The Story Of O Movie Online Free

🛑 ALL INFORMATION CLICK HERE 👈🏻👈🏻👈🏻

The Story Of O Movie Online Free
All Titles TV Episodes Celebs Companies Keywords Advanced Search
Fully supported English (United States) Partially supported Français (Canada) Français (France) Deutsch (Deutschland) हिंदी (भारत) Italiano (Italia) Português (Brasil) Español (España) Español (México)
Photographer O's lover takes her to a Château, where she is, like other women there, naked, humiliated by whipping, sexual abuse by men etc. When O leaves, her lover gives her to his much ol... Read all Photographer O's lover takes her to a Château, where she is, like other women there, naked, humiliated by whipping, sexual abuse by men etc. When O leaves, her lover gives her to his much older step-brother. Photographer O's lover takes her to a Château, where she is, like other women there, naked, humiliated by whipping, sexual abuse by men etc. When O leaves, her lover gives her to his much older step-brother.
Christopher Lee turned down the role of Sir Stephen.
Most of the times that O's being whipped, there is no sound of the whip hitting her body.
The Story of O was initially banned in the UK in 1975, but cinema and video/DVD releases were passed by the British Board of Film Classification in 2000. The censors themselves did not make any cuts to this dubbed version, but around 8 minutes of non-sexual narrative scenes were removed by the director for pacing reasons. The fully uncut, subtitled version has played in the UK on the subscription channel FilmFour.
Featured in Tod eines Weltstars (1992)
Histoire D'O Written and Performed by Pierre Bachelet
I admit I know little about the S+M/B+D lifestyle, but if this is any indication, it must be kind of like being in a bad European "art" film. This is one movie that truly does not deserve its notorious reputation(either in the negative or positive sense). It's just your typical silly and pretentious 70's Eurotrash. It is slightly less boring than the director's previous "Emmannuelle" (1974) but only slightly. The lead (and only conceivable reason to watch this nonsense) is Corrine Clery,who was later a second-string Bond girl eaten by vicious dobermans in "Moonraker". Clery spends most of the movie naked and being whipped by various men and women. This certainly sounds pretty sordid, but the movie (tastefully?) never shows the whip actually hitting her. And though she is almost constantly being flogged, there never seems to be a mark on her on her perpetually on-display body. She is also passed around by various men, but the sex scenes are even more circumspect than the whipping scenes. I'd enjoy watching Clery doing anything naked(mowing the lawn, painting a fence, digging a garden), but there's just nothing especially exciting here. Mostly, the movie consists of cheesy dialogue and idiotic libertine philosophizing. I don't know if you have to be a sadist to enjoy it, but you definitely have to be a masochist to sit through it.
Suggest an edit or add missing content
What is the Brazilian Portuguese language plot outline for The Story of O (1975)?
The Best Movies and Shows to Watch in August
Fall TV Guide: The Best Shows Coming This Year
Hollywood Romances: Our Favorite Couples
Narrator : O felt soiled and guilty of the illicit pleasure she'd had in a stranger's arms. But her lover explained that the more he gave her, the more he wanted her. Offering her to another man was proof that he owned her.
Rene : One can only give that which one owns.

The beautiful O is taken by her boyfriend, Rene, to a bizarre retreat, where she is trained in bondage and sexual perversion. Rene discharges a personal debt by transferring possession of O to his step-brother, Sir Stephen...
This video is currently unavailable to watch in your location
By ordering or viewing, you agree to our Terms . Sold by Amazon.com Services LLC.
