is moronic homosexual
tech doesn't develop simply because it can. we could be mining asteroids right now, but we're not. advancement requires a will to advance, and most societies have a will to stagnate because its will is determined by the elites, stagnation maintains the status quo, and the status quo serve the elites already. for advancement, you need the elites to want to upset the status quo, which you basically never get, and when you do it takes literally thousands of years of natural selection between societies, or it takes catastrophic societal upheavals like wars, plagues, or famines. the industrial revolution probably never happens if not for the black plague killing like 60% of the population of europe.
they also didn't have neither economy or technology for that
these are not steam machines moron. you are repeating same moronic arguments at this point.
watermill are nothing like steam machines of Victorian Era or before.
also your argument that roman industrialization was same as British is absolute lunacy and moronation. they didn't have trains moron. Their steam toys were useless and your gay watermill links are even more so
I never said these were “steam powered”.
They were large “industrial” production centers, using powered mechanically powered equipment, to replace human or animal power.
Water power was, and still is, used to power production mills, during, and after the start of the industrial revolution, in both the USA, and England, and other areas of Europe.
Wether the Roman Empire was using steam power doesn’t matter, if they had large scale production, using mechanized mills.
As for “railroads”, there were a few that existed.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diolkos
then your argument is irrelevant, because we are talking about steam engines and industrial revolution here
>Roman Empire, so even if you could increase productivity, there was little advantage in many cases, since the market for the goods wouldn’t have been large enough.
you fricking idiot. you can literally say the exact same thing about the population before the industrial revolution 300 years ago. productivity is relative the current level of productivity, not the population.
>There were Roman factories, using hydraulic power, to run continuous production machinery, for cutting stone, and other large scale, difficult, manual labor jobs.
There was?
Yes.
Sorry kid, a saw mill is not a factory.
Great post wasted on plebbitors.
more like made by a plebbitor for plebbitors like you subhuman cuck
yeah its a bit insane that nutrition and health got BETTER for the average peasant outside of Italy after the empire fell even after the chaos and devastation of the late antiquity. just goes to show how insanely top heavy the empire was.
correct
>crazy marvel of technology that the Romans are rumored to have had
Like what?
It’s really not that different from nowadays in some ways.
Advanced computing power is now used for video games and gambling.
Advanced mechanics are used for making movies, to keep the populace pacified.
good read, anon
This sort of thing happens all across history. The Greeks and Persians were doing this shit even earlier. The Chinese and Indians had all sorts of whacky shit too. The basics of electricity and steam power were probably rediscovered and lost many many times across history. There's been thousands of Da Vincis doing shit way ahead of their time, but their knowledge doesn't spread or is outright lost to time.
I suspect the real secret sauce that enabled modernity was the printing press. It's a lot harder to lose knowledge when it gets thousands of copies printed en masse and spread everywhere instead of scant copies painstakingly hand copied and kept in a couple dusty archives. And once knowledge can start seriously spreading, it can accumulate, be distilled, and applied.
Give Rome a printing press and I bet the industrial revolution would've happened 1500 years earlier.
>Give Rome a printing press
Give Socrates AI and ...
impressive levels of moronation
I'd rather have a harem of sex slaves than an iphone.
fricking colosseum was a pool for war ship battle scene
those homies have too much money
No it’s not real. There is nothing written about this and Suetonius would’ve loved to write it
I watched basic instinct yesterday and it really looks unsimulated when he eats her out. they could've put a dental dam i suppose but at that point why not just go all the way?
So he wouldn't sue them for getting cancer on the job
>one pornographic film at midnight every month
...what are some pornographic films?
>Alain dicky
They used to produce a lot of soft core porn with girls with questionable age. In Germany RTL2 used to send that shit after 10 pm every day in the 90s. Mostly lost media nowadays because society became hilariously prudish compared to the 80s and 90s.
>societyhasbecome prudish
It's a common criticism lobbed in casual conversation and it implies things that just aren't true in order to distract people from the real issue: high trust societies versus low trust ones. The time line differs per country but the same events basically happened:
age of consent in most european countries in the 70s and 80s was 12-16 and child pornography itself was considered to be the same category as 'regular' legal pornography all the way until the mid 80s when it suddenly became illegal. Almost over night, people started rejecting the idea of child pornography and law enforcement was pressured to clean it up. To back this point up, I remind you that you can still find tv shows, movies, and pop songs that reference under aged sex well into the 90s because the boomer and gen x generations essentially had absolutely no problem with under aged relationships in principle.
