Get Premium
Dark mode theme is available exclusively for premium users. Learn more about the benefits of subscribing.
No fees, cancel anytime.
Dark Mode 
No fees, cancel anytime 
Infamously Disturbing Film Was Banned In UK For 24 Years, Now It’s Making A Shocking Return
From the forbidden fruit to banned movies, humans are attracted to prohibited things just like moths to a flame. Well, this film was so controversial that censors shut it down for many years, but that didn’t stop a venue from screening it and getting into trouble with the cops.
After all, it was allegedly the most disturbing movie ever made, sending shockwaves through the public, who still yearned to see it with their own eyes. Shockingly enough, the film is returning to the screen 51 years after its first release, and the internet was left stunned after it dropped the date!
RELATED:
In 1975, Salò, or the 120 Days of Sodom, a controversial film by legendary Italian director Pier Paolo Pasolini, was released
It was a critique of the dangers of illegal ideology and human greed, but the extremely gory scenes drew harsh criticism, and it was banned in the UK for 24 years
The year was 1975, when the iconic Italian director Pier Paolo Pasolini’s Salò, or the 120 Days of Sodom, was released and instantly banned in almost 20 countries. While many films can fight for the title of the “most disturbing movie ever made,” there’s something truly unique about this one.
It’s based on the 18th-century novel by the Marquis de Sade, and attacks the political system by exposing the dangers of illegal ideology and modern greed. The movie takes place near the end of World War II in northern Italy, right as Mussolini’s power was crumbling under German control.
The plot follows four extremely wealthy, elite men who kidnap 18 teenagers and force them through 120 agonizing days of relentless violence.
What follows is a lineup of extreme cruelty such as forced degradation, severe bodily harm, and acts of sheer malice that are nearly impossible to watch. It is structured like the first part, Inferno, of Dante’s Divine Comedy. As the movie moves from one section to the next, the viciousness of the four oppressive captors escalates step by step.
For the young victims, there is no rescue, no escape, and no happy ending, creating a strict, descending staircase into human evil. In the Divine Comedy, hell is built by God to punish bad people who deserve it. However, in Salò, the victims are completely innocent, and the hell they are trapped in is built by corrupt men in power just because they can.
The plot follows 4 extremely wealthy, elite men who kidnap 18 teenagers and force them through 120 agonizing days of relentless violence
Pasolini used Dante’s structure not to preach about religion, but to show how absolute power and tyranny turn human beings into powerless objects. It’s actually designed to make your stomach turn, as the director’s whole goal was to make the audience uncomfortable.
When Salò first tried to enter the UK in 1976, censors banned it outright. James Ferman, head of the censor board, called it one of the most disturbing movies he’d ever seen, yet acknowledged its serious message. He refused to trim the worst scenes, arguing that editing them would ruin the film’s purpose by making the grim reality seem palatable.
Despite being so controversial, experts believe that the film was a masterpiece, and after 51 years since its first release, the movie is returning to the big screen on October 26, 2026
When a London cinema screened it anyway in 1977, police raided the venue, seized the film, and threatened legal action, keeping it blacklisted for 24 years. That changed in 2000, when censorship guidelines shifted to block only adult material that was illegal or harmful.
This finally granted the untouched movie an adult rating. Now, the British Film Institute is releasing a high-definition 4K edition with bonus features honoring the late director. Legal copies of the movie have always been hard to find in the UK. This makes its re-release the easiest way in decades for brave movie buffs to watch it on October 26, 2026.
Unfortunately, Pasolini met a tragic end before the movie was even released. Just weeks before Salò premiered in late 1975, he was brutally attacked on a beach near Rome. A 17-year-old, caught driving the director’s car, initially took the blame over a personal dispute, but later recanted.
He claimed a group of men actually carried out the ambush while shouting political insults, forcing him to take the fall to protect his family. Pasolini’s friends always doubted the original story, suspecting political motives or extortion over stolen movie footage. A 2023 official report even linked the crime to organized groups, prompting calls to reopen the case. But news shows that it remains a mystery to this day.
