Ain't It Cool News (www.aintitcool.com)
Movie News

Early Test Screening review of LOVELACE by the directors of HOWL & starring Amanda Seyfried

 

Hey folks, Harry here...  After watching Rob Epstein & Jeffrey Friedman's film with James Franco called HOWL...  I pretty much made a personal oath to be there for anything they'd make.   I found HOWL to be an incredible film - containing amazing work from Franco.   Now Epstein & Friendman have shot a Linda Lovelace feature for Millenium called LOVELACE - and they've had a test screening of that film in Los Angeles last night according to Sin O. Matic, one of our readers that shares his experiences with the rest of us!  The film doesn't have a release date yet - but with this cast I can't wait to see what they've come up with.   Lovelace's story is so incredibly fucked up - this will be a tough film to watch.  The emotional side of this story is one of profound spousal abuse, I've never found any of the Linda Lovelace porn as something I could even vaguely be turned on to - simply due to the knowledge of abuse.   This is going to something emotional I feel.  In particular, I'm dying to see Sharon Stone in this film as Lovelace's mother.   Sin-O-Matic has high praise for her.    Now, here ya go...  

 

Dear AICN-

I saw one of the first audience test screenings of Lovelace last night in Los Angeles and thought you and your readers would be interested.  This is the one with Amanda Seyfried, not to be confused with the sure-to-be inferior Inferno: A Linda Lovelace Story, the one that Lindsay Lohan dropped out of and was replaced by Malin Ackerman.  Let me start off by saying the acting is phenomenal. Amanda Seyfried totally disappears into the role of porn star Linda Lovelace who was in one of the best known porn films of all time, Deep Throat. 

  

Peter Sarsgaard looks great with his wife-beater goatee-ish beard playing Chuck Traynor, her douchebag husband who threatens her at gunpoint not only to appear in Deep Throat so he can reap the very little financial benefits to pay off his debts, but also prostitutes her out, to four or five guys in one scene.  Honestly I've never seen a young Hugh Hefner and James Franco was fine, if not a little over-the-top with the mannerisms and slanty eyes.  All the others were great as well, like Hank Azaria as the director of Deep Throat, Sex and the City's Chris Noth as the Italian gangsterish financier, and Juno Temple as Linda's best friend.  Chloe Sevigny, Eric Roberts, Sarah Jessica Parker as Gloria Steinem, and especially Wes Bentley are barely in the film, playing bit parts.

 

Beside Seyfried, the standout here is Sharon Stone as Linda's mother Dorothy.  I totally did not recognize her at all, and others didn't either until someone blurted out, who did Sharon Stone play?  She completely immerses herself in the role and is unrecognizable, with her dark hair and thin face and figure, looking quite old, but it's a fabulous performance as Linda's devoutly religious mother who believes in marriage no matter what.

      

As for the film itself directed by documentary filmmakers who directed Franco in their first feature in last year's Howl, Rob Epstein and Jeffrey Friedman do a fine job of directing and getting great performances - they seem like real actors' directors.  However storywise, the film is a downer.  And it lacks the entertainment value of say Boogie Nights.  While there are some interesting structural liberties taken, for the most part, this feels like a typical biopic that's just telling what happened in Linda's life without really delving deeper and finding the themes and uplifting aspects, like say Scorsese's The Aviator or Howard's A Beautiful Mind

 

The third act is glossed over in about 5-10 minutes and this is the most interesting aspect of the film.  Linda takes her former name back, speaks out against the porn industry, goes on Phil Donahue, and teams up with Gloria Steineim to stand up for women.  She even speaks before a congressional committee investigating pornography.  She remarried and had two kids, but we don't even meet her family.  And it would have been an interesting juxtaposition to see how her relationship was with her new husband as opposed to the horrible one with Chuck. 

          

Also, as the documentary Inside Deep Throat points out, Linda later revitalized "Linda Lovelace" posing in magazines trying to make a few bucks off her name, which apparently many others were but she never did. Again this would have been an interesting aspect to investigate, especially since she was so outspoken against the exploitation of women.  