The real issue society had at the time with teenage relationships was specifically 'diddling' and one night stands. In contemporary useage, people assume diddling means 'to frick' or 'molest' but it's original definition is 'to trick'. People did not appreciate their children being 'tricked' into sex, or misled into a situation that devolved into temporary relationships. Sex is suppose to be a motivation for marriage, ie stable pair bonding, thus the older generation was perfectly fine with you courting their underaged daughters and sons but you had to be open about it. They heavily looked down upon one night stands and other forms of temporary relationships.
This mentality exploded and resulted in a huge backlash with the satanic panic controversies and other high profile cases of celebrities/authority figures abusing those under them being exposed. Society shifted from a high-trust one, to a low trust one, and a consequence of this is that parents started doing things to protect and shield their children in ways previous generations didnt bother with.
Ok, pedo
Black Emanuelle best Emanuelle
For me, it's Black Rock Emanuelle
For me, it's Manuel
Underrated
It's genuinely acclaimed as the best British sitcom/television show ever created. I... don't think that's "underrated?"
Que?
I learn it from a book.
Que?
You Orilly men?
>Manuel, there is too much butter
>on
>those
>trays
>He's from Barcelona
er, she doesn't really, does she..?
Doesn’t a lady frick and suck a horse in Caligula?
Isn't this Emmanuelle in America? Or does Black Emmanuelle also have a horse sex scene?
It's Emmanuelle in America, yes, which is a Black Emmanuelle film
>just jackin
monke brain scene actually inspired this scene here
>This movie was lambasted for its "racist banquet scene" for years.
>Get on the internet to see what real Pajeets do.
>It's 1000 times worse.
Temple of Doom didn't show them eat literal shit and bathe next to rotting corpses, at least.
Any other leaf bros used to jerk off to these on Showcase in the 90s?
kino times
Did it have gay sex?
Caligula is kino erotica the only other movies I can think of are Pirates & Alice in Wonderland
I hate french film so much it's unreal
>french
80s german television crime show Tatort had an episode in which 15 year old Nastassja Kinski has full frontal nudes
She's nude in To the Devil a Daughter too released the previous year.
WHAT WENT WRONG ,
Talk about a fat fricking ass jesus christ. How her ass got that fat while the rest of her is still a size 4 is mystifying.
That movie was an acid trip from beginning to end
Canada beat France to the punch CityTV was the inspiration for Civic TV in Videodrome
Someone post her breasts please I need to see them
watch Age of Consent (1969)
Good recommendation. Naked Helen in her prime and a decent movie to boot.
Naked Helen mirren makes any movie worth watch.
But only once. Any rewatch l, just jump to the naked Helen bits. Or watch a better movie with even more naked Helen like age of Consent.
cool
lmao
N-no u
only reddit troons worship that plebbit the empire of troons.
Romans loved israelites. it's thanks to them that they are all around europe.
Also your response is irrelevant to my points troon subhuman.
nta, but have sex, incel. I can see your brain rotting in real time.
>, but have sex, incel.
go back troon
Caligula didn't do anything wrong. All the degenerate stuff written about him was the ancient roman equivalent of lugenpresse fake news. The one thing he did was make a horse a senator, which showed his justified contempt of the oppositional government and was hilarious.
This. I wrote a whole paper about it in college and it was the only paper I enjoyed researching and writing
moronic revisionist bullshit.
I love this new cope that everything I don't like about sources is propaganda, everything good is true.
Some things definitely were exagerated but there is no reason to doubt that he was a degenerate homosexual.
I would argue the revisionist are the Senators who smeared his reputation. Definitely a degenerate though but no more than other Roman Emperors at the time.
