Write to Imperator at email@example.com
On this scale of 0 to 4, with a precision of 0.05:
This message is copyright (c) by Imperator, email firstname.lastname@example.org Anybody wishing to archive/redistribute my reposts and new reviews for non-commercial purposes can do so as long as:
This is one of those tapes which has been reviewed, debated, lauded and despised to death since it first appeared on the screens back in 1976. It seems that one can have no neutral feelings towards it. I have no less than four asm reviews, evenly split in their attitudes, and even the original Playboy review in 1976, though on the whole laudatory, acknowledges that this is a movie that can leave no one indifferent: you either hate it or you love it.
Last night's viewing was the third one for me, and the second one in the privacy of my home and with the power of the FF button in my hands; and though that may surprise those who would expect me to rave about the movie by default (since it is a classic), I must warn you that I had predicted quite a lot of FF action before I started watching it again. As a matter of fact, it was only with the utmost reluctance that I rented it in the first place, and did so only because I needed an urgent Connie (Money) refill in my system. A man cannot live on an A&A (Annette & Abigail) diet alone :-)
But the remote control just gathered dust on the coffee table. It is amazing that, after all those years, this all-too-transparent and undeniably dated spoof of Bernard Shaw's "Pygmalion" still exerts an irresistible magnetism to the viewer. I am still mystified as to what the origins of the appeal are. It isn't just the production values, though the film costs were in the hundreds of thousands and it took _months_ to shoot in Paris, NY and Rome. It isn't the dialogue either, which though sparkling at parts, wears old fast particularly on second (or third :-)) viewing; and even Jamie Gillis' superb acting can't remedy this deficiency. It certainly isn't the sexual heat; as has been said many times, the action is disjoint and overly concerned with the blowjob. It even isn't just Constance Money, sweet and lovely though she is, and always a welcome sight for an old and tired porn hound such as myself :-).
I honestly do not know. All I can say is that I can't wait to go back and watch it for a fourth, fifth or even sixth time; and watch it in its entirety. It is -that may sound funny, I know- an uplifting experience: I found myself smiling like a foolish kid when the end credits started rolling.
Rating: 3.90, the same as the similarly almost perfect "Autobiography of a Flea". Though "Flea"'s plot and dialogue are unparalleled in the history of porn, it is a dark and brooding movie. "Misty" on the other hand, though lightweight, is "light and bright and sparkling", if I am allowed to use Jane Austen's words for smut :-)
I don't know if the DP clips in "Double Pleasure" are original vignettes or just compiled from other features; this is a question for Connoisseur to ponder. What I can say is that this is a big disappointment: the charming Chris Cassidy introduces the DP endeavours of some of the biggest stars of the early 80s, Seka, Serena, Lesllie Bovee, Lisa Thatcher being the most notable, while she does some light g-g with a girl I could not recognize. Unfortunately ALL vignettes are brief (the movie lasts for about 60 mins), poorly shot (with the exception of the Serena segment which is watchable) and the technical aspects are particularly odious: there was something wrong with the screen-to-TV conversion and everybody appeared a bit more squat that they should. But perhaps the worst aspect of the tape is the infernal sound. Terrible, asynchronous dubbing, ridiculously loud sighs and groans that reminded me of a beached whale; sometimes the sound fails altogether -and that's a Good Thing. Overall, I can't recommend this tape to anybody but the most staunch DP hounds out there.
Rating (tentatively, since this may well be a compo): 2.15
An old Bruce Seven video, starring Christy Canyon, Erica Boyer, Heather Wayne and Gina Carrera and more. It is so old that there is a trailer for the "upcoming release" of the original Loose Ends. It has a ghost of a plot, about a certain magical object that the members of the cast pass to each other, screwing their brains out in the process. The sex is however as hot as one would expect by Bruce. Nice full body shots, lots and lots of RCs, a mini group scene in the end; as expected, Bruce Seven is also very competent when it comes to shooting g-g, so these scenes are not the drag they usually end up to be once the novelty wears out. Heartily recommended as a solid, fairly hot rental.
I followed Frans' advice as promised and rented "Private Video Magazine, Nr.7". The result is that both video magazines I've seen (Nos 4 and 7) are boring and very quickly leave me saturated with smut. Sure enough, the cast is gorgeous (Draghixa, Kai Nobel, Samantha Shamal among others) and the usual European advantages (good camera work, RCs, RACs, smiling at the camera, natural boobs) are there. But it's BORING -too predictable: a girl walks in, two guys meet her; "hi, let's fuck"; she sucks them; she does RC; RAC; DP; gets a facial, blowing bubbles of cum in the process. Then the ordeal starts again with a different girl and pair of guys. GET ON WITH IT! :-)
The Verdict: You've seen one, you've seen them all. Not even the beauty of the ladies can dim our judgement so much that we don't see that everybody is bored to death on the screen as well. I know it's a job; it doesn't have to show however!
Rating: 2.45 (an extra 0.05 was deducted from the "average" rating for the exceptionally poor sound of the first vignette. No dubbing thankfuly).