Rating: 
Summary: Bitter and bad.
Review: This is the only movie I have ever seen that has a bibliography in the credits. The bibliography mentions writers like Roland Barthes and Simone de Beauvoir who might be able to explain the content of this film since nothing in the film itself explains why anybody would make such a disgusting, bitter movie or what this inhuman spectacle could possibly mean.I doubt those writers can accomplish what the director failed to accomplish and redeem this film. I have never seen anything as awful and life negating as this movie. And its no wonder. I have never been an active member of Hitler's SS. Only the cruelest and most sadistic moron could enjoy this movie. It is repugnant and rejects every decency of which man is capable. There is no reason to watch this movie. Only if you are like me, all these warnings will only serve to make you search out the video cassette, thinking, "Damn, how bad could it be?" I had to cover my eyes over some of it and I am not a squeemish person. This movie is really an atrocity. "Nothing is shocking," a lot of people say, but this movie shocks and its not a good shock. Watching this movie is like being in hell. It really is. If you are smart you will avoid it. At least be kind and watch it alone. Do not subject your friends or loved ones to this filth.
Rating: 
Summary: Crude yet profound!
Review: Marquise de Sade's work the 120 days of Sodom is a truly demented piece of literature. Pasolini managed to make the movie not quite as disturbing and even make it somewhat pertinent. He brings up the point that absolute power corrupts. The men in charge have total control over their subjects. However, power is apparently not enough and through their boredom, they conjure up many demented games and vices.
Rating: 
Summary: A Brave Film about Profound Cruelty
Review: This film goes to the heart of the times we live in. It is about cruelty in the most profound and disturbing sense - the atrocious, ugly things we know of and read in the paper everyday, but somehow can't fathom. Art is the only tool that allows us both understanding and the possibility of moral and social reponse. Some think this is a perverse, even evil film - but they are deeply mistaken. It is indeed about evil - it is also about the ability of the artist to look at evil and give it definition and deny it its mystery. If we feel violatesd by this, it's because we are denied the comfort of ignorance. At its center, Salo is a film of the highest moral order. In the century to come, it will be better understood. And its courage will be appreciated
Rating:
Summary: Circle of sadism
Review: Based on the Marquis de Sade, this movie takes the audience on a tour of sadism, although Pasolini himself was not a true sadist, he sure portrayed it well. If you've ever read de Sade then you know what you're in for, if not be prepared to cringe at this wonderfully made film. Weak bellies not allowed!
Rating:
Summary: You'll Only Watch It Once...
Review: This brutal, beautiful film is not meant for the casual viewer. In trying to indict the fascists of his home country,Pasolini has been (wrongly)accused of glamorizing their degradation of things human. I saw this film in the theatre on it's US release. No one with a weak stomach should consider this film. Anyone, however, with a strong interest in art as a means of political expression,flawed or not, should see this. If Heller's CATCH-22 points out the utter lunacy of war in a fanciful way, then Pasolini's film is the opposite side of that-it will make you cringe at the depravity visited upon the victims of sadistic torture. What was Pasolini's point? Perhaps he wanted to push us to think about what we refuse to consider is being done for us as well as to us. If you can take it, you'll never watch a film that can equal it's ability to disturb...
Rating:
Summary: Must not be ignored
Review: "Salo" is one of the most controversial and debatable films of the century. Pasolini directed a film which, after viewing, raises many questions, but offers few answers. It is an uncompromising film of perversion, but it's not exploitive - Pasolini is trying to say something about the goverment, and how it has treated him and his people. He is also making a movie on DeSade's "120 days of Sodom". "Salo" is not for everyone, and stars go down because I can't really recommend it to anyone except those looking for a very debatable film of what it is trying to say, and those who have the stomach for it. Yes, it is one of the most depraved films ever, but without resorting to shock as just a gross-out factor like "Pink Flamingos" did, the scenes which do shock, like the climatic torture scenes, come off very brillant credit to Pasolini's direction and choice of music, and produces a very chilling effect which to me has never been matched in any other film ever. The sets are very beautiful and there is a rumbling effect that can be heard in the background which make shocking scenes even more chilling. So in final words, if you have the stomach for the film, and looking for a film to think about, check this film out. Watch it with an open mind. It's a film like Pasolini's mysterious death that lets you decide your own answers to the questions you ask.
Rating:
Summary: trash, trash, trash!
Review: If you want to see a purely sadistic trash you'll probably love this disgusting movie. If you not, please pay attention: THIS IS NOT A SERIOUS MOVIE ABOUT FASCISM, OR TOTALITARIANISM, OR OPRESSION, OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. There's a lot of serious good movies about this subject, like those by Costa Gravas, for instance. Pasolini made a exercise in perversity here. Please, follow my advice: Don`t see this horrible piece of trash. Actually, this film was banished from most countries, with good reason.
Rating:
Summary: Pasolini had no technique for his subject.
Review: It is far too facile to envision this film as a degradation of the human spirit, Sure it is, but then degradation is all around us. For me an important question why does Pasolini utilize the realm of art to portray theses excesses the dark disgusting realms of the human spirit. What was the Vietnam War, but a molestation of children,of burning of their flesh, with no remorse,nor consciousness. Or any war for that matter. The Balkans is a great profound example, where death is a way of life. What disgusts me is that Pasolini's real disgust is his brutalization of art. His focus is on the purely clinical clean, to the state of painful boredom of his or de Sade's tale. I retrospect I don't think Pasolini had a consummate technique to realize his profound subject. In fact no artist comes to mind. Perhaps Goya his Disasters of War, or the Symphonies of Shostakovich, both as templates for the horros of the times they lived.
Rating:
Summary: A real shocker
Review: I actually saw this film in the cinema when it was released. I didn't know what it was about, but the warning outside stating the shocking scenes contained within this film, was enough for me to buy a ticket. There aren't many films that have left an impact on me, but this is definetely one of them. It's that shocking and perverse it's still banned today in quite a few countries around the world. Is there any value in a film like this? Hard to say. Let's just say it's an experience you won't soon forget.
Rating:
Summary: A stroke of the genius
Review: Truly a great film: I would place it in my Top 10, and I've seen a lot... To me as a Christian, this is about God and the man's longing for Him. What? Where do you see God in Salo? - you might ask. Well, it's really possible to make film about God, showing the opposite - the Hell. It depends on the author's approach. The Pasolini's attitude is sincere and poignant - what it lacks absolutely is cynicism.
| 
