Showing posts with label pornography. Show all posts
Showing posts with label pornography. Show all posts

Saturday, July 18, 2026

Movie review - "Centrespread" (1981) *

 Weird Aussie film, shot in South Australia, a sort of futuristic-ish sex movie. Some of the visuals are quite impressive. The plot is about a photographer who does various photo shoots. 

I watched a TV version so I think the sex and violence were tamed.

Wednesday, December 25, 2024

Movie review - "The Stud" (1978) ***

 Terrific exploitation. Trashy melodrama story which says something about the class system giving it some depth, terrific disco soundtrack (10CC, Hot Chocolate), great casting, lots of sex. Reminded me of 70s Oz films like Petersen - director Quentin Masters was Australian. Joan Collins shows off her body a lot and has lots of sex. Oliver Tobias is handsome and can act- why didn't he become a bigger name? 

Lots of fun.

Monday, May 20, 2024

Movie review - "Popatopolis" (2009) ****

 Gloriously entertaining look at Jim Wynorski, the prolific, enthusiastic film fan turned director whose love for movies, breasts and... that's it, makes him a compelling protagaonist.

It's focused on him making The Witches of Breastwick in three days, so the film has a strong structure. 

It also has a dazzling cast  - in adddition to Wynorski is Julie Smith, super smart,  a trained actress, who likes Wynorski but also clashes with him; Wynorski's bewildered mother (he's a dutiful son); Stormy Daniels (the one and only), again super smart, slightly bewildered making soft core porn.

In addition to interviews there's also scenes of Wynorski directing - the sex scenes ("we want to see her face not yours" he snaps at the male lead), feeding lines to Julie Smith which annoys her.

Friday, January 28, 2022

Movie review - "The Bellboy and the Playgirls" (1962) **

 Technically Francis Coppola's first movie. He was given a West German comedy and told to add nudity. It's easy to spot his stuff because it's not dubbed... and most of it is in colour. It's not that much.

Jack hill helped Coppola shoot the extra sequences. I liked this more than Coppola's second nudie - production values are higher.

Sunday, December 12, 2021

Movie review - "Tonight for Sure" (1962) *

 Before Coppola worked for Roger Corman he did some nudie cuties. This is about two men who meet and travel through Sunset Strip. There's lots of gryating women. Jack Hill worked on this as did Coppola's dad Carmine. It's dull. The photography isn't as good as say Russ Meyers. There's some quirky bits. You'd be hard pressed to know it was Coppola. Not really a porno more a "nudie".

Tuesday, December 04, 2018

Movie review - "Finders Keepers Lovers Weepers" (1968) **

Russ Meyer really getting into his creative groove now - check out the credit sequence, intercutting dancers at a strip club with men watching and the credits on bottles. The handling is very confident.

Unfortunately after a strong beginning this isn't a very good movie. I think the idea is good - and Paul Lockwood is a strong lead. He kind of looks like a rugged Robert Pattinson - I'm surprised he didn't have more of a career. He plays the manager of a strip club who is enticed over to the house of his brothel mistress to have sex with a woman then his mistress, so the mistress can organise a robbery of his strip club. He doesn't realise that his wife is dancing at the club and is sleeping with a bar tender.

It's not an enjoyable film. It gets very violent at the end - it's a Desperate Hours scenario. The sex isn't as fun because people doing it have agendas - to distract other people mainly. Anne Chapman, who plays the wife, never looks like she's having fun. There's a scene where Lockwood appears to basically rape her. Then she dances at the club but it's more out of revenge. She sleeps with the bar tender but seems to regret it

There's none of the joy and fun and love of sex that would be found in, say, Vixen. It's a downer.

Some decent acting but the thugs. And there's a naked black woman which was a Meyer first.

Movie review - "Vixen" (1968) ***1/2

A blockbuster success for Russ Meyer - the right film at the right time, but he was also fortunate in discovering Eric Gavin whose performance in the title role really makes this fly. In the first 40 minutes Vixen has seduced a mountie, her husband, a guest, the guest's wife and her own brother. She takes a break at the end so Meyer can throw in some plot about a communist who wants to go to Cuba.