Supporting actors Jean Gaven Producers Eric Rochat , Gérard Lorin Studio Kinonation Purchase rights Stream instantly Details Format Prime Video (streaming online video) Devices Available to watch on supported devices
B. Marold Reviewed in the United States on September 2, 2005
`The Story of O' directed by Just Jaeckin and `The Image' directed by Radley Metzger are both based on famous and critically well received French erotic novels written, I believe, in the 1960s by Pauline Reage (a pseudonym) and Jean de Berg respectively. In turn, the two movies are both considered masterpieces of erotic moviemaking. Yet the latter is clearly better than the former, in spite of the fact that the two books are, to my mind, roughly equal in quality. I may even believe that `The Story of O' is superior as a novel to de Berg's fiction. While both are of a very high quality, they approach roughly the same subject in very different ways. In `The Story of O', everything is seen and told through the eyes of the submissive, `O'. In `The Image', everything is seen through the eyes of the bystander become dominant, Jean. That does not mean that `O' can tell us nothing of the dominant psychology or `Image' tell us nothing of the submissive psychology. In fact, it is one of the strengths of `The Image' that it probably tells us more about true psychological submissiveness than the movie, `O'. The primary problem with `The Story of O' film is that while its source is certainly a very well constructed fantasy, the director does not hide this fact and play it as reality. This may be comparable to our not taking the confrontation between Gandalf and the Balrog at the bridge in the mines of Moria (in `Lord of the Rings') because we know this is all a fantasy. The power of great fantasies is that they allow us to totally suspend disbelief for the course of the experience. In Jaeckin's commentary, he states over and over that this is all a fantasy and was intended as such by author, Reage. But, one of Reage's great skills was to minimize the improbable aspects of the story to sustain the sense that this plot is actually being played out by real people. The second problem for me with `The Story of O' is the fact that it did not improve on my imagination while I was reading the book. Going back to that other fantasy, `Lord of the Rings', one of its great successes is the fact that at every turn, it improved on the constructs of my imagination. The black riders, the Uruk-hai, and Shelob were all far scarier than what I read, and the reading was pretty scary. At but one scene does the film outdo my imagination. The third problem, which the movie shares with the book, is the improbability of a woman's so easily moving her affection from one dominant to the next. The book's original ending makes great use of the chasm this reliance on a master opens at the submissive's feet. The movie squanders the great original ending in a muddle of alternatives. `The Image' easily sidesteps the last problem by being a very simple `menage a trois'. And, while the submissive is asked to perform with outsider, Jean, she is always devoted primarily to dominant Claire. As far as improving on my imagination, I will only say that from what you think you are seeing on the screen, director Metzger is pulling no punches and Mary Mendum playing the submissive is about as convincing as I can imagine in her role, in comparison to `O''s actress, Corinne Clery, who sometimes seems to be simply working through the boredom in some scenes. Part of the reality of `The Image' is based on the immediacy of all the settings. Like some films by Woody Allen and Martin Scorsese, where New York City is almost as much a character in the movie as the actors on the screen, several locations in Paris are important contributors to the lush, overripe feel of the film. In contrast, `The Story of O' could have as easily been filmed in Quebec or Sidney, and no one would have noticed the difference. On the other hand, while the two films are of roughly the same lengths, `The Image' spends a lot more time conveying the relationship by showing its fruits rather than by talking about it. Both movies are easily 1000% better than any other movie on these subjects, but `The Image' is clearly the better of the two in a very small field.
Lynn Reviewed in the United States on June 7, 2013
O, played by the gorgeously seductive Corinne Clery, is taken to an isolated chateau by her lover, Rene, where she spends several weeks naked, training to be a sex slave for an elite club of wealthy men. Although she voluntarily agreed to the training and is free to leave anytime she wants, O is defiant and, as a result, is whipped nightly as punishment. After completing her training, she joins seven other "slaves" who must submit to the sexual whims of any member of the club, at anytime, anywhere. She wears a ring and necklace, which identify her as one of the club's slaves. O originally "belongs" to Rene, but he quickly gives her to his older brother, Sir Stephen, who at first treats O as property, not thinking twice about humiliating her in front of other club members, but they eventually fall in love, Sir Stephen convinces O to prove her love for him by submitting to additional training, which involves more simulated whipping, piercings and brandings, after which they live happily everafter. O is naked as often as she is clothed. There is as much sex as there is whipping. Both are simulated, but stimulating. Strangely, the men are fully clothed in all the sex scenes, except one. Apparently men in France in the 1970's didn't bother disrobing to have sex. All the women in the movie are beautiful and sexy; most of the men are middle-aged. Every scene is well lit and there is no blood. For optimal viewing, I recommend watching the sex scenes in French since the English dubbed version doesn't capture the true emotions of the actors. The movie never explains why O, an educated, successful fashion photographer, would submit herself to such treatment other than to say she loves Rene and loves Sir Stephen. It also fails to adequately explain what she gets in return for allowing herself to be raped, tortured and humiliated at will. The moral of the movie seems to be women need to be subservient to men if they want to find true happiness. No wonder the movie, and the book before it, were controversial.
