Category Archives: Essays

PETE’S PERVERTED PIX: A MANIFESTO

Let me share some statistics with you:

  • This 2017 survey says “40% of your fellow Americans identify as kinky,” with 25% citing a specific fetish
  • This nationwide survey says “over 36% of Americans identify as having a specific kink or fetish and over 27% of Americans in a relationship have a sex act in mind that they want to introduce to their partner, but haven’t”
  • This 2026 Fast Company article claims “nearly half of people practice kink, but nontraditional sex still carries a strong stigma”
  • The Fifty Shades of Grey book trilogy, a romance series with a BDSM focus (albeit a blind and clueless depiction of the lifestyle), had sold over 150 million copies worldwide by October 2017. Its film adaptation raked in $569 million on a $40 million budget.

The success of Fifty Shades, printed upon trees tragically killed for the purpose, exposed something very odd in our culture. Apparently a lot more people than we’d imagined were starving for kink smut.

You don’t hear about kink relationships every day. You do hear about LGBTQ+ relationships. A 2025 Gallop poll says 9.3% of Americans identify as LGBTQ+. That’s the whole rainbow flag there, trans and non-binary and genderqueer and all.

It’s amazing how much time we spend fighting a worthless culture war about less than a tenth of the population. I look forward to the day of pansexual acceptance. Not because I’m a bleeding-heart liberal; I just want the dumb war over. People like different things, let’s get over it.

With that said: Go to the back of the gender spectrum closet and knock at the hidden door there, and you’ll find the BDSM closet. Gays and lesbians fight to have their lifestyle normalized, but the scary, kinky people have still years to go before they can glimpse sunlight—even though the overwhelming majority of the kinksters are straight. It’s equally amazing how at least a third of the population partakes of the exotic thrills of sadomasochism, and yet it’s an even bigger taboo to talk about.

I love taboos. They’re like sore pressure points you can lean on just a little and make everybody squirm. Sure, we’ve made some progress in pansexual acceptance, but the fact that we can’t handle a simple fetish without ridiculing it (or eroticizing it) shows we have a way to go, even as moral crusaders blow their big bazoos about men holding hands in public, before returning to their Fifty Shades copy dog-eared to the part where Christian pees on Anastasia.

BDSM pride flagIsn’t that weird in and of itself? It got me wondering, since the BDSM people mobilize for kink-lifestyle acceptance on Fetlife and have their own pride flag and everything, where is the normalized depiction of a dominant/submissive relationship in media? My quest for such a film is documented in my Medium essay “BDSM in Mainstream Cinema | Will Kink Ever Get Any Respect?

There, Secretary (2002) wins my award for “most down-to-earth depiction of power exchange relationships.” A runner-up happens to be a weirdie reviewed here as well, The Duke of Burgundy. Yes, as bizarre as that film is, it’s still a pretty even-handed depiction of a domestic role-playing household, and a lesbian one at that—two alternative lifestyles for the price of one!

So now I might as well finish my quest and review the other half of the BDSM-genre films, the highly abnormal depictions. The weirdest possible, of course. I’ll document my thoughts here, and we’ll re-huddle at the end to inventory our new insights into the freakiest, most broken, most perverted, most inhibited species on Earth: people.

Join me on my safari into the weird Leather Underground!

Movies reviewed in the series:

GREEK WEIRD CINEMA BEFORE THE “WEIRD WAVE”

Greek directors were weird long before made his feature debut with Kinetta (2006) and soon after found great success with Dogtooth (2009). From the late ’60s and 70s, while Greek commercial cinema was in decline, new directors emerged with singular voices and a modernist approach, many of them inspired by the teachings and international appeal of the Nouvelle Vague. Among these unique visions, there were many controversial ones, and even some really weird ones. This article is a short introduction to the weirdest aspects of Greek cinema of the 20th century, through five notable examples that traverse a wide range of styles and genres, each weird in its own unique way.