The acting is very solid. Gavin is a star and she really looks as though she loves sex and is having a good time. Vincene Wallace is very attractive too - the love scene between her and Gavin is the sexiest in Meyer films at least to me. I think other people share that opinion too - in part because Meyer actually builds up to it, plays the suspense and tension, instead of just cutting to a guy grinding away on top of a girl.

The photography is strong as always as is the editing. It's full of life.

I didn't like Vixen's racism. It got wearying. And if the film was really anti racist Vixen would have slept with the black dude.

Although set in Canada it was shot in California.

Monday, December 03, 2018

Movie review - "Good Morning... And Goodbye" (1967) ***

Not one of Meyer's most highly regarded movies but I quite enjoyed it. His vision was in full flow by this time - plenty of nudity, and dancing, and quick cuts, and women running naked through the countryside, and overheated melodramatic plot.

It's a slice of life about several people in a small town - the narration (from Jack Moran) says eleven, but I didn't feel it was that many.

I didn't really like Alaina Capri in Common Law Cabin but she's in good form here as the town man eater, unhappy with old husband Stuart Lancaster. She chases after the town stud and a young boy who is keen on the step daughter.

Lancaster can't get it up but is rejuvenated by a sorceress played by Haji - a nutty concept but one of the fun things about the film.

I wasnt that wild about the concept of the step daughter especially when she walked in on dad doing with with Capri. It's a bit all over the shop but the cast give it all. I think I enjoyed it too because I imagined that Lancaster was Capri's surrogate - the climax of the film involves him getting sexual dominance over his wife again.

Movie review - "Mondo Topless" (1966) ***

The box office disappointment of Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill! prompted Russ Meyer to once again change gears, and do this colour documentary about topless dancers in San Francisco. There was surprisingly little nudity in his previous four films - well he makes up for that here, which has wall to wall breasts.

There's hyper active narration, quick cuts, interesting angles - all the Meyer trademarks really except for the narrative. The action mostly consists of topless dancers dancing, well, topless - sometimes on stage but more often than not in odd places like train tracks.

Meyer's narration can be heard over it some time (at least I think it is) - other times there are interviews with the dancers. This recorded voice stuff is very interesting.

The boobs do get wearying after a while - the just keep coming. This will sound weird but they're kind of better when they're attached to some character development. I really liked the girl who zoned out and didn't think of guys to focus on her dancing. And there's Lorna Maitland talking about how she was cast in Lorna. I would have liked to have heard more from the dancer with three kids!

I would have liked a story and gotten to know some dancers better but in many ways this is a very 'pure Meyer' film.

Sunday, November 25, 2018

Movie review - "Wild Gals of the Naked West" (1962) *

A nudie cutie from Russ Meyer - the film's poor box office performance led to him trying a different genre, more dramatic. This was hard going. There's more nudity, but it's just a series of moments - you wouldn't call them scenes - around an old western backlot. Sometimes the woman are topless, the colour photography is fine, the women are attractive. Most of it is music over action, with occasional narration. Sometimes there's a prospector talking to the screen. He has a distinctive voice.

Friday, November 23, 2018

Movie review - "The Immoral Mr Teas" (1959) **

The film that kicked off Russ Meyer's career as a significant force in independent filmmaking - made for a low cost it was very profitable. Absolutely it came along at the right time - a few years before it would've been too much a few years later not enough - but it has verve, energy and colour. It reminded me of Jacques Tati and Frank Tashlin in a weird way - the adventures of this salesman who perves on women.

He develops the ability to look at them with no clothes on but to be honest they're not wearing that much early on - lots of low cut tops. Plenty of cleavage on display, and breasts. There's a scene where he walked past a little girl doing a hula hoop which felt wrong - kids have no place in this world.

It only goes for an hour. It got monotonous - there's no story. But it is bright and hard energy.

