On unwatchable films

Last night, in the middle of a discussion, one of us brought up the film Sálo by Pier Paolo Pasolini. For those unfamiliar with Sálo, it's actually a film that's filled with...well, it's basically unwatchable. It features every extremity you can think of, doubled and tripled. Every extreme violence, every gross humiliation, every outrageous behaviour, every horrific savagery, every act that is repulsive, revulsive, disgusting, and more.

I have only read descriptions of Sálo (and from what I've read I have no intention of watching it). There were four of us (and the other two were Italians!) and whilst all of us, of course, knew about Sálo, none of us have watched it or, at least, gone past the first 20 minutes (the girl who brought it up is actually a French literature scholar, and Sálo was mentioned in the context of the Marquis de Sade). I ventured that it's apparently an allegory of Fascism, so there was some intellectual content beyond the sheer horror of its images. But while people nodded and agreed, I know we all still carried the same thought: it doesn't absolve.

I have, however, watched Peter Greenaway's The Cook, The Thief, His Wife and Her Lover. It is a film that is much tamer than Sálo but still pretty horrific - James Berardinelli opens his review with "If there's anything disgusting or grotesque that The Cook, the Thief, His Wife, and Her Lover doesn't dabble in, I'm at a loss to figure out what it is." His other comments include: "Taboos? If director Peter Greenaway has any, you can't tell by this film" and "The word "gross" was coined for this kind of stuff." (And keep in mind James Berardinelli has not watched Sálo - or at least, he hasn't reviewed it. If this is how he reacts to Cook, I wonder what he would have to say about Sálo!)

Yet, like Sálo (ostensibly), Greenaway's film carries intellectual content and views: on politics (British or otherwise), protest, societal problems, the roles of intelligentsia, citizens, the poor, the rich. Etc.

Frankly, I could just barely sit through Cook. Ok, so I'm squeamish. Why do images cause such visceral reactions? Why not any of the other senses? Why, when we hear an awful sound, does it not cause us to retch? Ok, so maybe Jonathan Crary already has the answers to those questions, but the point remains that, after watching films like Cook, while intellectually I can accept it on its merits, there is still a part of me which is deeply unsatisfied, deeply horrified and deeply outraged. So maybe I'm failing as a scholar in saying this, but, y'know: all that serious intellectual content notwithstanding, this isn't what film - watching or studying - is about.