User Reviews

My review will be short. The low ratings of this movie have nothing to do with homophobia. In fact, had the characters been heterosexual it still would not cure what ails this movie.

The issue with this movie is the narrative. It is ostensibly three different shorts held together by a plot based on an urban legend.

As another review mentions, the movie starts really slow, you have to stick with it. It then transitions into the 2nd act which is quite interesting in part because the actors , well, they can act and hold the viewers attention.

Unfortunately, the 2nd act ends in a disjointed an unsatisfying way and leads into the final act that also features some descent acting but poor storytelling.

This movie could have been great. Several times I felt that this movie could become at least a cult classic but the director blew it.

Don't be fooled. This movie isn't too high-brow,far from it. There is one, and only one reason to watch and that is to see how badly the opportunity to make a very good movie was squandered.

"Pornography: A Thriller" starts off as a story about Mark Anton (Jared Grey), a porn star trying to get out of the biz, whose last gig turns out to be the last time he's seen, ever. Fifteen years later Michael (Matthew Montgomery), a writer working on a history of gay porn, and his boyfriend, move into a "New York City" apartment that becomes less and less fabulous as Michael uncovers clues—like "old" camera mounts that just happen to fit modern camcorders— that link it to Mark Anton's disappearance. Things get really spooky until—cut to Los Angeles, where present day porn icon Matt Stevens (Pete Scherer) is determined to make "The Mark Anton Story," surprised to discover Anton was a real person when the whole story came to him in a dream. Weird! Things get weirder as the movie goes into production and Stevens becomes unhinged. One of his stars mysteriously disappears. He starts seeing things. Reality and fantasy become blurred. Will re-enacting Mark Anton's end also be the demise of Matt Stevens? Would some full-frontal nudity help?

Writer-director David Kittredge had some promising ideas for three possible movies. Unfortunately, he failed to finish any of them and tried to cover it up by imitating David Lynch. Several actors occupy dual roles, most prominently Walter Delmar as Michael's boyfriend and Stevens' co-star/lover. Michael receives mysterious photos in the mail, the same photos that were taken by Anton, who was studying photography at the time he disappeared. Then Michael receives photos relating to Anton's murder, and after that, photos of himself in his apartment looking at these photos. There is a ring with a symbol on it, a symbol that links to some underground snuff film producer that may or may not be real. People spout lines of dialog that I'm sure were meant to be profound—like Anton saying he likes doing crosswords because puzzles "have no ambiguity"—but comes off as pretentious horses---t. Viewers will also see nods to David Croenenberg's "Videodrome" and more than a few scenes reminiscent of "Saw."

Many of the people involved in making "Pornography: A Thriller" were also involved in the gay sci-fi/horror "Socket." By comparison, "Pornography" has slightly higher production values—and I emphasize slightly—with stronger acting and some moody cinematography, though much of it looks flat and cheap. Truth be told, there are actual porn videos made with more finesse, which left me wishing Kittredge and crew just collaborated with, say, the folks at Raging Stallion or Titan Media, making an experimental porn video instead of a rambling "art" movie. At least a porn movie would have a climax. Several of them, in fact.

The first half of the film is pretty exciting, let be a bit cheesy, but that's part of the genre. Then it just gets weird in a "it was just a dream - or was it?" kind of way. Boring.

I got the impression the writer didn't believe in his own script, thinking the basic story was too over the top to make it on its own. So he made a twist to save face as a serious movie-maker. Or something like that.

Sorry to be so negative about it, but just like another reviewer pointed out, this movie could have been so good with so little extra work done to it.

Technically it was well done, the acting/directing is okay too, I really just object to the script.

Okay, I love psychological thrillers. I love gay cinema. I watched this movie and couldn't figure out what in the hell was going on.

First, I couldn't tell who was who. The movie was so poorly lit that I found myself squinting to see what was going on. All of the main characters looked the same - I guess it was to link the three phases of the movie together to show the different dynamics of the same issue, but good Lord. Turn the lights up so I can distinguish between the leads.

The story was so full of holes and there was nothing intertwining the different stories. It was like they couldn't figure out what direction the movie was going in. I felt the movie should have ended 5 times before it was truly over.

I feel like hours of my life were sucked away and I will never get them back. It wasn't even a movie that was so deep that I reflect on it later. I watched it until the end and all I could say was, "What in the hell was this movie about?"

This is the first review i have written about a movie but I felt the need to share my utter disappointment with this film. I love watching gay films because a lot of them are low budget and poorly done which makes them that more interesting to watch. This film however left me lost and I spent more time trying to figure out where people were then watching the movie. It finally dawned on me that we had jumped to a completely different story all together...so glad it was made clear we were jumping stories. As one of the other reviews put it, with proper directing, this could have been a really good thriller and could have gone far. As it is now though, it just sucks and not worth your time.