Friday, November 16, 2018

The A to Z of The Other Side of the Wind

(originally written for filmink magazine)

A conventional review doesn’t seem appropriate when reviewing an Orson Welles film, particularly one that’s getting a release more than 40 years after actually being made, so Stephen Vagg thought he’d tackle it A to Z.

A is for AFI Lifetime Achievement Award, which Orson Welles was given in 1975… and used the occasion to tub-thump for money to finish The Other Side of the Wind. To be honest, that story and all it involved and what it meant for Welles (and Hollywood) is more moving than anything in Wind itself – but the film is still fascinating, provoking and a reminder of what a talented man Welles was.

B is for Bogdanovich, Peter, perhaps the most famous acolyte and chronicler of Welles, who plays a character based on himself in the film. Bogdanovich began his career as an actor, as he often takes pains to point out, and has carved out a decent part-time career for himself as a character player. His performance in Wind is not one of the film’s best, but it doesn’t matter because he’s so spectacularly well cast and brings such fascinating baggage to the role. It’s also heartbreaking to see this early ‘70s Bogdanovich be so cocky and confident on screen, and to know what hardships were facing him down the track (several flops, the murder of girlfriend Dorothy Stratten, two declarations of bankruptcy). There’s also a “young dumb blonde girlfriend of the director” character played by Cathy Lucas based on Cybill Shepherd, which understandably annoyed Bogdanvich. Shepherd herself and Bogdanovich’s ex-wife Polly Platt can be glimpsed in the film.

C is for completion, fear of, something which (some) amateur psychologists think Welles suffered from – pointing to all the unfinished films he made in his life along with Wind (Don Quixote, The Dreamers, The Deep, Filming the Trial, It’s All True). Defenders argue Welles would’ve loved to have finished those films if he’d had the money and support – indeed, some get very touchy at any suggestion otherwise. Personally, I think it’s possible to reconcile both the view that he was let down by other people and he contributed to the problem. To me it makes total sense that Welles might put his heart and soul into a film and then get cold feet towards the end, when energy runs low, funds run out, and you fear the finished project isn’t going to be as good as you hoped. And I get the feeling he knew that had Wind been released in his lifetime there’d be a bunch of reviews that would say “another disappointment from the maker of Citizen Kane”… as they did for F For Fake and Chimes of Midnight and for everything else since Citizen Kane. It doesn’t make the fact that he didn’t make more completed movies any less tragic.

D is for The Deep, another unfinished film of Welles’, this one made in the late ‘60s. It was based on the novel which was filmed by Phil Noyce as Dead Calm, and I hope someone like Netflix puts that together too. I have a feeling that with its thriller plot it might be more accessible to non film buffs than Other Side of the Wind.

E is for editing, done by Welles and (after Welles died) Bob Murawski. Murawski did a stunning job of approximating Welles’ style – he imitated the great innovator with supreme skill, and if anyone deserves an Oscar from this film apart from Welles and Gary Graver it’s him.

F is for Ford, John, who I’d argue had as much, if not more, influence on the character of Jake Hannaford than any other figure, including Welles and Ernest Hemmingway. Like Ford, Hannaford was self-consciously macho, Irish, had a clan who would hang around him, had Peter Bogdanovich as an acolyte, John Milius as another acolyte (he inspired the Jack Simon character played by Gregory Sierra) and was possibly gay (read Maureen O’Hara’s memoirs for the dish on that).Of course, there’s a lot of Welles in Hannaford but I would say there’s more Ford.

G is for Gary Graver, the DOP of Wind, and Welles’ right hand man for the last fifteen years of the latter’s life. Their relationship was fascinating and complex – Welles was a father figure and inspiration to Graver, though the relationship was possibly abusive (Graver was rarely paid and at Welles’ beck and call). It’s rich emotional material, more interesting than any of the relationships depicted in Wind, to be brutally honest. It has to be said Graver does a brilliant job of photography on Wind, and one hopes he gets an Oscar nomination.