RAVENLADYX Reviewed in the United States on December 9, 2004
The Story Of O to me is one of the most tasteful and erotic films addressing domination, bondage, and true surrender that I have ever had the privlidge to view. This film not only gave me insite into another lifestyle but also to another world. If you really think about it we are all dominated by something and this film captures the domination and submission of true love. In my opinion the true message of this film is total trust. I know from personal expierience that trust is the basis of all relationships including O's. O completely gave not only her trust but herself. Is this not what happens in a marriage? It may be comparing apples to oranges but when one marries do you not give yourself completely to your spouse? O herself gave body, mind, and soul without saying vows because it was an issue of totaly putting her trust in another and in the stregnth of their relationship. This movie awakend desires in myself and I am greatful for the veiwing pleasure as it has added great pleasure into my life. This is a true art film that can inpact your own life if you look for the deeper meaning and not what many people percieve as degrating and offensive. There truly is a fine line between pleasure and pain and as long as it it a mutual relationship pain can be pleasurable as O did realize. There are critics in every crowd and this movie will always cause controversy due to the nature and subject matter. If you have not already made up your mind on this type of subject matter The Story Of O is an exceptional look into the world domination and submission. This movie delves into and explains aspects of submission while making sure total trust still remains as the heart of the movie.
Orchid Goddess Reviewed in the United States on June 6, 2005
This movie was so well done. Taking O through each phase of being submissive and then as she discovers thatoften the slave can become the Master. She somehow delights anyone that touches and sees her. She delighted me. Yes, this is a 70's movie, but a very good story, there was a only a few times, I thought the dramatics were a bit too much. My favorite part is when O gives her first whipping to another...and the becomes succumbed with such caring and in delight her receiver becomes calm and realizes that O meant her no harm. Obviously again, submissives and dominants are simply choosing a way of life...and in that life...one receives and one gives. I believe being a dominant takes a lot more work and thinking. I also believe that the dominant doesn't have all that much power. Unless they know themselves truly...and very few do. Anyhow, you may listen to the DVD in English or French and it does have chapter titles. I was very pleased and thrilled to add this movie to my collections. You may too.
Dominick Reviewed in the United States on November 11, 2007
Cinema's original sin returns with its shocking portrait of sexual submission from master of erotica Just Jaeckin (Emmanuelle, Lady Chatterley's Lover). Written by Anne Desclos (aka Pauline Reage, Dominique Aury) in 1954. A stunning young woman (Corinne Clery) surrenders herself at a remote chateau at her lover's request and is immediately forced into a round the clock regimen of every sexual appetite imaginable. Her submission is total to the orgasmic odyssey that explores the shadowy boundaries between pleasure and pain. The test is severe - sexual in method, psychological in substance. The most revealing scene is when a young man comes to call on her and sees first hand the whipping, flogging and caning she endures at the hands of her Masters sadistic maid. In the creation of the movie, a delicate balance had to be maintained between making a beautiful romantic and erotic movie, which it is, and simply a pornographic movie which it is not. Certain scenes had to be removed because they dealt with issues that were to extreme for the public to understand or accept, and also to pass censorship. This is a must see movie for anyone in the BDSM community. The artistic interest here has precisely to do with the use not only of erotic materials but also erotic methods, the deliberate stimulation of the viewer as a part of and means to a total, authentic movie experience. I gave it 5 Stars.
Robert Crosman Reviewed in the United States on September 29, 2013
This is my favorite erotic fantasy. It would be considered misogynistic if it weren't based on a novel written by a woman. The novel is considerably more extreme in its sado-masochism, but the film emphasizes the pleasure O gets from belonging totally to her man, and proving it by enduring pain and humiliation, while naked and exposed. In the end she brands Sir Stephen, as she has been branded: they belong to each other. Would I like such a film if the roles were reversed - if it was the man who was beaten, buggered, and branded for the sake of his love for his woman? Probably not - masculine pride would prevent me from submitting, even if it brought sexual pleasure. And my narcissism isn't sufficient to let me enjoy displaying my beautiful nude body, assuming I had one, as "O"(played by lovely Corinne Clery) enjoys showing herself naked to men's desiring eyes, and in submitting to them sexually. The author claims that O has achieved a position of power over her lover by arousing and maintaining his desire for her. It's difficult to see a woman who has been whipped, branded, and chained as powerful, but perhaps she's right - if having a man crazy about you is the height of female power.
