5.6/10
1,266
46 user 32 critic

Sex: The Annabel Chong Story (1999)

During a ten-hour period in January, 1995, porn actress Annabel Chong (1972- ) had sex with 251 men in front of cameras. The resulting video sold more than 40,000 copies (she was never paid... See full summary »

Director:

Writer:

(creator) (co-writer)

On Disc

at Amazon

1 nomination. See more awards »

Photos

Edit

Cast

Cast overview, first billed only:
Annabel Chong ...
Herself
John T. Bone ...
Himself (as John Bowen)
Ed Powers ...
Himself
Walter Williams ...
Himself - Prof. of Anthropology: USC (as Dr. Walter Williams)
Charles Conn ...
Himself - Friend and Classmate
Dick James ...
Himself - President: Annabel Chong Fan Club
Monica Moran ...
Herself - Friend and Classmate
Steve Austin ...
Himself - Talent Agent: World Modeling Agency
Jim South ...
Himself - Owner: World Modeling Agency
...
Himself
...
Himself
Lanisha Shanthi Easter ...
Herself - Friend and Former Lover
Mr. Quek ...
Himself - Father
Mrs. Quek ...
Herself - Mother
Allenina W. ...
Herself (as Alan Wong)
Edit

Storyline

During a ten-hour period in January, 1995, porn actress Annabel Chong (1972- ) had sex with 251 men in front of cameras. The resulting video sold more than 40,000 copies (she was never paid the agreed-upon $10,000). This documentary tells the story of that day and connects it to Chong's life as a student at USC and as the daughter of a middle-class Chinese couple in Singapore. Annabel talks to the camera about her decisions; the camera also follows her to an AIDS test after the world-record-setting sex fest and home to Singapore, where she visits her parents who do not know about her profession and friends and professors who do. Should she tell her mother? Written by <jhailey@hotmail.com>

Plot Summary | Add Synopsis

Genres:

Documentary

Certificate:

See all certifications »
Edit

Details

Country:

Language:

Release Date:

11 February 2000 (USA)  »

Also Known As:

Sex: I istoria tis Annabel Chong  »

Box Office

Opening Weekend:

$12,489 (USA) (11 February 2000)

Gross:

$233,076 (USA) (6 October 2000)
 »

Company Credits

Show detailed on  »

Technical Specs

Sound Mix:

Color:

See  »
Edit

Did You Know?

Trivia

The 250-man gang bang was halted early due to concerns over the rough treatment Annabel Chong was receiving. See more »

Quotes

Michael J. Cox: [referring to Annabel's "gang-bang"] It just gives porno a bad name.
See more »

Connections

Features World's Biggest Gang Bang 2 (1996) See more »

Frequently Asked Questions

This FAQ is empty. Add the first question.

User Reviews

 
A deeply flawed film that still deserves to be seen.
15 June 2002 | by (Sydney, Australia) – See all my reviews

This is not a well-crafted documentary, and no doubt film students will pick it to pieces. BUT, it is certainly a compelling and unforgettable piece of cinema, and one that raises many more questions than it answers.

The film is as tasteful as is possible, given its subject matter. Annabel Chong (Grace Quek) is an exceptionally complex human being: highly intelligent yet quite psychologically damaged. Watching the film is like being on amphetamines - the first half is hyper-frenetic and luridly self-congratulatory, but then the "come-down" happens. And when it comes, it hits hard.

I did some follow-up research. Ironically, this documentary gave Annabel Chong the financial rewards that her gang-bang didn't, and she earned enough to buy a house and return to college. She is currently completing a course in web-design/networking. She appears to be earning her living by operating a website that combines her discussions of Windows 2000 installations with subscriber-only pornographic photos of herself and others. Like the film itself, this historical footnote doesn't give any simple answers either.

As I said, this film is flawed in many ways, (I'll let you decide in what ways) but a few weeks later I still find myself thinking about the issues it raised. And on that score, it deserves a high recommendation.

After much deliberation I gave this film a 9/10 - not because of the film's actual quality (which only deserves a 5-6), but because it is a film that deserves to be seen and contemplated.


33 of 35 people found this review helpful.  Was this review helpful to you?

Contribute to This Page