I make a minor hobby out of finding bad films that are based on clever ideas. Oddly, soft core has many of these. I suppose it is because the genre supports many folks who have talent and are "just waiting." Gary Graver is an interesting case, someone who worked with Orson Welles when he really was trying to do something cool. So cool in fact it was probably impossible and certainly beyond what an audience could read anyway.
Here we have the standards: fake sex, fake boobs, fake acting and all. But we have a character that looks like Orson. And we have a Wellesian construction: a fabricated circumstance for amusement about a fabricated circumstance for amusement. Both are combined with caprice. The Welles character is the driver of events but in a twist we discover he really works for the viewer-voyeur. And then, and then, in the final analysis we have the result as an idea for a film, presumably the film we see. And around we go.
I wish I could say that the cinematography was as intelligently rooted. But we do have some competent conscious-shifting: a gravel-sweep to the right but with an annoying sound rather like canvas bags pushed on sandy concrete.
Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 4: Has some interesting elements.
Here we have the standards: fake sex, fake boobs, fake acting and all. But we have a character that looks like Orson. And we have a Wellesian construction: a fabricated circumstance for amusement about a fabricated circumstance for amusement. Both are combined with caprice. The Welles character is the driver of events but in a twist we discover he really works for the viewer-voyeur. And then, and then, in the final analysis we have the result as an idea for a film, presumably the film we see. And around we go.
I wish I could say that the cinematography was as intelligently rooted. But we do have some competent conscious-shifting: a gravel-sweep to the right but with an annoying sound rather like canvas bags pushed on sandy concrete.
Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 4: Has some interesting elements.