Login
Porcile, or known in English as 'Pigsty', is a film that surprised me in several ways and will definitely do the same to every newcomer about to watch it. First of all, when I read the description of this film, I expected the story of the man who forms a tribe of murderous cannibals to be nothing more than that said man exploring a deserted desert whilst eating what is initially animals, then transiting into humans. I also expected it to be just that for the entire runtime and rethinking that just makes me laugh, because there's so much more plot that dwells in Porcile. However, halfway through the film, I realized that this obviously isn't the plot, but I thought so in an impressed, surprised way. By then, it was enjoyable watching and I was looking forward to what else this movie would dwell on from its dyad plots and conversations, which were thought provoking. The final that deserves to be mentioned in this review is the main character in the succeeding story's ending. Though the title itself (possibly) gave it away, his conclusion was ironic and was one I never would've, under any circumstance, thought of.
Now, moving onto the acting. The performances by Franco Citti and Ninetto Davoli (rightfully named the 'faces of Pasolini's films') were per usual. When I say that, I don't mean to display their acting in a negative light and say that they're basic, but their portrayals of their characters are how they perform in MOST Pasolini films. By saying that, I believe Alberto Lionello and Ugo Tognazzi are the highlight actors of this film. They carried every scene they shared with their characters intellect and conversations, within how fascinating they'd make each one sound. Whenever one of their scenes concluded, many of their lines still remained, spiraling around in my mind. Jean-Pierre Léaud, Pierre Clémenti, and Anne Wiazemsky were individually well-endowed, but it was Lionello and Tognazzi who were most excellent and raw.
The imagery of Porcile was decent, but the aesthetics of Pasolini's other films are much more pleasing and delightful. This doesn't mean I don't think there's some truly beautiful shots in this film, such as when Ida and Julian are walking next to a gigantic fountain (placed behind an enormous mansion), and towards the very end when Ninetto Davoli and (what I believe is) Alberto Lionello are in deep discussion about the fate Julian was subjected to. The writing was also wonderful, but it's how most Pasolini films are written.
Despite the positive things I can say about Porcile, the real-let downs were the plots. Yes, I'm aware I said in my first paragraph that halfway through it was enjoyable, but as someone who loves the way Pasolini makes his stories, these two were simply weak and out of place with each other. Such as, in one bit a cannibal is either devouring or dispatching a human, and in another Lionello and Tognazzi are having an intellectually high conversation. See what I'm saying? The plots don't correlate with each other and that's what made Porcile weak, alongside the plot in itself. But on a positive note, I was looking forward to how Porcile was expanding, and by the mid-section the stories became more tolerable; as if more than just the plot was carrying this movie.
In conclusion, Porcile was an interesting film despite the plot not being the best part about it. If I'm being honest it's one I wouldn't recommend but that won't let me stop people from not seeing it by saying it's a terrible film, because it isn't. But this is a movie that you shouldn't feel contrived to see as there are several films from this era of Italian cinema that are more worthy of your time. And from that statement, I give Porcile a 4/10
