I'm guessing that's why the Feds went to the bother of filing charges and conducting a federal court trial over it. If it follows the typical porn pattern, the film would be about 10% plot and 90% action. I was rather surprised to see that the Federal obscenity statutes are still in force and still used. If the films were expressly designed to glorify violence, murder and forcible rape of women for the purpose of titillating the audience, I would say it fits the terms of the statute nicely, and I'm glad we still have it available to use.
Federal prosecutors used the U.S. Supreme Court's Miller v. California ruling from 1973 to argue their case against Extreme Associates in Pittsburgh.
The ruling says that materials are obscene if they pass a three-part test:
The average person, applying contemporary community standards (not national standards, as some prior tests required), must find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest.
The work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct or excretory functions specifically defined by applicable state law.
The work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value."
I like suspense films, and I've seen some that wove sexuality and violence into their stories in skillful and sometimes disturbing ways- "Blue Velvet" and "Cape Fear" come to mind. But when it comes to something like this, I think it crosses the line into something dangerous. Psychos and violent sexual predators are notorious for using certain kinds of porn to get wound up and inspire themselves to do the real thing.