While I normally enjoy pornography of all kinds when it is done in a documentary way; it is not palatable when one adds a plot which does not have a way of telling a complete story. This is that kind of film. The writer/director, apart from having an obvious love for film and its techniques and auteurs by the dozens, he only picks bits and pieces from some of his favorites, and then writes a story that should have been storyboarded, in order to even play homage to his most often used,enigmatic and "surprise/plot" directors. Hitchcock would have thought this the longest trailer in history......as a matter of fact, the movie IS a long trailer. I yearned for reason, as well as reason for casting, for lighting, for a clarity, and for ONE interesting character. What a bunch of bores the writer wrote. Who the hell cares? It sounds homophobic, but gay films must learn to realize that the serious subjects are always going to deal with "gay" and its problems, and MUST not try and take itself seriously. Lesbian films succeed because they are willing to take chances with honesty and anti heterosexual subjects.

A plot that doesn't sustain any of its premises, and, some artificial, trivial, and, rather unnecessary assemblage of so called 'controversial' situations, we can hardly bare enough to care, before even completing to watch just the first half of this disjointed film. Here, we are never even close to an auteur film's atmosphere, or that of a Lynch's type of 'narrative construction',rather, we are closer to the likes of some lurid tale, confusingly and quickly put together,and, bragging some pretentiousness! And, this is unintentionally(i hope!)carrying the responsibility to cheat even more audiences over the meanings of a truly inspired,and, inspiring, highly artistic, personal piece of film work, with, in this case, whatever preposterous mix of Gay sub culture and wrecked psychological over tones, you may regret trying to follow in the lousy developments,and, dialog, infesting this movie and its lack of firm direction or basic film rules,featuring just some acting that drags performances into almost juvenile portrays,bringing most players down to such a misleading, unfocused state where indicated acting may just come as handy,as it is indeed,the over all,general confusion, and, profane misinterpretation of the failed intents of this production! I can be making excuses for low budgeting,technical difficulties, and, all the detriments that Independent Cinema must unarguably face today to even make it to the completion of a project,but, i cannot making excuses when to hide the lack of identity, and, real personal vision of products, such as this one,someone would use the name "Lynch" as, just an excuse to sell some slow moving, undefined material, as artistically challenging, because that, "Pornography"is not! I personally resented some of the "over heated","tweaked" sequences, written more like keeping in mind a conversation between raunchy costumers of some seedy sex house, rather than having in mind a film that would like to introduce us to a dark thriller with stylish tones! "Pornography"sadly kept reminding me of how transparent were becoming, all of a sudden, the radical but simply basic lines and substantial differences,within such a mess, and, instead,the electrifying, galvanizing experience someone could still get by watching(and,i would quite frankly recommend dearly "re-watching" many greater films, to all of those folks still having doubts on whether,this film has nothing merely even resembling the works of Lynch and of other talented filmmakers, or not, since we should all, at least, be able to understand, how hard it is to accomplish even just a mere impression of those contemporary masters' work, and, with such different creative ideas, cultural back ground's, talent,and,imagination, they must be working with!),something like "Lost Highway" or "Mulholland Drive",or even the out standing works of another great European director, whose name, someone even dared to make, when talking about "Pornography"! Especially unsuitable in this case,in fact, it was to read or hear cited by some, at the time of this film's premiere,the name of extraordinary director, Michelangelo Antonioni (well known in the US, especially,for the frenzy, the trend he established so unforgettably, with the mesmerizing mystery,and virtuoso script,and camera work,carrying his intense,unique "Blow Up"released by MGM back in 1967, when there was still someone truly caring for the cultural faith of this Country),who indeed made also a phenomenal movie about an unusual,unexplainable disappearance of a key character, bringing up events, eventually going much deeper inside the interiors,and "the reality", to the point of introducing,a completely new story,from the one the movie had originally started with! That glorious achievement "L'Avventura",was shot in Italy in early 1960,and,still gives incredible thought provoking thrills,and, many reasons for collective meditations over the never ending links between filmmaking,and representation of relationships, cheating, alienation, and, other social commentaries,including last,but, not least,a disease we all may experience and share at various levels today, called incommunicable feelings'despair. Again, quite frankly, after having watched such ineptitude,just the thought of such directors,and, subjects,feels out of place and utterly embarrassing, since Antonioni's,and, Lynch's works, in my opinion,should just not even be mentioned, when going through the motions of "Pornography", ultimately, becoming only just fine example of how lost and awry a movie project with, maybe even too many ambitions, considering the material's potentials, may so tragically turn out to be,at the end. I could also object that Lynch has never even edited a nonsense shot,like the many abominable ones we have gotta sit through here, but, at the contrary, how there's always plenty of heartfelt,visionary,meditative moments,and, insightful,layered content, able to introduce anyone into a new World, new experiences,and, philosophical journeys opening up new horizons to our lives and minds. But, why shall i even bother to go on? Would i be doing any good? I obviously don't have anything against daring, independent producers and directors,quite, at the contrary, love and try to route for, prize, and, always welcome all the works of new talented folks, even when not all completely accomplished, such as the films of P.T. Anderson,but, even those of Steve McQueen,John Cameron Mitchell,Van Sant,or of Todd Verow,and, Everett Lewis,for example,whose,movies are never less than compelling, but, always taking us through a creative,emotional,and spiritual journey of discovery! In fact, i have even bought and watched "Pornography",in its full entirety, before judging it so harshly! However, it did raise only one important moral question,and, that was just the absurd,but, painfully true misconception, today convincing many to believe, in good or bad faith, to be watching art films,instead of just boring, misguided,and tawdry attempts at exploitative, sporadic,utterly sensationalistic filmmaking.

