Pink Narcissus

Watch: Pink Narcissus

10/21/19881h 9m

Premiere Release (US)

~ A unique experience in visual fantasy! ~

Overview:

An outrageous erotic poem focusing on the daydreams of a beautiful boy prostitute who, from the seclusion of his ultra-kitsch apartment, conceives a series of interlinked narcissistic fantasies populated by matadors, dancing boys, slaves, and leather-clad bikers.

Director:

James Bidgood

Status:

Released

Language:

English

Buget:

$27,000.00

Revenue:

$0.00

Key words:

dreams
prostitution
gay erotica
gay theme

Cast

Bobby Kendall

~ as ~

Pan

Don Brooks

~ as ~

Angel / Times Square Hustler / Hippie

Charles Ludlam

~ as ~

Salesman / Bar owner / Blind man / Pizza maker / Hindu dancer (uncredited)

Arthur Williams

~ as ~

John

Don Kvares

~ as ~

Drag Queen

Eddie Barton

~ as ~

Larry Rey

~ as ~

Priest

Harvey Yerkes

~ as ~

Don Stephens

~ as ~

View full cast & crew

Reviews (1)

CinemaSerf
Written 1 year(s) ago
7
Whilst Mussorgsky's "Pictures at an Exhibition" is a superb score for this, I can't help but wonder what he'd have thought if he were to have seen how it was used in this end product! Essentially it's a series of increasingly wet dreams from the young "Pan" (Bobby Kendall). Handsome, lithe and totally self-confident, this young man uses the next hour to live out some of his fairly graphically depicted sexual fantasies with toreadors, lads in leather, cottaging, slaves - indeed just about every fetish that he could wish for. It's riddled with symbolism, too. From the embryonic chrysalis at the start through to the denouement that rather concludes the life-cycle in a fitting fashion. Nature features extensively. Flora, fauna, rain, sunshine and the flickering wings of a butterfly help convey the young man on his journey (around what is clearly just one single apartment) and maintain a flowing momentum that is erotically charged, but surprisingly - not as overtly as I was expecting. I suppose the censors still had an hand in what was allowed and what wasn't even in 1971! I couldn't quite decide whether this is a production that needs or doesn't need restoration. The vibrancy of the colours and imagery all too often bleeds and loses focus. At times that works seductively, but I found that mostly it rather detracts from the focus and makes the film quite difficult to watch and the images to distinguish. I've never seen something like this in English language cinema before and it does raise a few questions for you to ponder about the fleetingness of life as we watch things of beauty and danger overlap, evolve and...