Watch the full film on the
Welcome to Fandor. Watch thousands of award-winning films online. ×

Blue Streak1971

  • 2.8
An adroit expansion on the notion of a "blue" movie, Mark Rappaport's early short BLUE STREAK contrasts the rarified realm of classical composition with an unspoken assortment of words predisposed to human sexuality, all layered over footage of a room filled with naked women and men. At the intersection of high art and low art, Rappaport skillfully dissects the absurdity of such distinctions and brings notions otherwise undiscussed in polite society to the forefront.

Copy embed code

×

What makes this film worth watching? See All Reviews

2 members like this review

The enigmatic Mark Rappaport sets pornography and "smut" of the 70's on its ear with this witty and sardonic presentation. Healthy and youthful nudists sit elegantly in a manor house mouthing bon mots silently while explicitly dirty words and phrases fade in and fade out on the screen. Passages from pornographic books are recited in a flat monotone while a picture of nature fills the screen. You'd have to be a hedonistic sex freak to actually be turned on by this. Which is the point actually....

Picture?width=100&height=100
top reviewer

Member Reviews (4)

Picture?width=100&height=100
top reviewer

The enigmatic Mark Rappaport sets pornography and "smut" of the 70's on its ear with this witty and sardonic presentation. Healthy and youthful nudists sit elegantly in a manor house mouthing bon mots silently while explicitly dirty words and phrases fade in and fade out on the screen. Passages from pornographic books are recited in a flat monotone while a picture of nature fills the screen. You'd have to be a hedonistic sex freak to actually be turned on by this. Which is the point actually....

2 members like this review
115948.small
top reviewer

Coming on the heels of the Summer of Love and the height of the Vietnam War era, this short film may have originally seemed somewhat avant garde and a bit shocking in its explicit approach. Today, however, it seems rather dated and tediously repetitious despite its brief duration.

Ff228656fc3cffbf927e51ce21e1324c?default=https%3a%2f%2fd3uc4wuqnt61m1.cloudfront.net%2fassets%2favatars%2ffemale%2favatar f 0088
top reviewer

*I do not know the intent of the filmmaker = reviews are typically nothing but opinion and speculation. This one is no different.*

To me contrasts seem to abound in this short film, similar to Mur 19. I was much more affected by the monologues than with the portraits. What do we consider pornographic and why? When gender roles are reversed how does it change our response? Do "high brow" and "low brow", when combined, change each other? Is the mere mention of specific words or pictures of body parts enough to be considered profane or is it the action with which they are often part of? This must depend on the person observing.

I confess that during the last narration I laughed out loud. I wonder if the monologues were from the viewpoint of the same couple each time? - and I'd love to see a screening of this so that I could observe the faces of the audience and their varying reactions to certain parts of it. It may say a lot about how certain people interpret information.

To me this was a 15 minute study of the questions I've mentioned - and likely a very entertaining personality test for audiences.

99029.small
top reviewer

Looks like an example of early Passolini films. A little bland.