I became interested in Salo after poking around the internet and getting sucked into the mystique. I researched Pasolini too. Maybe I was over prepared as I came out less affected than I thought.
The film has a beautiful aesthetic to it that I wasn't expecting, which contrasts strangely with the stomach churning and horrific content. I found the horror to be artistically justified and heartfelt. Maybe too heartfelt. Maybe heaped in with too much abandon, not because it's merciless (which is clearly part of the point) but because it could perhaps be applied more articulately. Pasolini brings the viewer into a rare and naked confrontation with the dark psychological workings of power, but after risking my mental well being to follow him there, I wanted greatness. I left feeling a bit frustrated, like I almost got it. He pursues some interesting and relevant angles in a quick and half hearted way while taking plenty of time dwelling on tangential horrors. For example, he takes a few slightly clumsy minutes to explore the themes of the exploited turning on themselves.... a minute or two of the film is dedicated to stories of resistance..... plenty of time for more coprophagia though....
I will also add that Pasolini's stated aims of critiquing capitalist consumer culture specifically didn't really come through to me, and I'm not sure it's my fault.
This is a successful film that will be relevant as long as one human being holds power over another. That being said, I wanted to hear the pure archetypal artist's scream. I wanted righteous rage and truth. I got them but I wanted more. I accidentally ended up expecting a film version of Francis Bacon's Pope paintings. I got that, but not the very best or most striking of the portraits. Still... it's enough truth to make my eyes just begin to well up, to wish some timeless peace upon the spirit of Pier and upon the unending multitude of humanity's victims.
If you can begin to understand where this film is coming from, and if you have the stomach, you should watch Salo.