The Rosebud Beach Hotel (1984) User Reviews

Exactly What You'd Expect

[BloodTheTelepathicDog · 5/10 · 23 May 2008]

The only reason I am giving this '80's hormone comedy romp a five is because it didn't take itself seriously, just aiming for an occasional laugh. I mean, how can you take a film with Eddie Deezen in it seriously? The film centers on a spineless wimp, played well by Peter Scolari, who is offered the job of managing a motel owned by Christopher Lee - who plays Scolari's prospective father-in-law. He and his girlfriend, Colleen Camp venture down to Florida to take charge of the place not knowing that Lee has set Scolari up for failure. He has already planned to torch the motel to collect insurance money while devising a cunning plan to make Scolari look the loser that he is so his daughter won't marry him. Laughs come occasionally but not nearly as often as the bare breasts shots. Comedies of the 80's had one thing going for them and that was the endless supply of nakedness.

VIOLENCE: $$ (This isn't an action film so you shouldn't go into it expecting to see any violence or bloodshed. However, the man who Christopher Lee hires to torch the motel has constant run-ins with fire and bombs).

NUDITY: $$$$$ (On parade here! Evil Toon's Monique Gabrielle sheds her clothes on several occasions as well as the other nameless actresses who play the bellhop-hookers. Believe when I type this, it is all gratuitous. There is a scene with a fused out Vietnam veteran -not played by Bruce Dern, surprise - who conducts a formation of nude women armed to the hilt with weapons. Colleen Camp manages to keep her clothes on so all of you folks who drooled over her in Clue - sorry, she teases us again here).

STORY: $$ (Nothing great. Colleen Camp seems to run the motel but makes Scolari feel like he is calling the shots. I wondered why she was with such a useless guy since she is the daughter of a well-to-do Christopher Lee. The pairing made little sense in this film. The main premise of the film is to see if Scolari can win over Lee before the motel is torched. Needless to say, the plot is threadbare but still moderately enjoyable).

ACTING: $$ (The acting here isn't that good. Deezen and Fran Drescher have their fan-bases but I don't see why anyone would want to watch them act. They can't help but be annoying. Scolari and Camp do alright with their roles but Christopher Lee is wasted. The story centers around Scolari and Camp and doesn't flesh out Dracula - or Mr. Lee. The two original bellhops offer a few laughs as the two guys try every maneuver in the book to score with the hooker-bellhops. However, as a whole, the acting was slightly below average for the genre).

It's actually called the "Fiesta Hotel"

[Groverdox · 3/10 · 9 January 2019]

A characterless posh couple are entrusted with looking after a hotel by Christopher Lee, about whom it is painfully obvious that he filmed his scenes apart from all the lead actors in the movie.

Lee is introduced in a swordfight scene that comes out of nowhere. When it first came on I assumed it was an excerpt from another movie the characters were watching. Unfortunately, no. It was still this one.

There is one of those godawful, lengthy musical interludes where some third rate songwriters have churned out a dreadful parody of whatever dated type of music was big at the time - here it is hair metal. Later, the trick is repeated with a power ballad that isn't quite as bad, or as lengthy, as the tacky, soulless metal track.

The beautiful Fran Drescher shows up, apparently playing a prostitute. An example of the filmmakers' idiocy is the fact that she was not cast as the female lead. She is beautiful, charming, funny, brave - a born star. The lead actress is totally forgettable.

The hotel (apparently actually called the Fiesta Hotel? How did they stuff that up in the title?) is supposed to be inhabited by a bunch of kooky characters, including a creepy nerd who thinks he's from another planet, and a creepy army man who thinks he's at war.

The movie has a few inserts of topless women that seem to come out of nowhere. It's not a sex comedy or a dirty movie or whatever. Watch the "Carry On" films. At least they managed a bawdy, lewd tone where the flashes of nudity fit. This one is a lame brained comedy that some pornographer has sabotaged with a few seconds of smut.

There is apparently some kind of attempt to make Christopher Lee the villain of this story. But his scenes are so disjointed and poorly inserted into the movie that I never really understood what he was doing in it. Most of this movie, at least, makes very little sense. There is hardly any narrative, just a set-up.

The conclusion made no sense to me either.

Even my enthusiasm for 80's b-movie junk has limits...

[terrywatt375 · 3/10 · 30 March 2024]

I've watched this movie probably a half-dozen times over the last 40 years or so (yeah, yeah, a waste of my time/life, whatever), yet I'm at a loss as to why...so much for the idea of age equating wisdom.

It may be due to having seen this first late at night via whatever premium cable movie channel it aired on in the mid-1980's when I was a teenaged horndog on the lookout for a little t & a on television. Sort of a wistful nostalgia for a time when seeing women disrobed wasn't readily available anywhere at anytime with the mere click of a button or swipe of a screen.

I should also say I've enjoyed other flicks lead actress Colleen Camp has been in. I always liked Christopher Lee in the Hammer Dracula stuff. Fran Drescher isn't an actress I've ever much liked, although her appearance in this movie was very early in her career thus she wasn't yet amping up her accent and annoying vocal mannerisms.

I think a lot of it has to come down to The Rosebud Beach Hotel just being a film I couldn't make sense of. It wouldn't be inaccurate to define it in the strictest terms as an 80's sexploitation comedy except for the fact that it was neither stimulating nor was it funny. There is a bare-bones plot which I'm fine with in that I never really required the boner comedies I enjoyed in my teen years to have intricate storylines.