 

Lovelace even has an epilogue which says Deep Throat made $600 million, and Linda only made $1,250, which the film insinuates Chuck probably took even that money.  It's a sad sad story, but you really needed that third act, at least the fighting for women's rights and speaking out against pornography, to really make Lovelace seem like a film, a cinematic experience, instead of just like an HBO biopic with great acting, which is what it feels like now.

 

For those of you curious about how graphic the film gets, you get to see Seyfried topless, a lot, but that's about it.  You get simulated "deep throating" with her hair covering the action, or filmed from the back, and almost rape-like sex scene between her and Chuck, but nothing on the level of The Brown Bunny, a film where Sevigny performed all-out fellatio on Vincent Gallo.  Since Seyfried already went topless in Chloe, there's not much new to see here.

 

 

I hope your readers enjoy, and you can just call me:

 

Sin A. Matic

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • May 4, 2012, 8:20 p.m. CST

    Homer Simpson moment.

    by CodeName

  • May 4, 2012, 8:22 p.m. CST

    That guy looks like the "Supersize Me" director.

    by CodeName

  • May 4, 2012, 8:35 p.m. CST

    Well...

    by Vicconius

    More topless Seyfried is nothing to sneeze at.

  • May 4, 2012, 8:47 p.m. CST

    So it's not as lighthearted as Boogie Nights?

    by Mugato5150

    Because that movie made me want to jump out a fucking window. Great movie but depressing.

  • May 4, 2012, 8:52 p.m. CST

    Sounds like it's based on her bullshit book..

    by borsky

    "Ordeal" was pretty much called out by those that knew her as a crash grab, guilt trip. While Traynor was undoubtedly an ass wipe, control freak, Lovelace was certainly no angel. And neither were the feminazi's who used her for their own gain. See Inside Deep Throat for a more measured view, or that Linda-Canine loop coz if she seemed perfectly happy to let doggy mount her, I'm sure deep throating Harry Reams was all in a days work rather than a rape "ordeal"!

  • May 4, 2012, 8:54 p.m. CST

    Sharon Stone

    by gaygoonie

    Man, I can't think of another actress who held the screen in such a badass way the way Stone did in Basic Instinct. For whatever reason, these quote unquote hot girls like Megan Fox and Jessica Biel just don't have the same evil/smart quality she had in that role. She was also great in Casino. There's just something about natural beauty. It trumps surgery faces like Jolie any day of the week.

  • May 4, 2012, 9:01 p.m. CST

    mentaldominance- You have no Frakken idea

    by SonicRiver

    The vast majority of female actresses in such films are paid very low fees for their work. While their motivation for engaging in the performances characteristic of this industry are financially related, only a few actresses actually do well. For every Sasha Grey, you have about fifteen thousand Linda Lovelaces.

  • May 4, 2012, 9:03 p.m. CST

    I

    by Norman Colson

  • I made my knot Looser. You give bad head and you are a loser. I lost the game because I was a loser. Your mother was a whore but your sister was looser. Learning the english language is cool.

  • May 4, 2012, 9:04 p.m. CST

    I'm gonna rent this...

    by Norman Colson

    Besides i need something to Fap to... LOL. j/k im gonna take this movie seriously. amanda seyfried idk, she's a great looking woman but i dont think she looks like linda... idk.

  • May 4, 2012, 9:42 p.m. CST

    sure, she was topless in Chloe, but not all THAT much, really

    by TheSeeker7

    Though it was enough to tell they were beautiful, so if there's much more exposure in this film, bring it on!! mwaahahaaa Also, while she looks good in the official poster up top, the second still from the film (where she looks scared of hubby) the hair is sooooo obviously a wig.

  • May 4, 2012, 10:16 p.m. CST

    If Lovelace had been 1/2 as good looking as Seyfried...

    by The Shropshire Slasher

    I would be blind and arthritic by now.

  • May 4, 2012, 11:17 p.m. CST

    Three sides to every story

    by dancetothebeatofthelivingdead

    Lovelace has gone on record as stating that watching Deep Throat is effectively watching a rape. She states that rape isbasically what was going on in each scene she did. However that wasn;t the only film she did, and she did a few after she was no longer under her husband's thumb if my facts are correct. (Not sure if they are so don;t take that last statement as fact even though I'm pretty sure it is, just not 100 percent positive. She didn't come out against the porn industry until she had her own little agenda to sell, basically supporting censorship. I know, I know, it's porn, not the Declaration Of Independence or Huck Finn but censorship is censorship. She was walked out by Steinam and told what to say, which is pretty much what she claimed her role was in the movies she made. Is Steinam using and exploiting her to further her agenda any more wrong than her claiming that her husband used and exploited her to make money from the porn. If she's telling the truth than yes it is very different because if she was "raped" then there were criminal acts involved. I, however, have a really hard time believing anyting Lovelace says however; I've seen her post-porn interviews and recent interviews with her as well, when she was promoting her book. I think she basically said what she thought and what she was told she had to say to garner as much publicity as possible for both Gloria's femi-nazi agenda and to boost book sales, and all the more power to her for whatever she had to do to boost the book sales, at least she finally got some money from porn. The reason I have such a hard time is that, if memory serves, and I think the reviewer mentioned it as well, she did porn again later in her life!!!!!!!!!!!!! Not really standing behind her such strong Christian morals and integrity, and basically nullifying all the bad shit she said about the industry for decades. I don't know, I mean I believe some of the shit she said because 70's porn was run by people that make today's porn producers look like Mother Theresa. I just don't believe all of it based on her own demeanor and her own actions. At least we get to see Amanda Seyfried do somtehing Lovelace could never do, look attractive. I just hope they play it right, because if they have Seyfried acting like she's not enjoying herself during the sex scenes....well...let's just say if she was being raped then the lady deserved an Oscar. I know it's possible to pretend you like it, there are thousands of porn stars that make their pleasure look believable and Lovelace sure was one of them. Not a tall order, unless you are being fucking raped!!!!

  • May 4, 2012, 11:21 p.m. CST

    Peter Saarsgard

    by dancetothebeatofthelivingdead

    Is there any actors out there today, or ever for that matter, that are half as underrrated as Peter Saarsgard? The guy is just fucking phenomenal. He was even not bad in Green Lantern, and that's saying a lot. I put him up there with John Cazale, Strother Martin, and J.T. Walsh as one the best character actors ever. He's in pretty good company if you try to rate him. And totally underrated and underappreciated. Just his presence already makes this movie better in my mind, I just hope they fdon't base it completely on her book. I'd like to see a movie that presents both sides of the story and let's us decide which side we want to believe. You know, like a good movie would.

  • May 4, 2012, 11:39 p.m. CST

    mentaldominance

    by gnocchi

    Sorry, you loose.

  • May 4, 2012, 11:49 p.m. CST

    I can't get past a sentence in that guy's recap

    by David_Denmans_Beard

    "Also, as the documentary Inside Deep Throat points out, Linda later revitalized "Linda Lovelace" posing in magazines trying to make a few bucks off her name, which apparently many others were but she never did." WHAT THE HELL DOES THAT MEAN? Others were trying to profit of the Lovelace name but Linda was apparently the one to do so first? It just makes no fucking sense.

  • May 5, 2012, 12:22 a.m. CST

    Here's some more awkward and disjointed grammar:

    by jawsfan

    "Lovelace even has an epilogue which says Deep Throat made $600 million, and Linda only made $1,250, which the film insinuates Chuck probably took even that money." Reading that is like flying in a plane during heavy turbulence.