SteveH Reviewed in the United States on May 10, 2015
We came, we saw, and -- at least it was well-made enough that I watched it to the end (I had to stop reading the book after only 21 pages, due to the coldness of the writing). I would have given this movie 5 stars, but the material (consensual slavery with harmful BDSM) just isn't to my taste. Yes, the acting is almost wooden at times -- but, then, we are watching people who aren't supposed to have feelings. It's all very European and, honestly, somewhat disconcerting. I really liked the settings and cinematography. For what is literally a porn film with nasty BDSM (not "bedroom level" at all), it's a pretty good flick. (Note: I know a little bit about BDSM. What you see in this film is NOT what you will ever be doing.)
Adam Sacks Reviewed in the United States on July 4, 2000
Certainly this is a very erotic film based upon a very erotic book. I am afraid that people take this material seriously and seeing it "acted out" in this movie may be a bad thing in that respect. In general, I have read interviews with the book's author and she said that it wasn't meant to be literally interpreted. The things done were more symbolic, the enslavement emotionally, etc., rather than literally doing the things the book describes. Very likely if you did what was done to O to a real woman, she would die. Certainly be hospitalized at the least. I mean branding, sex with animals, bull whipping, etc. Come on! Good to read Anne Rice's "Beauty" books as well, but better not to try this "at home"...

Conditions of Use Privacy Notice Interest-Based Ads © 1996-2022, Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates


All Titles TV Episodes Celebs Companies Keywords Advanced Search
Fully supported English (United States) Partially supported Français (Canada) Français (France) Deutsch (Deutschland) हिंदी (भारत) Italiano (Italia) Português (Brasil) Español (España) Español (México)
2002 2002 Unrated Unrated 1 h 38 m
Sir Stephen introduces O, a talented photographer in her late 20s, to a seductive world of deceit, power and eroticism. Sir Stephen introduces O, a talented photographer in her late 20s, to a seductive world of deceit, power and eroticism. Sir Stephen introduces O, a talented photographer in her late 20s, to a seductive world of deceit, power and eroticism.
Dominique Aury (novel) Marc Cushman (additional dialogue) Nadejda Klein (additional dialogue)
Dominique Aury (novel) Marc Cushman (additional dialogue) Nadejda Klein (additional dialogue)
Dominique Aury (novel) Marc Cushman (additional dialogue) Nadejda Klein (additional dialogue)
This story (of course, adaptation of the same novel) was first made into a French movie Histoire d'O in 1975 featuring Corinne Clery a O.
A tawdry, sanitized effort that doesn't come close to the meaning of Reage's book.
When the Just Jaeckin film version of Story of O came out in 1975, many reviewers criticized Corrine Cléry for being a wimpy O. And they were right, she was. But now there's Story of O: Untold Pleasures. You want a wimpy O? Let me introduce you to Danielle Ciardi. This version of the classic story of sexual submission pulls its punches so often you wonder why it was even made. Let's get clear right off the bat that there is a lot of nudity in the movie: pretty, naked women all over the place, no disappointments there. The Award of Merit in this regard goes to Ciardi's backside. You just don't see 'em like that very often. The problem is with the film's conception of O. She is supposed to give herself completely to Rene and then Sir Stephen to do with her as they please. That's the whole sexual fantasy the story speaks to. Except in Danielle's portrayal, she gets deep into submission when she is at the château, but as soon as she goes home, it's "OK, whatever." She keeps going back and forth between, "I'm yours. Take me," and, "Are you kidding? Why would I want to do that?" O has to buy into the fantasy, the commitment to subservience, for the viewer to buy into it as well. Ciardi never gets us to that point. One begins to wonder why Sir Stephen, played by the talented Neil Dickson, after all
Vaughn Nude
Private School Betsy Russell
Hd Adult Tube