6.9/10
156
2 user

A Gunman Named Papaco (1986)

Um Pistoleiro Chamado Papaco (original title)
The adventures of a bisexual gunman named Papaco who wants to deliver a special delivery to anyone who pays for it.

Director:

Mário Vaz Filho
Reviews
Edit

Cast

Cast overview:
Fernando Benini Fernando Benini ... Papaco
Márcia Ferro Márcia Ferro ... Linda (as Márcia Hierro)
Angelina Dumont Angelina Dumont
Chumbinho Chumbinho ... Big Boy - Midget
Denise Clair Denise Clair
Satã Satã ... Sartana
Paco Sanches Paco Sanches
Edit

Storyline

The adventures of a bisexual gunman named Papaco who wants to deliver a special delivery to anyone who pays for it.

Plot Summary | Add Synopsis

Genres:

Adult | Comedy | Western

Parents Guide:

View content advisory »
Edit

Details

Country:

Brazil

Language:

Portuguese

Release Date:

1986 (Brazil) See more »

Also Known As:

A Gunman Named Papaco See more »

Company Credits

Production Co:

Olympus Filmes See more »
Show more on IMDbPro »

Technical Specs

Runtime:

Color:

Color
See full technical specs »

Frequently Asked Questions

This FAQ is empty. Add the first question.

User Reviews

 
Had more potential had it not held back so much and not used too much editing trickery.
7 February 2016 | by hippiedjSee all my reviews

Here's the main thing: If Papaco was being touted as a bisexual western, then by golly GO FOR IT instead of only giving vague tidbits of said male bisexuality and holding back too much. And if you play around too much with editing to disguise the use of body doubles, it gets tedious.

When I first saw Um Pistoleiro Chamado Papaco, I was pleasantly entertained by this Brazilian film. It had everything going for it. I was also intrigued by the fact that many adult films from Brazil contained all persuasions of sex: heterosexual, bisexual, and gay male (not so much on the lesbian angle). The fact that they contained a bisexual element was interesting enough, but the ones I had seen were borderline bizarre (among them being two vampire- related ones and the other just some sort of plot but it all seemed like it was made by a crew that had liquored up quite a bit!).

Papaco was different than those in being it is a western. Other reviewers have elaborated on the plot, so I'll not add more to that. My focus, which other viewers / reviewers have left out, is the fact that the initial "gay" scene is all implied, no nudity, just body motion. The second "gay" scene, while graphic orally, then blocks the view of the gent's lower front while he was receiving from the man behind him, and you never saw that actual act explicitly. Those were the only two scenes of that kind in the film, though Papaco is described as a bisexual. All the other scenes are heterosexual sex and full on views of everything from every angle.

The other issue no one seems to talk about is that there seemed to be a body double for actor Fernando Benini in all scenes, except for one which I'll get to in a moment. You never see his face and full frontal in any sex scene, they keep cutting to the close-ups of the genitals and then to his face, but never both at once. It was difficult to tell the difference between his body and the double's, but to never show all at once was suspicious. In the scene where he's with five women at once, they are always blocking his face with their bodies when showing everyone on camera together. Now, there is ONE scene where I am 100% certain it IS Fernando doing the real thing. At the scene with the blonde woman (at about the 55-minute mark), there is the usual cutting back and forth between his face and her servicing him. However, at nearly the 58-minute mark where you see a member being maneuvered behind the woman, the camera pulls back to show both actors in full view. When the man turns his head, it is indeed Fernando. Even a few "adjusment" motions with his hand when he pulls her up into a different position seemed genuine, however the rest of the scene is the usual cutting back and forth as if a body double was once again used. This process of constant cutting back and forth just becomes too noticeable with each subsequent sex scene.

Some might say, what's the big deal! I can see that argument. But having seen a tremendous amount of films including adult films, when obvious edits are used, it catches my attention. Have you seen THE BEAST IN SPACE? They didn't even try to hide the fact that the body doubles' bodies didn't even come close to resembling the main actors. At least they did in Papaco. However, hiding most of the visuals in the gay scenes (really, they went to an extent, so just go all the way) and SO many edits to disguise Benini's body (they wouldn't even show him full frontal when the little man pointed a gun to Benini's rear end and Benini purposefully got off the bed in a manner as so that you wouldn't see his genitals), it gets distracting.

Yes, I was entertained. Um Pistoleiro Chamado Papaco was fun, even quite arousing. It just came short (no pun intended) of being a really great adult film had they not tried to hold back so much. See it to have the experience of seeing it, but I for one pine for the possibility of what it COULD have been.


1 of 1 people found this review helpful.  Was this review helpful to you? | Report this
Review this title | See all 2 user reviews »

Contribute to This Page



Recently Viewed