  • May 5, 2012, 12:28 a.m. CST

    david_denmans_beard

    by dancetothebeatofthelivingdead

    Actually, I think Lovelace was her married name and when she got divorced she took back her maiden name. Until she needed some cash, then she did some porn and/or magazine spreads and was more than willing to use the married name that she had shitcanned because it was the name under which she was known by the public. So this name that she claims represented rape and seediness and evil in her mind also reprsented more cash than whatever her maiden name was, so she went back to publicly using Lovelace because she'd get more money that way. See if you can dig up some interviews with her on You Tube or something; the lady was batshit crazy. NOt crazy in the sense that I tellpeople that my wife is crazy; no, she was actually cuckoo for cocoa puffs.

  • May 5, 2012, 1:09 a.m. CST

    Does Sammy Davis Jr. Show up?

    by cookylamoo

    He was obsessed with Porn and Lovelace in particular.

  • May 5, 2012, 1:09 a.m. CST

    Does it mention the filming of Linda Lovelace and her Dog...?

    by disgustingduo

    Probably not - if this thing was produced with the co-operation of Lovelace's family, then they'll have wanted that one airbrushed out.

  • May 5, 2012, 1:15 a.m. CST

    the_cellarrat

    by DANGER_DIABOLIK_

    Gday Squire! Hahahaha....I'm guessing you (plus me) are both hoping HK personally reviews this very movie...remarking on 70s style booooosh.....it's all about that bush, Harry....(plus as Harry says - Amanda's mammary glands - seen it all before. No biggie.)

  • I remember watching a documentary where they made a case that she did go through some hard times, but, no where near as much as she made out. It even gave the impression that she, herself, was a liar and manipulator, and a lot of the feminist stuff was OTHER people trying to use her for their own beliefs and goals. Is this how safe Hollywood has become? That its willing to completely overlook fact and reality not even to entertain, but, to make a movie the least threatening possible? No doubt this film will be touted as "controversial" and "shocking", but, this review makes it feel like a Lifetime movie with some nudity; Man abuses woman, woman's mother doesn't help, woman's girlfriend is the only one there for her, woman finally finds salvation getting married and having kids, woman goes back to exploiting herself for money ...but, it isn't her fault, etc. If you want to do an "expose" on the porn industry, specifically back in the 70's and 80's, then reveal all the cases of AIDS that happened and how the people who got it were actually turned away from medical care because of their profession, or, reveal the blatant hypocrisy that has plagued the sex industry ever since its start; Politicians, feminists, corporations, Hollywood, etc. all speaking out against it while at the same time profiting from it in several ways. We really need to stop letting Hollywood, actors, and film makers get away with trying to get credit for making revealing and hard hitting films when all they're doing is confirming stereotypes and cliches.

  • May 5, 2012, 1:31 a.m. CST

    I'm gonna blort my nord all over the seat in front of me

    by Queefer Sutherland

    Amanda Seyfried stimulates me. Amanda Seyfried naked and blowing and fucking guys REALLY stimulates me. I wonder how explicit this will be? The article looked boring so I didn't read it. Does it say if it's explicit or not?

  • May 5, 2012, 4:15 a.m. CST

    Seyfried has way too beautiful eyes for the part

    by Tristan

    Google image Lovelace. Little beady eyes. Kirsten Dunst with a dye job would have been more physically suitable.

  • May 5, 2012, 5:08 a.m. CST

    The most important part

    by MrDuke118

    was when he told us that she gets her blamps out. Awww yeah

  • May 5, 2012, 5:47 a.m. CST

    I find it very hard to imagine Amanda Seyfried as Linda Lovelace

    by Have_Penis_Will_Travel

    On her worst day Amanda Seyfried is still a very attractive woman. And on her Best Day Linda Lovelace, really wasn't. Although if you believe the stories. She was a victim and ultimately a figure of tragedy

  • May 5, 2012, 5:59 a.m. CST

    @tophat

    by Have_Penis_Will_Travel

    yeah, her and that junkie Mackenzie Phillips who has made an entire career out of doing the talk show circuit when her bank acct gets low The professional victims

  • ...and by "it," I mean my penis.