It’s akshully academic consensus he was smeared by the senate and has been for hundred of years. You’re misconstrued because you get all of your history from pop culture.
academic consesus is that some things are exaggerated what you propose is that he was a good boy who did nothing wrong you disingenuous israelite.
definitely more then other emperors at that time. you have literally no source that indicates otherwise but only headcanon
Ok buddy and no one is trying to paint him as a saint im just saying it’s the equivalent of a future historian looking at all the TDS posted now and genuinely believing Donald Trump is worse than Mao
but the person I responded literally said that he did nothing worng.
You responded to me and I never said he did anything wrong and stuff he did, like ordering his army to march into the ocean to declare war on Poseidon, while looks crazy was a jab at the senate because the army he was marching was the senates personal elite army so it was a Chad humiliation move. Read a book
i know his escapades in the sea and I said that those things were exaggerated or taken out of context but meat of an argument is that he was a hedonistic freak even for his time which made propagandizing him very easy. Caligula won't frick you bro
homie dey wuz all hedoniswhateva the frick you sayin! It’s dey culcha
this
who would trust history after learning about israelites
>That scene where the women hold the midget down and start blowing him
Why were R*mans such hedonistic bawds?
How come actors looked hotter back in boomer times?
Beauty standards in the media have changed significantly from what people find attractive to what people are told to find attractive.
>Caligula
It's a good movie that unfairly gets criticized for a few brief hard-core shots, because executive producer and Penthouse publisher Bob Guccione was a Hollywood outside and wouldn't obey their commands.
Just to clarify here, Caligula is a BAD movie that includes some fairly bad porn scenes (and one okay one).
No, it's actually a pretty good flick.
This dude is based, he owns 4 rhodesian ridgebacks. They used to use those dogs to hunt lions.
>rhodesian ridgebacks
homie isn’t that the name of the dragons in Harry Potter
Yeah
No one calls pitbull owners based
those aren't pitbulls
same difference
I had a rhodie boxer cross, lovely animal. best of both breeds with none of the drawbacks (apart from dying of megacancer super early)
Guccione was likely some sort of spook handler, like Hugh Hefner, Harvey Weinstein, and Jeffrey Epstein.
There aren’t stories about him banging Penthouse Pets continuously, so he was at most, just in it for the money.
Wasn't Guccione handicapped? Don't remember ever seeing pics of him standing, always sitting.
>Wasn't Guccione handicapped? Don't remember ever seeing pics of him standing, always sitting.
I’m not sure.
Unlike Hefner, there are no stories about Guccione screwing every Playboy Playmate.
He seems to have been like a “drug dealer” who never sampled the product.
If you were some “group” running an agent, you wouldn’t want someone who couldn’t keep his dick in his pants.
you're thinking of Larry Flynt
>Canal+'s tradition of showing one pornographic film at midnight every month
They were showing one hardcore (Dorcel usually) + one softcore film each night ~15 years ago.
Some of the "softcore" films were just American three or four scene plotless hardcore films, except the dudes were wearing baggy shorts and stuff that they used together with a careful choice of angles to hide benis and bagina from view. Why the frick would anyone watch that shit
People used to genuinely make pornographic films. Not just cam shots of two people boning each other.
1985 was nearly 40 years ago.
yeah but that was back when they could sell those films cut down as softcore stuff for TV AND as hardcore stuff for video rental.
The internet killed all of that.
When I'm gooning on uppers I love watching vintage porn. A lot is 4k upscaled too. But it's crazy the production quality vs today
OP is just a moronic coomer. Cinemax is the US also showed porn at midnight but he's going about how based France is.
Lots of softcore porn didn't have a plot. That's what anon is talking about
Canal+ was a pay channel, the BBC also showed porn at 2AM but that was/is a public funded tv station.
Booben Admirren
Speak English doc we ain’t scientist
>decadent society making a movie portraying a decadent society
Degenerate filth
Degenerate kino
What happened to the new extended cut they were supposed to release?
germans had funnier content.
Which version of Caligula should I watch?
The uncensored hardcore version. McDowell is great, it has some good scenes, and the porn scenes are pretttttty good
Nice, thanks.
Is that also called the uncut version?
yep, its called Uncut or maybe Unrated. 156 minutes.
Cheers
caligula is just a pretentious hardcore porno. it literally casts porn stars.
I hope jannies are handing out bans for all the off-topic shit in this thread.