A decidedly bizarre entry in the gay XXX canon, RAOUL'S MASTERPIECE delivers largely unappealing sex scenes inside a narrative that's fascinatingly ambivalent about the film's milieu.
A long, LONG preamble (probably 20 to 25 minutes of the hour-long film) find a young black guy sexually servicing several men in a garden while an old man watches from the sidelines. After a golden shower climax about which the young guy seems none-too-thrilled (hard to tell if this is for real or just acting), the whole thing is revealed to be an extended audition for a porn flick the old guy is putting together. Turns out this is Raoul, though it remains to be seen if this new film will be his masterpiece.
Later, at a (curiously sparsely attended) industry party, we find Raoul in talks with a famous producer, trying to procure the services of his hot new client for the film. Raoul sets up another of his famous auditions, and again watches from a distance as the two guys perform. Far more interested in this potential star, Raoul offers him the part, which the young guy, now fully persuaded that this is the right career choice, eagerly accepts.
(SPOILERS)
Things take a turn for the weird in the final act, which - quiet unexpectedly - never makes it to the shooting of Raoul's feature. As the other actor from the audition scene effuses about his love of Raoul's work and his memories of seeing Raoul's first film, the movie strangely begins cross-cutting to shots taken from a silent cartoon (supposedly Raoul's early film) as the two begin reminiscing about better times. Against all goodwill and common decency, a sex scene erupts, with the younger guy fellating the elderly director as his lies on a bed with his eyes rolling back in his head. Finding this sensory stimulation too much to bear, Raoul transitions from his "little death" to the big one, finishing out his days receiving a hum job from a sycophant looking to be cast in a porn film.
(END SPOILERS)
The very definition of open-ended, RAOUL nevertheless provides a fair amount to chew on. It's a shame the filmmakers didn't put just a little more effort into its construction, as it could have been a real contender. As is, the film presents some interesting ruminations of showbiz and the advent of the porno industry, seemingly lamenting the lost innocence of a previous era while acknowledging that it's impossible to go back. The finale seems to suggest that we're all basically damned – either to live in the shadow of our past or to worship former (and false) idols – and the closest we can come to salvation is the fleeting pleasure afforded by reminiscence. All this is pretty heady stuff for a sex film (not to mention a real boner- killer), but I nevertheless give the crew props for trying, even if the resultant film is kind of a mess.
Production values are decent, and RAOUL features some good, immersive hand-held camera-work that makes you feel like you're part of the action. (After watching way too many one-day-wonders that come from the plunk-it- and-zoom school of tripod-based cinematography, you begin to notice details like this.) Most of the sex scenes are ugly and alienating, generally involving at least some element of coercion, sexual deviance or, at the very least, participants who just aren't that attractive (with one or two passable exceptions). All this fits the theme and mood of the film quite well, though it doesn't end up making for a very arousing experience. Still, even if it does feel like a bit of an unfinished draft, RAOUL is well worth watching for those who enjoy their vintage porn more cerebral than sensual. It may not be a masterpiece, but I wager it will nevertheless leave an impression.
A long, LONG preamble (probably 20 to 25 minutes of the hour-long film) find a young black guy sexually servicing several men in a garden while an old man watches from the sidelines. After a golden shower climax about which the young guy seems none-too-thrilled (hard to tell if this is for real or just acting), the whole thing is revealed to be an extended audition for a porn flick the old guy is putting together. Turns out this is Raoul, though it remains to be seen if this new film will be his masterpiece.
Later, at a (curiously sparsely attended) industry party, we find Raoul in talks with a famous producer, trying to procure the services of his hot new client for the film. Raoul sets up another of his famous auditions, and again watches from a distance as the two guys perform. Far more interested in this potential star, Raoul offers him the part, which the young guy, now fully persuaded that this is the right career choice, eagerly accepts.
(SPOILERS)
Things take a turn for the weird in the final act, which - quiet unexpectedly - never makes it to the shooting of Raoul's feature. As the other actor from the audition scene effuses about his love of Raoul's work and his memories of seeing Raoul's first film, the movie strangely begins cross-cutting to shots taken from a silent cartoon (supposedly Raoul's early film) as the two begin reminiscing about better times. Against all goodwill and common decency, a sex scene erupts, with the younger guy fellating the elderly director as his lies on a bed with his eyes rolling back in his head. Finding this sensory stimulation too much to bear, Raoul transitions from his "little death" to the big one, finishing out his days receiving a hum job from a sycophant looking to be cast in a porn film.
(END SPOILERS)
The very definition of open-ended, RAOUL nevertheless provides a fair amount to chew on. It's a shame the filmmakers didn't put just a little more effort into its construction, as it could have been a real contender. As is, the film presents some interesting ruminations of showbiz and the advent of the porno industry, seemingly lamenting the lost innocence of a previous era while acknowledging that it's impossible to go back. The finale seems to suggest that we're all basically damned – either to live in the shadow of our past or to worship former (and false) idols – and the closest we can come to salvation is the fleeting pleasure afforded by reminiscence. All this is pretty heady stuff for a sex film (not to mention a real boner- killer), but I nevertheless give the crew props for trying, even if the resultant film is kind of a mess.
Production values are decent, and RAOUL features some good, immersive hand-held camera-work that makes you feel like you're part of the action. (After watching way too many one-day-wonders that come from the plunk-it- and-zoom school of tripod-based cinematography, you begin to notice details like this.) Most of the sex scenes are ugly and alienating, generally involving at least some element of coercion, sexual deviance or, at the very least, participants who just aren't that attractive (with one or two passable exceptions). All this fits the theme and mood of the film quite well, though it doesn't end up making for a very arousing experience. Still, even if it does feel like a bit of an unfinished draft, RAOUL is well worth watching for those who enjoy their vintage porn more cerebral than sensual. It may not be a masterpiece, but I wager it will nevertheless leave an impression.