Let’s leave films that are just subversive and creative aside, and focus on movies with a WTF-level of weirdness. Subversiveness in Greek cinema starts about 1967 with works like Nikos Papatakis’ The Shepherds of Calamity, a drama famous for its social critique through the controversial portrayal of a slightly kinky love affair between a poor peasant and a girl from a wealthy family. It was a favorite of Lanthimos. In the following decade, many movies used an eccentric style to portray the rock and roll spirit, or to tackle subjects regarding Greek counterculture, like The Wretches Are Still Singing (1979), or ‘ entire filmography. As both these directors have been mentioned previously on this site, I won’t expand on them. There are many more and bizarre hidden gems out there, waiting to be discovered!

Still from Idlers of the Fertile Land (1978)

Let’s start with Idlers of the Fertile Land (1978) by Nikos Panayotopoulos, a director clearly inspired by the style of . This film more closely resembles the contemporary Greek Weird Wave in the way it builds an elliptical allegory of the absurd. We follow a wealthy family, a father and his three sons, as they isolate themselves in a mansion along with a maid played by sensual Olga Karlatos. They decide to pass the rest of their lives by sleeping and by doing literally nothing else, becoming increasingly idle. The central concept of rich guys isolating and destroying themselves by indulging in their vices is of course similar to ‘s La Grande Bouffe (1973); it’s a caustic morality tale parodying laziness in exactly in the same way Bouffe parodies gluttony.

Still from Mania (1985)

Our next selection is Mania (1985), an anarchic and oneiric parable commenting on our need to escape from “civilized” society, even if just for a bit. Haunting shots follow a young woman named Zoe, a program analyst for a big company, who finds herself in a series of escapades and dreamy encounters while strolling at a park. Her Bacchanalian odyssey and transformation have been compared with “Alice in Wonderland.” Suntan director Argyris Papadimitropoulos claims this movie as a favorite. As Zoe navigates through her surreal experiences, she grapples with the constraints of her daily life, leading to moments of profound introspection and liberation. This film’s rich visual style and evocative storytelling invite viewers to question the boundaries between reality and fantasy, making it a memorable exploration of the human psyche.

Continue reading GREEK WEIRD CINEMA BEFORE THE “WEIRD WAVE”

PARALLEL CINEMA OF THE LATE SOVIET UNION

Ed. Note: There is an undercurrent of Russian film that is totally unfamiliar to most viewers, awaiting rediscovery. Eugene Vasiliev describes the “cine-samizdat” movement of Parallel Cinema, which subverted the official Soviet Union aesthetic of Socialist Realism. Although these films were made in the underground and still have not been officially released (at least, not in the Western world), copies of several of them can be found through a YouTube search. 

Eugene’s latest project is the English-language YouTube channel “Cinema for the End of Time“.

Parallel or “perpendicular” cinema was an elusive star that slipped away from the mainstream of Soviet movies. It shone through the tattered veil of the cultural climate, defiantly refusing to bow before the crushing weight of conventional Soviet film production. It was the cinematic equivalent of a secret society, existing just beyond the reach of those willing to conform. Yevgeny Yufit, Pyotyr Pospelov, the Aleynikov brothers, and Boris Yukhanov were major figures: each one a true alchemist of surrealism, conjuring images as if plucking them from the depths of some kaleidoscopic, psychedelic dream.

At the heart of parallel cinema is a movement known as Necrorealism.

NECROREALISM

It’s the early 1980s in Leningrad (now St. Petersburg), and a little film movement is scooting away from the mainstream, bubbling up from the gooey underbelly of Soviet cinema like an old, ratty corpse. Welcome to necrorealism. Don’t let the name fool you—it’s not some low-key meditation on life’s fleeting nature. No, no. This is shockingly avant-garde cinema. Death here is not the poetic “life is but a dream” kind of death, but rather the “let’s zoom in on the slow decay of the human form and blurt out how messed up it all is” kind of death.

