When it first premiered in 1972, this film left audiences stunned — and for good reason.
A film that critics have labeled as “repulsive” ended up being banned in several countries due to its inclusion of multiple unsimulated acts. The movie’s content was so extreme that it crossed lines few filmmakers dare to approach.Movies can be prohibited for all kinds of reasons — sometimes for political messages, other times for explicit or disturbing material — but it usually takes something truly shocking to trigger an outright ban.In this case, the movie was prohibited in four separate countries after a deeply controversial scene involving an unsimulated sexual act between the lead character and her on-screen son sparked outrage.
Released in 1972, the story follows drag queen Divine, infamously nicknamed the “filthiest person alive.” She proudly lives up to that title until she crosses paths with two criminals who become envious that she has been deemed even “more filthy” than they are.According to one review, the film doesn’t shy away from disturbing and “repulsive” themes. It even features an infamous scene where the character eats dog feces on camera, followed by a series of simulated murders.However, the moment that remains the most disturbing to viewers is the scene in which Divine engages in unsimulated oral sex with her fictional son.
Legendary drag queen Divine stars in the filmNew Line Cinema
The British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) warns viewers that “a man’s semen is seen, in close-up detail” and that “there is focus on a man’s dilating anus, in close-up detail” — descriptions that make it clear this is not a film for the faint-hearted.The site also points out that “cuts were made to remove the sight of chickens being roughly handled and killed during a bizarre sexual assault on a woman.” Still, the movie contains other disturbing moments, such as a man “exposing himself to schoolgirls.”The controversial film in question is none other than John Waters’ cult classic, Pink Flamingos.
According to the BBC, director John Waters once explained his approach: “I knew I had only $10,000 to work with, so I figured I had to give the audiences something that no other studio could dare give them even with multimillion-dollar budgets.”“Something to leave them gagging in the aisles. Something they could never forget.”Following its release, Pink Flamingos was swiftly banned in Switzerland and Australia. It was later deemed unsuitable for screening in certain areas of Canada and Norway as well.
Unsurprisingly, the movie faced heavy backlash from critics. Variety bluntly described it as “one of the most vile, stupid and repulsive films ever made.”During a special 25th anniversary screening of the film, legendary critic Roger Ebert quipped that “with any luck at all that means I won’t have to see it again for another 25 years.”“If I haven’t retired by then, I will,” he added, making it clear his feelings about the film hadn’t softened with time.
Critics called out the movieNew Line Cinema
On IMDb, one reviewer summed it up as “outrageously sick, disgusting and grotesque but also funny,” highlighting how the film walks a bizarre line between shock and humor.“John Waters’ intention is certainly to shock the audiences and is certainly very well succeeded,” they noted.Another reviewer offered a more concise take, describing it as: “A very strange, disturbing but intriguing film.”
Watching Pink Flamingos today can be a challenge since it’s not available on major streaming services. This has made it more of a cult find for devoted film fans.There are still limited-edition physical copies out there, and for those in the United States, most online versions can be accessed without regional restrictions, making it easier for American audiences to track down a viewing.