  • 70's porn stars didn't look like Heather Graham and Jullianne Moore either.

  • May 5, 2012, 8:44 a.m. CST

    Morgan Spurlock

    by torpedoboy

    totally thought that was him in that first pic.

  • May 5, 2012, 9:45 a.m. CST

    Seyfried

    by Extr3m1st

    I would love to juggle her big tits, love that girls bod..

  • May 5, 2012, 9:56 a.m. CST

    Most of her story is bullshit

    by Dkev00

    She always was a wack job.

  • May 5, 2012, 10:16 a.m. CST

    'Ello, my name eees Claude... I am like zee hippo!

    by James Stevenson

    For fucks sake, how difficult would it have been to cast Hank Azaria (who's present in the movie) as Harry Reems? Such a lost opportunity. Fuckin' suits have ZERO imagination.

  • May 5, 2012, 10:52 a.m. CST

    "you get to see Seyfried topless, a lot"

    by CatVutt

    Poster tag-line material right there.

  • May 5, 2012, 2:03 p.m. CST

    she looks fucking hot on that poster

    by HASBEER_WILLCHEET

    boner levels: 84 percent

  • May 5, 2012, 2:42 p.m. CST

    Dont Listen to Sonicriver-Women get paid well

    by LoLWut

    Coming from someone that has worked in the biz I can tell you that the women in legit porn get paid well, and they get a lot more then the men get. You can get paid MORE if you go Independent and work for scene to scene but doing Contract is the way to go for most girls since you will on adv make more then the independent girls. This sort of pay scale is something that is fairly new (20 or so years) and I can not speak for shit done earlier then the 90's but I am guessing women in the biz are doing much better then pre-90s.

  • May 5, 2012, 2:42 p.m. CST

    @halowiscious

    by big_log

    You forget this is AICN. This site practically exists as a shrine to the destruction of the English language.

  • May 5, 2012, 3:33 p.m. CST

    Amanda Seyfried is hideous

    by gruntybear

    Shave her head and she could play one of the aliens from "Close Encounters."

  • May 5, 2012, 4:48 p.m. CST

    Seyfried...Topless...Sold.

    by adeceasedfan

    That is all.

  • May 5, 2012, 6:04 p.m. CST

    I can't believe people still make porno movies

    by Mugato5150

    and people buy them. With money. Have people not heard about the internet?

  • May 5, 2012, 6:05 p.m. CST

    Seyfried has GREAT tits, but

    by mongo126

    she's way to attractive to play Lovelace. Still, thumbs up for tits.

  • May 5, 2012, 7:32 p.m. CST

    Thanks for the nudity update at the bottom

    by Tall_Boy6t6

    must be read

  • May 5, 2012, 9:45 p.m. CST

    linda lovelace was so scared for her life, she did porn?

    by JaredP

    never believed that story. why come out twenty years later to speak out?

  • May 5, 2012, 9:52 p.m. CST

    Um, dahveed1972, you don't know what a bear is, do you?

    by gruntybear

    You silly, silly boy.

  • May 6, 2012, 12:05 a.m. CST

    course i know what a bear is , you burly fuzzball you!

    by dahveed1972

  • May 6, 2012, 12:07 a.m. CST

    sorry about the closet crack though. peace.

    by dahveed1972

  • May 6, 2012, 12:50 a.m. CST

    Seyfried didn't really go topless in Chloe

    by BigTuna

    It was camera tricks to show us side-boob and nothing else.

  • May 6, 2012, 12:11 p.m. CST

    If only it were an actual porn starring Amanda Seyfried!

    by NeonFrisbee

    I wanna bang that anime lookin' babe all night lawwwwng! YEAAAAAH!!!

  • May 6, 2012, 12:54 p.m. CST

    So wait...

    by ThatEndDown

    There are people who still think that Boogie Nights was an entertaining film with a happy ending? Yeah, that's not really surprising.