Necrorealism was cinema that aimed to rip away the rose-colored glasses we wear when thinking about life and death to show us the grimy, decaying truth underneath. So, who’s behind this snide brand of films? The main authors are Evgeniy Yufit, Andrei Kurmoyartsev, and Konstantin Mitenev. These guys weren’t just making weird films; they were practically twisting the very idea of cinema into a grotesque, feisty art project. If you walked into a necrorealist film expecting a feel-good drama, you’d leave questioning your life choices and maybe even your grip on reality. These films weren’t designed to uplift. Instead, they said, “Death and decay? Let’s make it a fun, twisted art project.”

Still from Papa, Ded Moroz is Dead Papa, Ded Moroz is Dead [i] (1984) is one of the most offbeat features of the necrorealist movement, far away from anything remotely resembling conventional cinema. It is loosely based on A.K. Tolstoy’s “The Family of the Vampire.” Picture this: an old man and a kid, grinning in a dark, Continue reading PARALLEL CINEMA OF THE LATE SOVIET UNION

R.I.P. Roger Corman (1926-2024): Weirdness in Workaholism

We at last have an explanation for the Aurora Borealis illuminating the skies to the north this weekend. That’s the gates of movie heaven opening extra wide to admit one .

Roger CormanTo some movie-goers, he’s a “who?” To anybody who’s dipped a toe in movie culture, he is a giant, almost a mythical legend, some great mountain cyclops of Lovecraftian proportions. Where do you even start with Roger Corman’s legacy? The Little Shop of Horrors? The vintage Poe adaptations with Vincent Price? Easy Rider? The Fantastic Four? The women-in-prison flicks starring Pam Grier and her two D-cup co-stars? The steady churn of grindhouse and drive-in exploitation flicks, premiered and gone nearly as fast as they could be made? Death Race 2000? Or the long, long line of savant-level talented stars who passed through Corman’s production boot-camp to go on to be legends in their own careers?

It’s complicated, because Corman is also remembered as a ruthlessly pragmatic businessman, stingy with paychecks, who benefited from exploiting hungry new talent. He willingly stamped out some horrendous schlock with his name on it. Lest we forget that, we could also start with Dinocroc vs. Supergator or Sharktopus or Attack of the 60 Foot Centerfolds. To be fair, Corman was solely concerned with finding out what the audience wanted to see—and then getting it to them as fast as possible. It might take a cardboard and duct tape set and an afternoon shoot financed from change he found in a pay phone, but Corman got it done.

I try to imagine an alternate universe where Corman never existed, and the first thing I see is half of this website disappearing. It’s not just the movies he produced, directed, or acted in; it’s the big players who owed their start to Corman’s mentoring. Without Corman, you have no Scorsese, no Coppola (and hence, no George Lucas), no Ron Howard, no James Cameron, no Peter Bogdanovich, no Joe Dante— and that’s just the directors!

Reportedly, Roger Corman would not tolerate the expression “” within his presence, insisting he made A-movies on a B-budget (often while standing next to a poster of something like Night of the Cobra Women). But I don’t see him that way. He had a chance to go the big studio route working under 20th Century Fox. He had the chance to go art-house with his own New World Pictures. Roger Corman only felt at home driving his own desk, doing things his way, with a magical, forgotten talent known as a “work ethic.”

A hack. Being a hack has a proud tradition. Many of the literary greats we honor now got their start writing dime-novel pulps. You might use “hack” to describe those who write for money on a hand-to-mouth basis, such as we bloggers, bless us every one. Sure, Corman concerned himself with the art, and in the case of 1962’s The Intruder, he could even treat film as an important medium with something substantial to say. He just happened to care about the bottom line most of all.

The world needs people with such a work ethic. Doubtless, when that person is a producer who will fire you without apology for daring to go one day over schedule, that’s going to rub some people the wrong way. Rest assured, we will still be making fun of his sexploitation quickies and rubber-suit bug-eyed monsters for years yet. But we’re going to miss Roger Corman, more and more with each passing year, as the film industry’s pace-setter is no longer here to keep everyone else on their toes. You’re going to be asking in twenty years: Why does film as a medium feel so lethargic and bloodless now? It will be because Corman was not bringing up the rear, and the rest of the producers got comfortable and lazy.