David Kittredge has style - it is a style that inhabits a number of other really fine writers and directors as Christopher Nolan (Memento), David Lynch (Blue Velvet, Twin Peaks, Mulholland Drive etc), Claude Chabrol (Chloe), Alain Resnais (Last Year at Marienbad, etc). Good company, this, and it would seem that given some time to develop his technique and perhaps seek the assistance of some other script doctors he will likely become an important artist in film. In PORNOGRAPHY: A THRILLER he comes close, but it seems like the finished product was rushed to screen before the kinks were ironed out.

There are three interweaving stories in this movie about the male pornography business. It begins with a well-known Los Angeles porn actor Mark Anton (Jared Gray) who is talked into a final film deal where he will make a large amount of money for a one night stand, but the one night stand seems to be a snuff film project with Mark interviewed in the dark by a crazed killer. Jump 14 years ahead to New York City and Michael (Matthew Montgomery) and his partner William (Walter Delmar) move into a large apartment in Brooklyn. Michael is doing research on a book on pornography and in the process receives strange photographs in the mail that lead to the discovery of the presence of evidence that video cameras had at one time been installed in their apartment, videos they come to discover show the 'snuff film' of Mark Anton! The discovery leas to dire consequences. The third story involves porn star Matt Stevens (Peter Scherer) who out of a dream state begins writing then directing and casting a film called 'The Mark Anton Story' in which Matt will play the role of Mark Anton! In the film his partner Jason (Walter Delmar) is a participant in the horror that follows and instead of a film about the death of Mark Anton no one is able to tell where reality stops and thriller starts. It is a classical dilemma for the audience of the conundrum 'What is real'?

The cast is well trained and there are some cameos by Wyatt Fenner and Rasool J'Han that are particularly fine. Give David Kittredge some time and he may become an important figure in cinema!

This movie was a HUGE snoozer! It was so boring that I could hardly keep my eyes open. The main character was about as exciting as watching grass grow. He is no actor......performance was cardboard! I guess he thought monotone acting was mysterious! Not much of a thriller either. I'll admit I was on the edge of my seat, not because I was scared but because I was one step away from running away. Don't waste your time!!!

This is an excellent, enticing and thought-provoking movie that doesn't infantilize and spoon-feed the audience like most of the assembly-line crap that is now coming out of the film industry. This movie gets right at the lizard brain, without apologies, and challenges the viewer--gay or heterosexual, male or female--to look at and tolerate the darker, naked aspects of the human condition. It breaks my heart and frustrates me to no end that that this film will likely not reach as broad an audience and receive the level of attention and acclaim it deserves--as it undoubtedly would if the porn industry depicted were heterosexual--because too many members of our society are still too fearful to explore different realms and find the underlying commonalities.

Slow and boring — a badly told story: are the two objections reviewers here reiterate in different ways over and over. And yet, the film I saw couldn't be more enticing. PORNOGRAPHY: A THRILLER is methodical, character driven, but certainly not boring; and considering its ambitious three part narrative, I'd say this seamlessly rendered film ends up being the engaging puzzle it was intended to be. Writer/director, David Kittredge has clearly thought about his subject long and hard, for the kind of cubist back and forth he's cooked up brilliantly exploits thriller hooks to explore the relationship between hardcore sex acted for the camera and the imagination of those who get off on watching it. Even with the ghost of David Lynch in obvious attendance, Kittredge's thriller plot does not seem stolen or manufactured, as others would have you think; it reflect the artist's ambiguous relationship to the subject. The film is saying that pornography arouses us, body and mind, with temptation and dread; two sides of the same coin. Here's a gay film that truly challenges its audience to think. No gay bar clichés, no stupid, camp posturing pandering to a marketable demographic. If someone says this is boring or not well done, it means the film went over their heads.