H is for homosexuality, a theme which interested Welles later his career – such as in his film script for The Big Brass Ring, and The Other Side of the Wind, which hints that Jake Hannaford has a crush on his leading man. Mind you, there’s a lot of straight sex in it, too. A lot. Hey, it was the seventies.

I is for Iran, the country of the film’s co-financier Mehdi Bushehri, the brother-in-law of the Shah. When the Shah was overthrown in 1979, the legal situation of the film became extremely tricky and contributed to its delay in being released. Which is classic Orson Welles – his productions didn’t just have financial troubles, they had troubles that involved revolutions.

J is for John Huston, who plays Hannaford – rather surprisingly since Welles normally nabbed the best roles in all his own productions. Huston’s performance is fine, but you can’t help wishing that Welles had taken the role – he had more of a twinkle in his eye, more humour, more fun. And of course, the scenes with Bogdanovich would have taken on an extra dimension. I do love how Welles and Huston were BFFs in real life though.

K is for Karp, Josh, whose superb book on the making of the film is required reading for anyone interested in it.

L is for legal troubles, which dogged this film even more than other Orson Welles productions. I think any creative person would have adored the chance of working with Orson Welles. I think any lawyer would have been terrified.

M is for McBride, Joseph, a noted film historian, biographer, screenwriter, author and educator, who appears as a character based on himself, and wrote one of the best books on Welles, Whatever Happened to Orson Welles, which did so much to revive appreciation in the considerable achievements of Welles’ later years.

N is for Netflix, famed for their market dominance, the high quality TV shows, and the patchy quality of their movies. The restoration of Wind is one of the best things that the company has ever done, the best “original” movie they’ve ever released, and they should be proud of it.

O is for Oja Kodar, who co-wrote and appears in the film, and was Welles’ creative and romantic partner during the latter years of his life, even while he was married to (and lived with) another woman. You old hound dog, Orson! Kodar spends a lot of Wind’s running time walking around nude – I mean a lot – and is front and centre in what is already the film’s most famous sequence, riding cowgirl on Bob Random in the front seat of a car while her necklace beads slapp against her body and rain splatters outside. Welles’ admiration for Kodar’s body clearly didn’t extend to wanting to hear her talk – she doesn’t say a line in the entire film. She was apparently a leading reason in holding up the release of this film, which is a shame, since she is an arresting presence.

P is for pornography, which Gary Graver used to make to pay the bills while working free for Orson Welles. Orson even famously helped him out once, editing a shower scene in a porno called 3AM. Wind is easily Welles’ most sexy film, with plenty of nudity and copulation and even a dildo in the opening scene. I always thought Welles was a great lost maker of horror films (just look at how creepy the Xanadu scenes were in Citizen Kane) or action flicks (see the house of mirrors shoot out in Lady from Shanghai, or the battle sequences in Chimes at Midnight). After watching Other Side of the Wind, I’m convinced he would have made first rate porn and erotic thrillers too.

Q is for Q and As, which appear a lot in Wind – scenes of people standing around asking questions and replying. Did this happen to Welles in real life? Does it happen in real life? It felt weird to me watching the film but maybe this was how things were in the seventies and/or among famous directors.

R is for Rich Little, a celebrity impressionist originally cast in the role later played by Peter Bogdanovich. Little shot most of his part but then walked out on the film because he had a professional engagement. Welles promptly recast the role and no doubt stewed on the betrayal – which a lot of selfish self-centred people do, which Welles clearly was, despite all his genius.

S is for Susan Strasberg, daughter of Lee and Paula, a one-time wunderkind of Broadway whose career had become reduced to mostly appearing in guest shots on TV dramas when she got the call to appear in Wind. She plays – quite well – a figure based on Pauline Kael, who famously both defended and criticised Welles in print. Welles clearly remembered the latter – her essay Raising Kane – more than the former. The finale of Wind involves Hannaford punching this character in the face for suggesting he might be gay.

T is for They’ll Love Me When I’m Dead, a stunning documentary about the making of Other Side of the Wind, focusing in particular on Welles and his relationships with Bogdanovich, Kodar and Graver. It’s gripping, moving and captivating – a more emotionally affecting movie than Wind itself, though Wind is more innovative technically.

U is for Unknown Actors, which Welles delighted in using in his projects over the years. Sometimes it paid off – but there are some performances in Wind which are simply bad, such as Geoffrey Land as the Robert Evans style studio head, and Cathy Lucas as a Cybil Shepherd type. Gregory Sierra, a good actor, is disastrously miscast as a character that’s meant to be based on John Milius.

V is for vision, Orson Welles’, which is all over this film. A visual feast, full of ideas, erratic, overwhelming, stimulating. I know this is a flawed movie and I’ve been critical in this take, but I should also add it’s full of moments and scenes that have stayed with me, and I’ve seen it three times in a month, and each time gotten new stuff out of it. To counter balance that…

W is for writing, a skill at which Welles was never that good at, at least not compared to his abilities as an actor and director. If he had the help of a skilled collaborator like Herman Mankiewicz (as on Citizen Kane) or was adapting William Shakespeare, he was great, but he struggled more when writing on his own or with Kodar (eg The Big Brass Ring, Mr Arkadin). Wind has a great set up – a party in the last 24 hours of a director’s life – and plenty of ideas for drama: he’s gone bankrupt, his girlfriend is young enough to be his granddaughter, his leading man has quit, he might be in love with his leading man, he has to borrow money off his former protege. But none of these are really developed – the film is more interested in style and philosophical chat. There’s no confrontation with the girlfriend, or the leading man. No real resolutions, except death. And Welles fans will leap to his defence and go “oh that’s the way he intended, he’s subverting the form”. And I’m sure he intended to. But I’d also argue, looking at the whole of his career, that he simply wasn’t a very good screenwriter, and that’s reflected in Wind. And I also think it’s possible to say that, and say that the film is still fascinating and entertaining and well directed.

X is for X rated, which this film flirts with being at times. A dildo in the opening scene! (see pornography)

Y is for young Hollywood vs old Hollywood, which this film exemplifies. Hannaford is, like Welles and John Ford, very much a creature of old Hollywood, surrounded by cronies (played by old pros like Norman Lloyd, Mercedes McCambridge, Cameron Mitchell, Lili Palmer and Edmond O’Brien)… but who was so talented and such a maverick that he was immensely appealing to young Hollywood, as shown in the film (and in real life) by people like Bogdanovich, McBride and Jaglom.

Z is for Zabriskie Point, the 1970 Michelangelo Antonioni film which featured a house that is used in Other Side of the Wind. Welles mocks Antonioni’s film-within-a-film in Wind – lots of arty shots of Oja Kodar walking around naked not saying anything. Welles fans claim this is brilliant satire, which it is, but there’s so much of it. Kodar walks around not saying anything in the “real” section of the film, that you wonder how much he was sending it up, and how much he was simply having fun doing it himself.

Sunday, November 04, 2018

Movie review - "They'll Love Me When I'm Dead" (2018) *****

Superb documentary - everything you need about The Other Side of the Wind and more. It's less innovative than that film but more emotionally affective, as the material is better - the highs and lows of Welles' last years, his difficulties raising money for projects, his relationship with Bogdanovich (who was his student, then outstripped him, then fell back in the pack - and Welles hurt Bogdanovich mocking Cybill Shepherd and making jokes about At Long Last Love with Burt Reynolds on a talk show), his relationship with Gary Graver (who was so devoted, hoped that Wells would turn his career around and it didn't).

Fantastic footage including outtakes starring Rich Little, behind the scenes stuff, Welles doing a Q and A before the film about the film, the porn clip from 3AM which Welles edited for Graver. No Oja Kodar but it doesn't matter.

A truly fantastic doco.

Sunday, December 17, 2017

TV review - "The Deuce - Season One" (2017) ***

So many good things going for it - the production design, costumes, acting. It's an interesting world though a bit wearying in its seediness. But I've got to admit - I didn't love it. I like more story.

For instance, we establish that Maggie Gyllenhaal (superb) doesn't want to be a prostitute, then gets interested in filmmaking, and we expect her to go off and do filmmaking. But then she isn't allowed to, she goes back to being miserable, then starts filmmaking.

Everyone looks as though they're about to do something interesting but never quite get there: the pimps who smack their women around, the college student who just kind of serves drinks and sleeps with James Franco, the gay bartender who is mostly just gay. There is a lot of openings of venues, I guess.

If you can adapt to the story telling rhythms I think you'll love it, because there's lots of good stuff. I think it just wasn't for me.

Monday, June 19, 2017

Movie review - "The Girl from Starship Venus" (1975) *

I saw this at the New Beverly - apparently Quentin Tarantino is a fan. But surely he was being perverse, for this is an exceedingly dull, unsexy, unfunny movie from auteur Derek Ford.

It's got a bright central idea - an alien arrives on earth in the body of a blonde woman (Monika Ringwald) who walks around and has a series of sexual encounters. None of these are sexy, at least not to me; there's not a lot of nudity or sex; much of it I found downright uncomfortable because the alien walks around parts of sleazy 70s England: a porno theatre (where she's felt up by an old goat), a strip club, a massage parlour, a porn shop, a wedding, a drycleaners, a sex photographer's studio.

Everyone wants to cop a  feel - the only person nice to her is a nice guy who lets her crash on his couch. They get together at the end, which is the only feel good aspect of this movie. There's all these creepy middle aged and old man leching about.

It just depressed me. Scenes go on forever. Jokes aren't funny. A mess.

Wednesday, May 20, 2015

Movie review - "Lovelace" (2013) **

The basic idea sounds as though it'll be interesting - porn star turned feminist advocate, or was she lying? - and Amanda Seyfried acts her arse off but it's a dull movie. The story feels so predictable - innocent girl under spell of dud guy, becomes famous but doesn't like it, achieves some sort of redemption. There are some neat clothes and tunes and actors but honestly, we've seen it all before, with Boogie Nights... and then Rated X and Wonderland and maybe it's time to consider a moratorium on stories from the golden age of porn.

Surely there was a better movie to be made from the story of Linda Lovelace? It's such rich material - the allegations of abuse and gang rape, the conversion to feminism, the doubt cast on her claims vs the people who support her. But the film takes this wonky middle route, and it ends up being bland. It's not even that sexy.

Wednesday, December 17, 2014

Movie review - "Men, Women and Children" (2014) ***1/2 (warning: spoilers)

This Jason Reitman film didn't find much enthusiasm amongst audiences or critics, despite a cast including Adam Sandler and Jennifer Garner, plus a "hot button" subject matter - namely, the influence of the internet on our lives.

It's a well made, solidly acted film, done with affection and skill - Reitman has a wonderful humanity about his movies. Some of it was so eerily spot on - the recreation of net life, the details - and there were a bunch of very impressive young actors, especially Kaitlyn Dever, plus beautiful music. I enjoyed it when watching it.

But thinking back on the movie, I admit I feel a little sordid or "yuck". I think because every internet-related aspect of the movie had some dodgy overtone - Adam Sandler looks up porn and escorts on the internet; his son looks up so much porn he can't get it up when he gets the chance to bang the trashy cheerleader, Olivia Crocicchia, who is oversexualised due to the internet, who has warped ideas of fame due to the internet, and whose mother (Judy Greer) sells dodgy pictures of her on line; Sandler's wife, Rosemary De Witt, seeks out an affair on line; Jennifer Garner is so obsessed with daughter Dever getting in trouble on line she drives a wedge between them and almost causes a death; Ansel Elgort becomes so into a role playing game he can't function in the real world; Elena Kampouris is encouraged into bulimia by people on line. 

It's actually all quite bleak and down - the only real bright spot is the sweet romance between Elgort and Dever. So my memories of the film are mixed.