As I mentioned before, there are many films that are said to be “most disturbing,” and these also faced trouble.
Last House on the Left (1974)
Long before A Nightmare on Elm Street, Wes Craven ran into major censor trouble over Last House on the Left. It was a thriller about parents avenging their late daughter’s brutal attack. Censors blocked the unedited film for over 30 years, arguing its relentless violence went way too far. It was finally released completely uncut in 2008.
Butcher, Baker, Nightmare Maker (1981)
Butcher, Baker, Nightmare Maker, a 1981 thriller, centers on a teenager framed when his aunt, who has inappropriate feelings toward him, takes a man’s life. Censors blocked it for home video over disturbing scenes of gruesome injuries, misconduct toward a relative, and graphic human remains. It wasn’t released completely unedited until 2024.
Cannibal Holocaust (1979)
This infamous movie follows an unethical camera crew who meet a grim fate from an Amazonian tribe. Cannibal Holocaust faced backlash for causing real harm to animals, along with scenes of extreme violence. The film was quickly blacklisted in the UK. Censors demanded nearly six minutes of cuts in 2001, and it wasn’t approved completely unedited until 2011.
However, none of these movies are actually treated as high art like Salò. Endorsed by legendary directors like Martin Scorsese and preserved by The Criterion Collection, it is even studied in film schools. Watching it is supposed to feel painful, and that’s precisely why people have debated for over 50 years whether it’s an unbearable ordeal or a cinematic masterpiece.
With the BFI giving it a high-definition release, it’s clear which side of the debate they stand on. What about you? If you have actually watched it, we would love to hear your thoughts, so feel free to drop them in the comments below!
Netizens were divided, as a few claimed that there were other films that were way more unsettling than this controversial movie
Poll Question
Total votes ·
Thanks! Check out the results:
Total votes ·
Newsletter
Subscribe to Access
Exclusive Polls
By entering your email and clicking Subscribe, you're agreeing to let us send you customized marketing messages about us and our advertising partners. You are also agreeing to our Privacy Policy.
Thank you! You've successfully subscribed to newsletters!
What do you think ?
Did I say that out loud? 2 hours ago (edited)
BP churning out it's usual sensational b s. Yes, it was initially refused a certificate by the BBFC,but, it was was given an18+ certificate to be shown uncut in 2000,26 years ago. And a certificate for home viewing.
Ban-One 1 hour ago
Seen it a while ago. An interesting watch so to say. The setting was actually quite interesting. I've also read Marquis De Sades book. Which is actually unfinished...the last chapters just short shock-value sentences without much context. Just describing t*****e and m****r. Some were used in the final moments of the film. I wonder how the book would have turned out fully finished. That said, Cannibal H*******t did hit me harder. Maybe because of the real and unnecessary animal cruelty. A Serbian Film was another shocker. Extremely well made, shot and produced. But felt like entirely made just to shock the watchers....not much substance. Human Centipede I was ok, Part II everything fans expected from Part I. Dark, brutal....and over the top. Almost funny. Great main actor though. Part III was bad and badly made. Real trash. But with Eric Roberts!
Did I say that out loud? 2 hours ago (edited)
BP churning out it's usual sensational b s. Yes, it was initially refused a certificate by the BBFC,but, it was was given an18+ certificate to be shown uncut in 2000,26 years ago. And a certificate for home viewing.
Ban-One 1 hour ago
Seen it a while ago. An interesting watch so to say. The setting was actually quite interesting. I've also read Marquis De Sades book. Which is actually unfinished...the last chapters just short shock-value sentences without much context. Just describing t*****e and m****r. Some were used in the final moments of the film. I wonder how the book would have turned out fully finished. That said, Cannibal H*******t did hit me harder. Maybe because of the real and unnecessary animal cruelty. A Serbian Film was another shocker. Extremely well made, shot and produced. But felt like entirely made just to shock the watchers....not much substance. Human Centipede I was ok, Part II everything fans expected from Part I. Dark, brutal....and over the top. Almost funny. Great main actor though. Part III was bad and badly made. Real trash. But with Eric Roberts!
Related on Bored Panda
34
7