Reviews written by registered user

5 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

9 out of 11 people found the following review useful:
Not so bad., 4 July 2007

Okay, clearly other viewers had great expectations of this. Jenna's then-husband probably had a lot to do with the expectations... way overblown based on his ego.

Dude, it's porn, not art. Alright, 'nuff said about that douche.

Michael Ninn did most of this with his artsy porn (read: special effects/green screens and story lines) in the 90's. Private makes better artsy product, too.

The odd part of the film is the scene in which Jenna is supposed to be suffering through the trials of Hell, yet, in the opener, she is the one dominating Janine.

Also, Katja Kassin should have been allowed to "mingle" some more with Janine and Jenna in the café, before moving on with her guy/girl scene.

The scene in the rain is a good one, with Janine being the more watchable of the two. The camera seemed to reflect that as well, giving her more face time than Jenna.

Jenna gets it back in the devil's chamber, and then makes an awkward attempt to escape that crashes the whole movie back down to it's most amateur level of "non-acting"... I actually laughed out loud, because I thought they were trying to be funny, not sincere.

The lesbian scene is hot (Jenna and Janine) but a little lacking, and I'm not a fan of lit candle insertions. There are far more erotic practices that can be used in porn scenes such as this.

Overall, I enjoyed the movie, if not just to see Jenna before she totally pigged out with the plastic surgery, and of course, to see Janine working with men.

Worth renting, maybe owning in a few months when the price comes down.

Pirates (2005) (V)
20 out of 22 people found the following review useful:
Can't wait for more like this...., 27 June 2006

To call this film groundbreaking, for me, it must have very good scores in five areas: 1.Costumes/make-up 2. Sets/ambiance 3. Special effects / lighting 4. Sexual heat 5. Acting

Groundbreaking would have been for the director to provide his performers with acting lessons and on-set coaches. IMO that would have fused together the good costumes/sets/special effects/sexual interaction with that which most porn lacks--good acting. The budget was there, so to have a coach would have made it better for many of the actors who found themselves on unfamiliar ground, compared to other movies they've made.

Much better than any other so-called "ground breaking effort" by other film companies.

Janine did a great job, so did Ewan Stone. The Chinese guy was hilarious, although quite flat and wooden with his delivery. All the sex scenes were good.

1 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
Not worth it, 9 June 2006

Movie deserves a six for having a few scenes of Janine with men. The rest of the movie is a bunch of individual scenes with no inter-connection or story. Looks and feels very low-budget and amateurish. Janine is hot, but not always in a good way, in this movie. I like her, but wouldn't rent it again. I look forward to seeing Pirates, and any other work she's done with other male performers, that hopefully have bigger budgets and better production values. I'd like to see her do another interactive DVD, but this time with a real male partner, and not another woman using toys. I'm also not a fan of movies shot outdoors. Never really like the isn't complimentary for a 36 year old woman such as Janine.

Maneater (2004) (V)
6 out of 13 people found the following review useful:
A little confusing, hypocritical., 19 July 2005

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Well, it's about time she worked with men. However, the director attempted to give it a real "amateur" look and feel -- on purpose, or not, I'm not sure.... What's weird is all the "behind the scenes" conversations that made it to the final cut. These conversations seem to attempt to create some image of Janine that the viewer wouldn't ordinarily have. --Who cares?! Sadly, she speaks of "control", "asserting her needs and desire for taste and intimacy" in all the scenes. It doesn't happen.

Well, in the first scene, she spends most of the time trying to act passionately, but there is zero chemistry with her partner...and she seems to be on the verge of laughing hysterically at herself, and the whole situation.

The filming is poorly done, and doesn't befit Janine. It looks like they had zero budget for this film. I'm shocked that Andrew Blake wasn't called to work with her again, and make a "tasteful" movie as she'd done in the past with him before. It seemed at points as if a bunch of high school kids with web cams were directing this film. It hardly showcases the beautiful Janine and this phase of her career.

In her second scene with a man (a threesome with another woman) she again is barely able to contain herself from bursting out in laughter, and at one point hides her face behind her hair while we can visibly see and hear her scene partner begging her not to stop the action as he tries not to laugh himself.

Apart from these two oddities, the scenes are pretty decent. There is no story at all. One other scene features Janine and another woman, but it's disjointed and hard to follow. The final addition to the movie is an old photo shoot from some magazine. It doesn't qualify as a scene, but more of a spoiler as to how these photo shoots materialize. However, it's with a male partner, so it does qualify as a boy/girl scene.

All the interview/commentary with Janine could have been a special feature and done apart from the movie scenes themselves and it would have been a much better final product as a result.

Memento (2000)
14 out of 30 people found the following review useful:
Hated it!, 14 January 2002

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This movie is the worst movie ever made.... It rips off "The Usual Suspects" in many ways, except for the good acting. Usual Suspects had good acting compared to this pile of junk. I wouldn't line the bottom of a bird cage with the paper this script was written on. This movie only works BECAUSE of it's backward regression story telling technique, and not in SPITE of that. If you watched it from start to finish in chronological order (instead of the reverse presented in the movie) it WOULD MAKE NO SENSE, UTTERLY! Granted, the writing is weak, so I guess there was no choice, but to show it that way. **spoiler** coming up: (if you can call warning you about the most obvious plot holes since spaceships hung from strings in early sci-fi movies...) If the revenge killing actually happened "last" in the movie, and then we relive in reverse order the memories that spawned it, what does the principal character then move on to with all his tattoos still pointing him in the direction of vengence for his murdered wife? He would still believe that he hadn't gotten his revenge yet!! DON'T WASTE YOUR TIME WATCHING THIS MOVIE!!