Tuesday, November 06, 2012

Movie review - "Felicity" (1979) **

Australia's answer to Emmanuelle - there's even a scene where the title character reads the book - complete with similar soft focus photography, exotic locations and a young woman's sexual awakening. Unlike Emmanuelle, Felicity is a virgin to start off with - well, a virgin when it comes to sleeping with a man, she's already had a boarding school lesbian experiences. She's younger too, which does make this a little uncomfortable at times, even though Glory Annen is clearly in her twenties.

Most of this is set in Hong Kong, giving rise to some terrific production value. (Some of it was shot in Melbourne - I presume the scenes set in that house with a large pool took place there, it feels very spacious for Honkers). There are lots of lingering scenes of Felicity putting on underwear and getting changed and some narration which sounds like it's straight out of Penthouse Forum ("I knew he was watching me as I was getting changed but it excited me", "I began touching my nubile young body").

Yet the film can't be dismissed entirely. It's a rare Australian film that encourages people to have sex, and says that it's an enjoyable thing - not just Felicity, but the family she stays with, her Asian friend (who she sleeps with), the nice bloke she hooks up with (Chris Milne, playing a knockabout self deprecating guy instead of a stud, which is a pleasant change). Even after Felicity and her boyfriend go on a break when she goes to Macao both sleep with other people but aren't punished for it. And there's a surprisingly un-erotic scene where Felicity loses her virginity to a man in a handlebar moustache - which makes the good point that when you have sex you should care about for partner's feelings (a point made in The ABC of Love and Sex, Lamond's earlier film, which characters in this movie go to see).

John Michael Howson makes yet another appearance in a Lamond movie as a pervert. Annen gives quite a good performance (relatively speaking) in the sort of role that is hard to pull off - she's not Sylvia Kristel but she does well enough. Whether you're actually turned on by any of it depends what you're into.

Sunday, November 04, 2012

Movie review - "The ABC of Love and Sex" (1978) **1/2

John Lamond's follow up to Australia After Dark is another documentary about the underbelly of Australian life, with more emphasis on sex. This makes it even more exploitative than that first film, although it's less obviously Australian - the things they talk about apply to pretty much every country, really (indeed, apparently the hard core sex footage was shot in Sweden).

But you know, while it's easy to mock these sort of films, and it's no masterpiece, its heart is in the right place. Yes there are plenty of bums and boobs and dicks and vaginas, but the messages it puts forward are ones that many sex therapists espouse today: don't be judgemental about sex, nothing beats a supportive and caring sexual relationship, communication is importance, homosexuals should have the same rights as others, size doesn't matter so much as caring, experimentation can be fun.

It does have that exploitative side (for instance, in the segments of homosexuality it shows gay men being campy and bitchy, and the lesbians having sex) but at least it is supportive and encouraging of people having sex, showing it to be a good, positive, enjoyable thing - which even now remains rare for Australian cinema.

As a piece of cinema, it's a more assured work than Australia After Dark showing Lamond's increasing confidence. I enjoyed the opening and closing animation, John Michael Howson camps it up in a cameo, and there is some gloriously daggy dancing during the open credits. There is also some surprisingly hard core footage (as in erect penises) which is presumably why this ran into censorship trouble.

Thursday, November 01, 2012

Movie review - "Australia After Dark" (1975) **

John D Lamond's Aussie knock off of Mondo Cane proved enormously popular in terms of its low budget - the right film at the right time. It's not all about sex, it's about weird and wonderful aspects of Australian society, with an emphasis on sex.

It's a real grab bag - nude modelling, bikini shops, Arnhem Land, Todd Henley regatta, a gay wedding ceremony (sensitively treated, and a rebuke to those who think Lamond was just an exploitation merchant), a pre-op transexual stripper, artists, a look at the amount of beer Australians drink, a prison museum, UFO spotters in Tully, fortune tellers, brothels. It was shot on 16mm and doesn't look too crash hot, and has several leering moments, but it's actually quite interesting in spots. Some of the sequences (e.g. witch ceremonies) look obviously faked but that's part of this movie's charm. 

It's exploitative but not mean spirited. Hayes Gordon does the straight faced narration.