  • May 6, 2012, 2:13 p.m. CST

    I like Epstein and Friedman, but

    by SenatorJeffersonSmith

    I'm probably gonna skip this one. Seyfried is decent looking, but the most wooden thing in the theater is usually her acting.

  • May 6, 2012, 2:29 p.m. CST

    @jawsfan

    by Chris

  • May 6, 2012, 2:33 p.m. CST

    @jawsfan*

    by Chris

    Harry should be an inspiration to us all. It's people like him that prove you don't need something like an education to be successful. Only in America could a man run a well known internet movie news website yet have such a poor grasp of the English language.

  • May 6, 2012, 2:37 p.m. CST

    Also...

    by Chris

    One might think the look of this site hasn't changed for years due to nostalgic reasons, but I imagine it's just due to laziness. Honestly, look how crappy these talk back forms are. This shit has been this way for like, ten years or something absurd. You'd think someone at some point would just offer to change everything for free only so they don't have to keep looking at the same background.

  • May 6, 2012, 2:52 p.m. CST

    Seyfreid was pretty topless here

    by sunwukong86

    http://www.celebritymoviearchive.com/tour/movie.php/28079

  • May 7, 2012, 12:19 a.m. CST

    Isn't she a shitty actress?

    by proevad

    I've never seen her in anything, because the trailers to all her movies look like dogshit. I like Peter Sarsgaard and porn though, so I might check it out. Wonder if they will show dick.

  • May 7, 2012, 12:20 a.m. CST

    and I thought it was Lindsay Buckingham in the 3rd pic

    by proevad

  • May 7, 2012, 8:05 a.m. CST

    Hang on...

    by Flibbertygibbet

    So this Seyfried girl is perhaps best known for actually fellating Vincent Gallo on screen? I assume the tragic irony of her casting here isn't lost on everyone? At this rate a biopic of her life would be the exact same film!

  • May 7, 2012, 8:31 a.m. CST

    Flibbertygibbit, it was Chloe SEVIGNY in "Brown Bunny"

    by Ringwearer9

    This is Amanda Seyfried. The article placed the names "Sevigny" and "Seyfriend" close together when mentioning Brown Bunny, but it was Chloe Sevigny in Brown Bunny.

  • May 7, 2012, 8:35 a.m. CST

    Evil Porn Fans Attack

    by Ringwearer9

    Once again, the evil fans of porn rail against the idea that women involved in porn might not be all that thrilled about the situation. I wish I had a flamethrower.

  • May 7, 2012, 8:49 a.m. CST

    Deep Throat did NOT make 600 mil

    by larrydart

    The $600 million figure for Throat is just a number some publicist pulled out of their ass for the Inside Deep Throat documentary a few years back. It in NO WAY represents a realistic number. That was an era when movie admissions, even to porn houses, were two or three dollars. To make $600 mil, you'd be having to talk about Avatar/Hunger Games/Avengers sized turnouts. This for a film that had maybe 25 prints made in it's lifetime, and was controlled by the Colombo mob family the whole time. I'd say it made $10 mil tops, in reality.

  • May 7, 2012, 9:15 a.m. CST

    ringwearer

    by Flibbertygibbet

    Ah, my mistake! I remember hearing about Brown Bunny years ago and being a bit weirded out by it.

  • May 7, 2012, 9:29 a.m. CST

    So is this about that Robin Williams penguin from Happy Feet?

    by Jaster Mareel

  • Remove about 95% of all talkback comments on this site, and this would be a fascinating and informative place. As it is, it's a sea of morons diluting any possibility of genuine discussion.

  • May 7, 2012, 1:53 p.m. CST

    Honestly I'm not interested

    by MoistMuskyCamelToe

    Saw the Lovelace documentary and thought it was well done. I don't see a need for another film about her. Seems like a pointless cash grab. Oooh, she sucked a lot of dicks. Big deal.

Top Talkbacks