SEX IS...

Content -4
Quality
None Light Moderate Heavy
Language        
Violence        
Sex        
Nudity        

Release Date: May 07, 1993

Starring: Madame X, Larry Brinkin, R.
Wood Massi, & porn star Brad
Phillips (among 15 subjects
interviewed)

Genre: Documentary funded by your tax
dollars through the National
Endowment for the Arts.

Audience:

Rating: No MPAA rating

Runtime: 80 minutes

Distributor: Outsider Productions

Director: Marc Huestis

Executive Producer:

Producer:

Writer: Lawrence Helman

Address Comments To:

Content:

(Ho, Ab, A/D, H, LLL, NNN, NA, PC, SSS, VVV) Anti-biblical view of homosexuality reinforced by wide discussion of the failings of Christian faith as it relates to homosexuality, that discussion being given greater credence by one of the primary homosexual persons interviewed being some sort of a priest in a collar; discussion of the use of amyl nitrate ("poppers") as an enhancement during homosexual sex; alcohol abuse; humanist theology; homosexuality, sodomy, & sadomasochistic homosexuality advocated & displayed; numerous obscenities; extensive nudity & naked boys; equating homosexual sadomasochism to spirituality; and, acceptance of "sex workers."

Summary:

SEX IS... a talking-heads documentary about the lives of fifteen homosexuals in the San Francisco area. This despicable so-called "documentary" is actually hard-core pornography complete with graphic sex acts funded, in part, by your tax dollars through the National Endowment for the Arts.

Review:

SEX IS... a documentary about the lives of fifteen homosexuals in the San Francisco area. The interviewer takes on a number of the usual subjects including first homosexual experiences, long-term homosexual relationships, life with AIDS, life as an HIV-negative homosexual having sex with HIV-positive men, the nature of the "Bath House" experience, and the early days of homosexual freedom (and repression) in America.

SEX IS... has been funded in part by your tax dollars through the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA), but the surprising element about it is the degree of hard-core film footage intercut with the interviews, and which could only serve to titillate. It is not surprising that the NEA. (promoter of Robert Maplethorpe's sexually explicit work) would fund a film celebrating sexual deviation, but what was unexpected was the graphic extent of the "documentary" footage about the subjects' sex practices. If this film were just a garden-variety heterosexual "XXX" film these sex acts would not be allowed to be shown. The reason this "documentary" can get away with its explicit pornographic content is because its political correctness and homosexual political clout. If this film plays in your city, require your elected officials to rule on its pornographic content. Don't be deceived. This film is advocacy, not a recording of history.

In Brief: