It is a performances centric movie

good back-story, and good acting

Simple and well acted, it has tension enough to knot the stomach.

The tone of this movie is interesting -- the stakes are both dramatic and high, but it's balanced with a lot of fun, tongue and cheek dialogue.

A naked guy jumps around his palatial estate. He kisses girls and hugs guys. All the while musicians play something in the background. This takes forever so I started fast-forwarding. He and his crew prepare for some lavish party. Soon after the party begins the clothes start coming off as the guests dance and giggle in a scene that takes forever. As the night progresses inhibitions start falling as well. Some guys in uniform appear and witness the debauchery. The naked guy also wears occasionally a uniform. Next day, more uniformed guys show up to threaten the guy but things don't turn out as they planned.Private Vices, Public Pleasures is absolute junk unless you enjoy ridiculous time-piece musicals mixed with some aberrant sexual stuff. Story-wise there's not much going on. There some tasteless twist about the identity of one of the girls there.As other reviews point out, the characters here are very freely based on historically characters but knowing that doesn't make this movie any better. Even if you're looking for titillation, this movie offers very little except for male genitalia.

Lots of information here in other reviews about the films historical context and ambitions, and also the directors other work and background. For me this film is from a time when film makers were not tied to mast of narrative, long lingering shots abound, with beautiful graceful composition , and the camera holding on little moments of reverie. The nudity is irreverent and celebratory , again capturing candid moments, and as one reviewer stated an almost dream like atmosphere is achieved. Also the use of diagetic and non-diagetic sound is playfully used and intertwined, with musicians playing the soundtrack itself on screen. A wonderful example of European cinema from a lost time.

Which makes it sound dull, but more on that later. Read the review by ArpadGabor to get some background information on the historical context of the movie. The motives are clear in the movie, but it shines a new light on some things I guess. One thing is for sure though: If people mistake this as pornography (as the reviewer also wrote), they are dead wrong.This is like a study of society. One sided (rich people) it may be, but it's still vaguely intriguing to see how boredom gets them and pushes them to do crazy things. Like the scene almost at the beginning in the hay, which coincidently is the only scene that actually could lead to the pornographic conclusion. We do have a lot of nudity though and the love making is diverse.Some people will be offended by that (especially because we're not only seeing "regular" couples/intercourse). This is by no means titillating or anything, but appalling? Maybe, depends on your threshold for such things.You also don't really know the background on most of the people on screen or their relationship towards each other. While this adds to the mystery it's also frustrating and not really satisfying (no pun intended). A little more background and a little more fleshed out characters would've gone a long way. As it is, it's a decent film, with a neat message

The Australian video release cover of Miklos Jancso's 1975 ode to sexual freedom and personal rebellion had it placed alongside pornography in Australian video stores when it was released in the 1980s (alongside other classics like In The Realm of The Senses and A Zed and Two Noughts). It features naked bodies moving and lying all over one another in a wildly joyous orgy. Once you watch the film, you realise this is no simple recitation of the pleasures or mechanics of the flesh. This is a fascinating film which can be aligned for many reasons with Pasolini's Salo (they were both made almost in parallel). Both films are subversive historical studies of human sexuality and the treatment of the human body as a political object. Or more simply, the way bodies are always at the centre of the forces of power. The two films are very different - but not absolutely distinct. Both do concern the events at a distant place where sources of political and social power subvert the order of things. In Salo, however, it is an insatiable facistic power which reproduces itself through acts of abuse and murder. In Private Vice..., it is a subversive power of a less annihilistic order aiming to alter order by embracing passions and overturning the military order. Quite the opposite to Pasolini's much more bleak vision of politics in the shadow of modern forms of exploitation since WW2.Private vice, Public Virtue follows a rebel son embracing the ideals of sexual freedom, dionysian joys such as wine and song, and the rebellious refusal to accept the orders of absent elders. The scenes where they mock the military ruler with caricatured masks as the army returns from battle is one such example. But throughout, the film seeks to alter roles and power structures. Women wield dildoes, nakedness is not the domain of women as in so many other films and sexual expression is an unstoppable force. The film is both a beautiful, utopian vision and a tale of the violent power of history.