Though some cast members are identifiable, this execrable attempt at softcore porn comes from the 1-shot school of "anybody can make a movie". Since amateurism is back in vogue during the current Video Era, perhaps no-taste buffs will tolerate this junk.
Sold misleadingly as a co-feature on Something Weird's Vol. 12 of its Dragon Art Theatre XXX Series, this strictly softcore opus is haphazardly shot with no sexual closeups or even medium shots. A cast of 6 or 7 people is let go to improvise life in a hippie commune, with dialog the late Dennis Hopper popularized back in "Easy Rider". Originally listed in the database as a 1972 release, it has been corrected to 1970, same year "The Family", a classic by Sergio Sollima starring the team of Charles Bronson and wife Jill Ireland, was released.
The later After Hours Cinema release has a 10-minute long sequence of hardcore inserts, shot with closeups and no matching whatsover to the characters or action of the film. It is merely XXX loop footage thrown in.
The nonsensical plot line has a new girl Karen (a prostitute) sexually initiated into the commune, with the rite of passage described by its leader as "better than swallowing goldfish", referring to those rather innocent times of frat boy antics. Clan decides to avenge Karen's mistreatment by her ex-old man by visiting his pad, raping his current girl and having group sex there. Apres-sex the girl whips out a revolver and film ends abruptly and unconvincingly with a couple of dead bodies littering the floor. I won't spoil the meager pleasure of "who dun it" by giving away the shooter's identity, but believe me, it is strictly arbitrary.
Though simulated sex is the film's raison d'etre, it's dominant contrast is actually drug taking. Karen shares "time capsules" with the group and getting high is, alas, the by-word of that long-gone hippie era.
The would-be filmmakers here have reinvented cinematic technique, sort of pre-dating D.W. Griffith who is often credited with inventing or at least popularizing the closeup. I counted one closeup of Karen speaking, but otherwise the sex scenes are all shot with a remote, distant camera, that makes the pioneering work of Andy Warhol look like Ken Russell maximalism by comparison.
No, it isn't another of those oft-cited "worst films ever made"-there is no such beast; rather this is one of tens of thousands of purely mediocre junkers. It is mediocrity, not "badness" that is the cardinal sin in this medium, and I'm constantly astounded at how a whole generation or two of would-be film buffs make the futile effort of actively seeking out the worst - a thoroughly pointless exercise by definition. Whatever happened to the impulse to seek out a hidden gem or overlooked masterpiece? Those were my marching orders as a film buff paying his dues (traveling to remote theaters to see rare titles before the invention of the Betamax or VCR), and remain so in these decadent times.
Sold misleadingly as a co-feature on Something Weird's Vol. 12 of its Dragon Art Theatre XXX Series, this strictly softcore opus is haphazardly shot with no sexual closeups or even medium shots. A cast of 6 or 7 people is let go to improvise life in a hippie commune, with dialog the late Dennis Hopper popularized back in "Easy Rider". Originally listed in the database as a 1972 release, it has been corrected to 1970, same year "The Family", a classic by Sergio Sollima starring the team of Charles Bronson and wife Jill Ireland, was released.
The later After Hours Cinema release has a 10-minute long sequence of hardcore inserts, shot with closeups and no matching whatsover to the characters or action of the film. It is merely XXX loop footage thrown in.
The nonsensical plot line has a new girl Karen (a prostitute) sexually initiated into the commune, with the rite of passage described by its leader as "better than swallowing goldfish", referring to those rather innocent times of frat boy antics. Clan decides to avenge Karen's mistreatment by her ex-old man by visiting his pad, raping his current girl and having group sex there. Apres-sex the girl whips out a revolver and film ends abruptly and unconvincingly with a couple of dead bodies littering the floor. I won't spoil the meager pleasure of "who dun it" by giving away the shooter's identity, but believe me, it is strictly arbitrary.
Though simulated sex is the film's raison d'etre, it's dominant contrast is actually drug taking. Karen shares "time capsules" with the group and getting high is, alas, the by-word of that long-gone hippie era.
The would-be filmmakers here have reinvented cinematic technique, sort of pre-dating D.W. Griffith who is often credited with inventing or at least popularizing the closeup. I counted one closeup of Karen speaking, but otherwise the sex scenes are all shot with a remote, distant camera, that makes the pioneering work of Andy Warhol look like Ken Russell maximalism by comparison.
No, it isn't another of those oft-cited "worst films ever made"-there is no such beast; rather this is one of tens of thousands of purely mediocre junkers. It is mediocrity, not "badness" that is the cardinal sin in this medium, and I'm constantly astounded at how a whole generation or two of would-be film buffs make the futile effort of actively seeking out the worst - a thoroughly pointless exercise by definition. Whatever happened to the impulse to seek out a hidden gem or overlooked masterpiece? Those were my marching orders as a film buff paying his dues (traveling to remote theaters to see rare titles before the invention of the Betamax or VCR), and remain so in these decadent times.