Here on 366 Weird Movies, of course, we have lopsided standards, and so Corman looms larger to us than many a mainstream box office draw. We want the weird stuff, and he delivered his share of weirdness, mostly by virtue of the fact that when you’re hurling out nine films per year, a few weirdies will make it through the gauntlet the way one mutant green potato chip shows up in every bag. I don’t think Corman ever intentionally discouraged a viewer. But his low margins let him take some insane risks that paid off, and then he could content himself with making movies just for those narrow slices of the audience, like the ones whose greatest wish was to see Pam Grier’s num-nums.

Sure, Corman put out some sloppy work, but he wisely observed that most viewers would barely pay attention at the drive-in anyway. Likewise, his attempts to hop on every trend and produce a knock-off of every Star Wars were mostly pathetic. Again, this was just Corman trying to give the audience what they want, following his money-dowsing wand. Whatever weirdness that came through was a byproduct.

Nevertheless, Roger Corman is the man most remembered for proving the indie film production industry can hold its own. Like a punk rocker encountering a string quartet, he swept away all the pretense of the elite auteurs and set up his gear on stage to give us the fast jams we danced to. In a world of delicate artists wrestling with impenetrable muses and big studios flogging comic franchises for their last dollar, Corman cut clean to the bleached bone of film-making. You get it done under budget and on time, or you walk. Under his discipline, so many other talents discovered that not only could they wing it, but soar to the heavens.

MIKE MCCARTHY/JMM – A (SOMEWHAT LENGTHY) PRIMER

Mike McCarthy – or JMM?

Twins?

Actually, both are one and the same. When John Michael McCarthy started in comics, he branded himself with the JMM logo. And if you’ve seen JMM’s work either in comics or movies, your impression is probably:

GIRLS! (Nudity!!)

GARAGE! (Rock and aesthetic)

GARISH! (look, plotting, dialog, attitude)

ELVISNESS!

Basically, what was/is considered to be the rudiments of American pop culture of the 20th Century. If you really want to get into subtopics, specifically Southern American Pop Culture, including the films of David Friedman, early , and lots of others I can’t begin to list…

JMM started in the late 80’s/early 90s, just ahead of the Nu Garage/Greaser/Glam Explosion* of the late 90s, which he and his work helped spread.

[* – NOT an official genre term]

McCarthy’s pinnacle (?) was possibly Superstarlet A.D., which was picked up for distribution by in 2000, making it the easiest of his films to find. After that… that Garage/Greaseball/Glam Boom slowed down and got overshadowed by Whatever New Thing was current. And although McCarthy got notice and acclaim overseas, back home he was just what was called a “cult figure”; an interesting but obscure branch of underground film. Meanwhile, others in the Memphis film scene broke through to studio interest, and money.

As McCarthy has stated himself, as a mantra: “My work is UNPOPULAR“.

I’ve long wondered why. Full disclosure: I was a crew-member on Superstarlet A.D. for the last half of shooting. But I was a fan of McCarthy’s before that, having seen The Sore Losers in Kansas City during the “Vice Parties” tour. My San Francisco roommate was a fan of Russ Meyer, which is how I started discovering that particular corner of film. So when an opportunity came to check out that type of filmmaking, I jumped right in—but that’s another story for another time…

Afterwards, I delved more into McCarthy’s work, and tried to keep an eye on what he was up to. If there’s a genre label for McCarthy/JMM, it’s “Redneck Art-house.” He remarks in the Blu-ray commentary for Damselvis, Daughter of Helvis that a reviewer once referred to him (and the film) as a “Pawnshop .” Both terms sound derisive, initially; but they’re both on-the-nose and correct, and not in a bad way.

McCarthy’s work follows two distinct paths:

JMM comix adaptations. McCarthy’s lo-fi versions of his own personal Cinematic Universe: Damselvis (1994), The Sore Losers (1997), and Superstarlet A.D. (2000) fit in here, along with his comix “Cadavera”, “SuperSexxx”, and “Bang Gang.”

Mike McCarthy graphic novel adaptations. These include features Continue reading MIKE MCCARTHY/JMM – A (SOMEWHAT LENGTHY) PRIMER