Coed Dorm
1971
No user ratings available yet
Representation score: 2.9 out of 10
You are here:
Ass
No Poster Available
Representation Score
3.5/10
Limited
1971
Director
Murray Berkowitz
Runtime
5 minutes
Average Rating
No ratings yetNew Showbiz Analysis
Ass (1971) functions as a gritty, low-budget character study that prioritizes psychological realism over social breadth. While it fails to offer meaningful racial or LGBTQ+ representation, it succeeds in deconstructing the era's standard male clichés. The film's strength lies in its portrayal of male inadequacy and vulnerability, replacing the typical confident male lead with a character defined by awkwardness and sensitivity. However, this individual focus comes at the expense of a diverse cast and a broader social perspective. Ultimately, the work is a product of its time, reflecting the demographic homogeneity of early 1970s independent cinema while offering a nuanced look at male inadequacy.
Category Breakdown
Does Ass have LGBTQ+ representation?
The film focuses on heterosexual frustration and the anxieties of young adulthood. There is no evidence of queer narratives or non-binary gender identities.
How does Ass portray gender?
The narrative challenges traditional masculine stereotypes by centering on male inadequacy and vulnerability. It replaces the confident male lead with a character defined by awkwardness and sensitivity.
How racially and ethnically diverse is Ass?
The ensemble is predominantly white and Anglo-Saxon, reflecting the demographic realities of early 1970s independent cinema. There is no significant racial diversity or blending of identities.
How does Ass represent religion and culture?
The film prioritizes individual psychological states over religious morality, focusing on urban alienation. However, it lacks a systemic critique of Western institutions or community structures.
Does Ass include disability representation?
No visible or invisible disabilities are portrayed as central to the character arcs or plot mechanics.
Present on Screen
- Challenges traditional masculine stereotypes by portraying male inadequacy and vulnerability.
- Provides a nuanced departure from the expectation of a confident, stable male lead.
Limited or Absent
- Lacks racial and ethnic diversity, featuring a predominantly white, Anglo-Saxon ensemble.
- Fails to include LGBTQ+ narratives or non-binary gender identities.
- Lacks a systemic critique of institutions or significant social commentary.
Official Synopsis
A UCLA student film designed as a stag film for jackasses, both literally and figuratively.
Where to Watch
Find another title
Type to search for movies. Use arrow keys to navigate suggestions, Enter to select or search, Escape to close.
Similar Movies
Taylor Mead's Ass
1964
No user ratings available yet
Representation score: 4.8 out of 10
Boin-n-g
1963
No user ratings available yet
Representation score: 1.4 out of 10
Porn 'n Chicken
2002
No user ratings available yet
Representation score: 3.4 out of 10
Young Playthings
1972
No user ratings available yet
Representation score: 4.7 out of 10
National Lampoon's Another Dirty Movie
2012
No user ratings available yet
Representation score: 1.3 out of 10
Screen Test
1985
No user ratings available yet
Representation score: 0.9 out of 10
Hedonistic Pleasures
1969
No user ratings available yet
Representation score: 3.5 out of 10
Rate this Movie
Reviews
No reviews yet. Be the first to share your thoughts on this movie!
Use the rating form above to leave a star rating and optional review.