I didn't find the amount of characters and subplots (of which there were many) by default to be either confusing or inhibiting. It just all came down to the sight gags and one-liners failing to connect with me. Very dumb jokes on a very juvenile level that failed to amuse me when I was 15 years old back in 1985. Then again, what else does one expect when your movie has Eddie Deezen as the onscreen comic relief? As another reviewer elsewhere mentioned, even the nudity here feels forced and out of nowhere, as if the director or producer or whomever suddenly decided mid-film that it was time to show some boobies. Mind you, I had no objections then (nor do I now) about nudity on film, but nudity on film is one of those things where if it isn't approached with at least some eroticism the result is awkward, as is the case here.

Let's see, what else? The movie was shot on what appears to be a cheap grade of film. Pretty grainy, visually. In addition, the movie barely rounds out at 83 minutes and I'd wager a good 10 minutes of those involve the opening and closing credits that recycle footage shown again during the movie to list the cast and crew over. About the only positive aspect I enjoyed circa 2024 was seeing and hearing Cherie and Marie Currie sing several tunes that certainly screamed mid-80's hair metal pop rock.

meh... memories of 80's sexploitation comedy genre

[Blueghost · 31 December 2005]

A memorable and yet forgettable film all at the same time. A lot of to be stars (as well as a couple of veterans) are thrown into this strange but poorly executed sex-comedy.

Even so there're a couple of laughs, but nothing really outstanding. Much of the lack of comedic punch can be attributed to a lack of coverage (as is typical with moderately budgeted studio films). Few, if any cutaways, poor sound, and reliance on basic camera angles; definitely a slam production.

Typical 80's sexploitation; has some interesting comedic conceptions, but it's market driven art. The DVD is a poor dupe of a second generation 3/4" tape; fuzzy image, poor sound, etc.

It brought a smirk to my face, but then again I saw the thing back when it came out. Otherwise give this one a pass.

the 80's were so prosperous that even Eddie Deezen could find steady work

[movieman_kev · 2/10 · 20 November 2008]

Sometime between "Bosom Buddies" and "Newhart", Peter Scolari starred in this dud of a comedy as Elliot, a soft-spoken weak-willed guy who's badged by his fiancé into taking up the reigns of her father's (Christopher Lee in a thankless role) hotel in Florida, which her dad just wants to burn down for the insurance money. Fran Drescher embarrasses herself as the head bellhop/hooker, and Eddie Deezen is on hand to...well to act like Eddie Deezen, the guy does the same shtick in every film he's been in and is never good. The film attempts to go for low-brow laughs, yet fails to even deliver at that.

Eye Candy: Monique Gabrielle, Julia Always, Durga McBroom, Tina Merkle, Julia Parton, & Paula Wood all show T&A

My Grade: D-

Where I saw it: Netflix online via Xbox 360

Full of tacky T&A interludes--but hey, it has Cherie and Marie Currie!

[moonspinner55 · 2/10 · 8 December 2002]

A comedy in nearly every sense, "The Rosebud Beach Hotel" is at odds with itself whether to be a goofy, screwball frolic (with surprisingly old-fashioned overtones) or a sniggering T&A fest à la "Private School". Colleen Camp inherits a fifth-rate hotel by the beach and hires second-hand help to run it, but does she know the bellhops are hookers? Fran Drescher has a riotous scene with a customer, and Cherie and Marie Currie provide a fine rock soundtrack as the maids-turned-singers (too bad they have no dialogue however). Eddie Deezen falls into the pool. Apart from all this, there are some nervous young ladies disrobed for the camera. The picture is so awkward it provides some unintentional laughs, but mostly it's a bore, and Camp's nervous-brand of insecure/in-command humor is just thrown away. * from ****

How did any cast member get work again?

[rockabilly-1 · 1/10 · 10 April 2008]

This movie is so bad, and the cast, which includes some semi-big names, is so bad in it, you will spend most of the films running time (if you can manage to keep watching) wondering how any of these actors got work again. I can't imagine this ever had much of a theatrical release, and got its only exposure on late night 1980's cable TV, a fate the film certainly deserved. I know they have fans, so if your interested, Cherie & Marie Currie sing a couple of songs that I don't think are available anywhere else. If this wasn't so obscure, it would have to rank pretty high on the IMDb Bottom 100 list. Trust me, it's really that bad.

Inn-competent!

[MikeMagi · 2/10 · 2 July 2015]

Sometimes, you can't help but wonder...how did this movie get made? What poor saps put up the bucks? Did they read the script? Were they in a financial plight where they could make money by losing money? And while we're speaking of money, presumably enough of it was forthcoming to persuade a few professional performers -- like Christopher Lee, Fran Drescher and Coleen Camp -- to wander through the drivel. The plot centers on a pair of young lovers who inherit a Miami Beach hotel and hire a squad of bell hops -- all hookers -- to work there. Meanwhile, a nutcase is trying to blow up the premises with predictable slapstick results. The movie should get only a one out of ten but I'll throw in an extra point for some very attractive bare breasts.

Girls (and guys) just wanna have fun!

[arnieineiss · 9/10 · 1 February 2016]

This is not one of those films that seeks to probe the deep mysteries of the universe. Anyone who has played critic and mercilessly panned or trashed this movie is taking this romp and themselves way too seriously. That said, if you are looking for a way to spend about an hour and a half immersed in pure mindless satirical comedy, this will do nicely. The movie is a spoof of almost any major movie genre you can name with each scene extracting laughter, while setting up a gag for the next. Similar to the Scarry Movie, Naked Gun, and Airplane franchises,a number of well known actors at that time (but not Leslie Nielsen)lent their talents to producing this very funny film parody. Sure, the plot is predictable, the jokes are cheesy, and the overall vibe is cult classic, but this particular recipe works so well that at times, the movie becomes a parody of itself. My wife and I first watched this movie about 10 years ago on late night HBO plus a couple of times after that, and I have to say it gets funnier each time.