Erotic 'Playback' challenges censorship policy<\/p>\n
By Laksmi Pamuntjak-Djohan<\/p>\n
JAKARTA (JP): That Playback can be shown in cinemas here begs
\nat least two fundamental questions. Firstly, what has become of
\nour censorship policy? Playback is, put quite simply, a product
\nof the Playboy Entertainment Group, and is unequivocally
\nclassified as erotica, rated R for strong sexuality and language.<\/p>\n
Stripped of most of its graphic lovemaking scenes, this film
\nis, of course, better off not being shown at all. The plot is
\ntypically thin, the acting wooden, the dialogue stale, the morals
\nshady. Every scene that doesn't have two naked people (or more)
\nwrithing and groaning in ecstasy seems forced and unnatural, and
\nit usually isn't the reason for paying the price of a ticket.<\/p>\n
Pornography, after all, is an accepted phenomenon, albeit not
\nof the kind that one wears and shows to the public. It inspires
\nwhole industries, has its own criteria of quality and
\nsensibilities, and is a genre in itself. It happily re-cycles its
\nmost talented actors and unabashedly borrows plot ideas from a
\nvariety of mainstream screen hits. For moral weight, it
\ninvariably feeds off Cosmo philosophy: hell hath no fury than a
\nwoman scorned; men are lechers and they deserve chastisement;
\ninfidelity is punishable even by death. In effect, corporate
\nskirmishing, domestic abuse, and lunatic baby-sitters are mere
\nsub-plots. Lurking beneath is the raging feminist exacting
\nrevenge at all costs.<\/p>\n
Which is what renders Playback's riding above our censorship
\nboard's moral high ground a trifle odd, particularly at the time
\nwhen our own artists have come under fire for their alleged overt
\nsexuality. But it isn't as if double standard is a novel issue.<\/p>\n
Furthermore, Playback is a 1995 release. It has been sitting
\non LD rental shelves for practically a year, and doing quite well
\ntoo with soft-porn aficionados. Two years ago, Jakarta's
\nmultiplex was similarly rocked by the sexy thriller Dead On,
\nstarring Shari Shattuck and Matt McCoy. With most of its
\nhighlights unceremoniously slashed, there was virtually nothing
\nleft to hold our interest. But what made its screening even more
\nsenseless was the fact that it had been on LD circulation for
\nalmost two years. It seems that while blockbusters jet their way
\nhere at the speed of light, porn films take a backseat and arrive
\non slow carriages. But they still arrive.<\/p>\n
Playback opens with Sarah Burgess (Tawny Kitaen), waking up
\nfrom a troubled night of unfulfilled sexual fantasies. She is a
\nlovely vision, with her lush tawny locks and long legs. What's
\nmore - she's wronged, through and through. Her husband, corporate
\nladder-climber David (Charles Grant) is a good sort, but being
\nthe heir apparent to his boss, Gil Braman (George Hamilton) he
\njust doesn't have time for her. While he battles it out on the
\nhand phone, in the board room, and in the not-so-private
\nseclusion of his office, she is the very picture of innocence and
\nwasted sensuality.<\/p>\n
"My problem is what he does with me whenever we're together, "
\nshe laments to a friend. "What's that?" asks her friend.
\n"Nothing!" she finishes.<\/p>\n
Trying to spark their love life, David comes home with a sexy
\nvideo and settles for a long night of seduction. A thrilled Sarah
\nreciprocates with a video tape of herself seducing David in a
\nsexual fantasy come-to-life. Their sex life picks up, and she
\nfinds herself becoming more involved in David's office affairs,
\nwhile unknowingly rousing Gil's desire.<\/p>\n
All these variables, once known to Karen Stone (Shannon
\nWhirry), David's ambitious colleague, are manipulated to catapult
\nherself to the top. As expected, the ensuing commotion is
\nDisclosure meets The Temp - and yes, she gets a dose of her
\nmedicine, too. The difference is that Karen is deadlier than
\nDemi Moore's and Lara Flynn Boyle's characters combined. She is
\nalso direct. After all, what do you expect of a thigh-baring vamp
\nwho declares to a bunch of men in suits, "I'm the Ivy Leaguer
\nhere. Yale. Summa Cum Laude."? Only God knows what she's capable
\nof when she feels slighted.<\/p>\n
In fact, the entire film is as direct. You just know what's
\ncoming, be it an activity of self - or shared- pleasure. Every
\nline is terse, not given to wit, subtlety, or any form of
\nstylistic indulgences. Often, points are neatly enumerated and
\nsummarized, lest we miss them.<\/p>\n
The woman's version: Sarah's friend advises her on deciding
\nwhether a man is having an affair: a) spends more overtime at
\nwork, b) wants to have sex with his wife more often, c) hangs out
\nmore with his buddies, d) comes home "smelling of soap". When
\nSarah concedes to one, her friend yelps, "He's flunked the
\ninfidelity test!"<\/p>\n
The man's version: David's friend asks him, "When was the last
\ntime you did it with your wife?" When he is met with silence, he
\nexclaims, "That's it, you didn't remember. If I ask your wife, I
\nbet she'll remember. Give her roses? What are you? A f------
\nflorist? Surprise her. If it surprises you, it sure as hell is
\ngoing to surprise your wife." You kinda wonder whether he is not
\nmissing the point altogether.<\/p>\n
It seems that the women are having more fun finding answers.
\nWhile poor David stumbles and fumbles in a sex video store,
\nlooking decidedly out of place, Sarah leaves through a female
\nmagazine and reads aloud with perfect gusto: "Do you have
\nproblems reaching orgasm? Yessssss!" Now you understand why
\nfemale magazines make so much out of sex trivia.<\/p>\n
Don't expect much acting either. This is TV soap-dom.
\nAlthough George Hamilton gets top billing, he's just sideshow
\nwith too much eye make-up. Granted, he's been around since the
\n60s, but rarely does his acting credits extend beyond TV sex-saga
\nmini-series like Danielle Steel's Vanished (1995), Alex Haley's
\nRoots (1977) and Harold Robbins' The Survivors, or soapies The
\nBold and The Beautiful (1987) and Dynasty (1981). When he does
\nventure into quality movies such as The Godfather: Part III (as
\nthe Don's consigliere B. J. Barrison), he becomes an
\nembarrassment.<\/p>\n
When not in TV series such as Hercules (1994) and Santa
\nBarbara (1984), Tawny Kitaen finds herself in movies with titles
\nas ridiculous as Perils of Gwendoline in the Land of the Yik Yak
\n(1984), or does voice-overs for Eek! The Cat (1992).<\/p>\n
Shannon Whirry, a favorite with Axis Film's soft-porn director
\nAlexander Gregory Hippolyte, has bared her all numerous times for
\nfilms such as Animal Instincts and Mirror Images. She's good at
\nit, but that's the only thing she's good at.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/erotic-playback-challenges-censorship-policy-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}