You know they must've had some money, because I think some of it is filmed overseas. But, the dizzying way the extended video "erotic" scenes are added to what was probably a late night pay-cable release are very annoying and easy to fast-forward through without the sustained quality of, say, Rod Steele. Okay, having found out that this WAS a soft core movie, I didn't necessarily turn it off and demand my money back. In this movies seeing the "actors" rehearsing highlights the lack of preparation that went into acting out the real characters in the movie. I was looking for more "cheese" and less "cheesecake." First of all, I think movies shouldn't be allowed to start with "actors" rehearsing for a part at a talent agency (or wherever "actors" rehearse). The reason why I didn't expect this movie, was because the box was missing the "Must be 18 to Rent" Sticker. It had a good script, a sincere leading man, and a sense of purpose. I rented this type of "soft core" before, but I can honestly say, I wasn't expecting this to be in the same type as "Rod Steele: You Only Live Until You Die"-which was both sexy AND funny. I pray for someone who worked on this panty waste of a flick to respond. Why did they even bother to give the film a NC-17 rating, were they hoping to get as large of an audience as possible? At least if it were rated X it would be more sexual and therefore taking the viewers focus away from the overall low quality. Why was a joke such as this put in the film? Was the director thinking "I need a humorous scene to balance out the great acting so I will use some lame ass joke I read on a Laffy Taffy wrapper." Another retarded part is when Norman spills the invisibility potion on himself as he attempts to keep it from spilling. My personal favorite part of the movie is the duck asking the bartender if he has any grapes. The acting, camera-work, plot, script, and sound are all awful. It is neither a porno nor a legitimate film and it gives them both a bad name. This takes my worst movie award away from Komodo, which is no easy feat. There's better, though.Īfter just viewing the movie, I must say this is one of the worst films I have ever seen. If you want to see the last vestiges of the softcore era before The Asylum took over with American raunch, this isn't bad. The acting isn't great, with people in England and Italy speaking stereotypical accented English. Obviously, you won't be disappointed with the women. The Invisible Men do things that Claude Rains wasn't allowed to do back in 1933, of course. The other ladies, like Kim Dawson, came to showcase their assets in grand style. It's to see a very healthy and fit Gabby Hall naked and she is in top form and health here. The movie features lame special effects but they do the trick but I doubt anybody watches this film to see those. Unbeknownst to them, an agent named Robert Bull (who also got into the butterscotch and is invisible as well) attempts to sabotage her career for being dumped by her as her representative. They go across the ocean to England to help perform an exorcism and then to Italy where Kelli has a film opportunity. She hangs out with a fired caterer named Norman Parent, who somehow got turned invisible by spilling a butterscotch smelling formula in a sophomoric scene that ranks among the worst ever in 100+ years of film. ![]() In one of her final performances, Gabriella Hall plays Kelli Parkinson, a struggling actress trying to get a job. It wasn't until yesterday that I saw Invisible Man and for what it's worth, it's actually decent. didn't decide to go PC or not even bother promoting what their channel was created for, respectively, I would have seen this one sooner.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |