FURNACE (2006) d. William Butler

Reviewed by Rick Trottier

It is hard work making a genre film today. Most of the great ideas have been used and reused over the years and establishing new story and filming trends requires ingenuity and intellect. Following the trends can be done effectively, but treading that thin ice requires a dexterity that is impossibly agile. Instead of paying homage to the pathfinders, most films just look derivative if they’re lucky. When you’re trying to do too much AND following the plow horse down the furrow, a whole lot of potential is not going to come to fruition.

FURNACE is the story of Detective Michael Turner played by Michael Pare, a cop haunted by the past, who stumbles upon unexplainable deaths at Blackgate Prison. As guards and inmates meet grisly ends, Turner teams up with prison psychologist Dr. Ashley Carter, played by Jenny McShane, to unravel twisted threads and ghastly secrets buried in the old wing of the prison. As the ashes of the history are sifted, guards on the take, simmering prison tensions and specters of bygone days bent on revenge bring Blackgate Prison to the very brink of Hell on Earth.

When it concentrates on being a ghost story wrapped in a somewhat tired and threadbare external tale of molestation and murder, FURNACE has some redeeming moments. The combination of ghosts pursuing the denizens of a prison who can’t escape their fates recalls some of the best elements of NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET and THE RING. Just as the characters in both of those fine forerunners could not run from The Reaper, the incarcerated and emancipated of Blackgate Prison stumble about like folks straying in quicksand. Just as a dreamer can’t elude the sinister shadow overtaking them when their legs turn to lead, the unfortunates of FURNACE not only can’t escape the two ghostly beings scything through the prison populace, they must mine through murky mysteries in the heart of evil itself, the furnace room. Like a Greek Tragedy from which you can’t turn away, the malevolence that you can’t avoid is a powerful story idea. Coupled with a cast that are mostly adults, screen veterans like Michael Pare and Tom Sizemore, who can give workmanlike performances, FURNACE had the potential to be a solid if unsophisticated and unsurprising addition to the modern horror canon. Unfortunately, there are too many weaknesses and overly mined trends that allow this film to sink into the mire.

One of the blood-lusting ghosts in FURNACE is that of a child terribly wronged long ago. The evil child-villain was a wonderful icon once upon a time, but it has run its course and it is time to retire it to the pasture where it has earned its rest. In addition, overly gloomy photography goes beyond atmosphere and just makes this film hard to see at times, so that between the herky-jerky “creatures”, the darkling corridors and the low lighting even when it’s an exterior set, it is a chore to grasp what is happening visually. Just as the evil child has outlived its day, so has the music video style of feature film camera work gone to the well once too often. Take the nag out behind the barn and put it out of its misery! The overly muddy scenes keep this old but enjoyable story idea from being successful. Instead of suspense being patiently but inexorably developed, it is frustration that rears its disappointed head. Finally, the trend that should sink into the LaBrea Tar Pits is the “rapper turned actor” used simply to market a film to a “wider audience”. Jeffrey “Ja Rule” Atkins is following in the footsteps of “rap artists” who have morphed into thespians like Busta Rhymes, DMX and Ludacris, but none of these people are actors. All they add to a film is name recognition needed to push the product. While the producers and some of the “actors” like Ja Rule are taking home a paycheck, painting by numbers does not create “grocer goodwill” with the movie consumer. It is better to find capable young actors who don’t command a big paycheck so you can use that saved cash to market your film in a more inventive manner, one that allows the film product to be of higher quality and the film viewer to feel truly satisfied.

Added to these weaknesses is a stable of extraneous story superfluities that detract from the story instead of adding to it. The subplot of Michael Pare’s character’s tragic past is horribly underdeveloped and seems more of a pretext for inserting an unneeded and just as undeveloped romance with Jenny McShane’s Dr. Carter. Neither story line adds anything to the film and takes away exceedingly precious time and energy from the central story elements. In addition, Tom Sizemore’s “crooked guard dealing drugs” story and the resultant prison riot stemming from his malevolent machinations feels like a last minute attempt to graft ATTICA to THE RING and NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET. Just as any hiker wants to make sure they’ve got a map that can guide them through the twists of a trail system, a film story has to guide the viewer around the corners so that they don’t feel like you’ve been dumped into the Minotaur’s Labyrinth. By the end of FURNACE, you’re in that Labyrinth, and instead of a pleasingly simple yarn with some back story that fits the tale like a glove, what emerges is a pizza with too many toppings, colloquially known as a “mess”.

FURNACE has a small extras menu that also suffers from quality control issues. There are three cast interviews with Danny Trejo, Ja Rule and Tom Sizemore, each about fifteen minutes in length. The overly simplistic stock questions lettered across the screen don’t really plumb any depths and two of the three interviews suffer from audio problems. The six alternate scenes were mildly interesting, but the most fun to be had in the extras menu came from one of the four trailers in the “vault”. I found myself wishing I had watched CROC instead after viewing that wonderfully silly trailer. Despite the weak offerings of the extras menu, at least there was something, which is not often the case. Putting together a few tidbits always makes me feel that the film makers weren’t just going through the motions.

FURNACE was not a bad experience, but a missed opportunity. There were times when I enjoyed the crimson lighting, the flickering flames and the sense of inevitable peril. Too often, I felt like chances were wasted, leaving an end product that could have been so much better but whose bright promise faded like the cold ashes of a fire long extinguished.

www.geniusproducts.com
www.furnacethemovie.com

THE SEXPERTS (1965) d. Jerald Intrator aka J. Nehemiah

Reviewed by Rick Trottier

The late 1960s are often held up as a time of vast changes in the art, science, culture and politics of the United States. Often, it is the hidden agenda of the historian or essayist who makes this claim, for the entire decade was a time of immense transformation, especially in film. Pioneers like Russ Meyer and Dave Friedman pushed boundary after boundary in the early 1960s, setting the stage for the explosion of exploitation cinema that erupted between the years 1963-1978. THE SEXPERTS: TOUCHED BY TEMPATION is an example of a film that grew out of the rapidly changing mores and tastes of filmgoers, so that exploitation cinema of the mid-1960s could rewrite the appetites of movie lovers for years to come.

THE SEXPERTS is the story of three men who sit down to plan out a film about two starry-eyed beauties hungry to get into the “film business”. A director, producer and writer (very possibly William Mishkin, J. Nehemiah and Charles Ross who created THE SEXPERTS), discuss the story and characters of the “morality tale” they wish to tell about “Liz and Connie”. Liz Adams and Connie Mason are two young lovelies who are willing to try just about anything to become “movie stars”. As casting calls, screen tests, producer parties, beach house stay-overs and apartment orgies ensue it becomes increasingly obvious that Liz will do anything asked of her, while Connie has reservations about the seamy side of cinema. Each girl has to make choices that will determine their future in “the business”.

Like its nudist-film cousin, HIDEOUT IN THE SUN, the nudie-cutie THE SEXPERTS was a mid-60s effort to bring babes and boobs to the Big Screen, while simultaneously lifting a few dollars out of the film buff’s pocket. THE SEXPERTS has many things going for it that patrons of the 60s would have enjoyed and even more to enjoy from a completely different perspective today. The seedy tale of “the good girl & the bad girl” is always a winner no matter what the vehicle, and unlike most of the actresses in THE SEXPERTS’ relative THE SEXPLOITERS, leading actresses Lana Lynn and Rusty Allen are supremely attractive girls. Poured into elegant, form-fitting dresses of the day, carefully coiffed and cantilevered, these girls are a perfect counterpoint to the dorky and loathsome “film makers” who are deciding their “fate” as they arrange them like pieces on a chess board. As Dave Friedman once said, most actresses of exploitation film looked like “dog meat”, but these two dolls must have brought forth quite a few sweaty foreheads in 1965, and their loveliness is still palpable today. What might have been missed by the moviegoer then but can be appreciated so very well now are the marvelously filmed scenes of Greenwich Village, Manhattan and the Long Island beaches. Coupled with a delightful lounge-lizard score, those supremely feminine dress fashions and all the little snapshots of mid-60s life and culture that each crisply filmed black & white frame so beautifully preserves, THE SEXPERTS operates on a pair of levels. It is another marvelous trip back to the past guided by Retro-Seduction, and it is a nudie-cutie film that still has its eggs in the right basket. While not the tour de force of a film like THE IMMORAL MR. TEAS, THE SEXPERTS is in an entirely different echelon when compared to later offerings by producers like Harry Novak and Dick Randall, and for that let us be glad.

THE SEXPERTS does have its “flaws”. Some people might be put off by the dubbed conversation of the film makers and the voice over narration track that is substituted for character dialogue. In the liner notes by Michael Bowen, he described the audio issues as giving THE SEXPERTS ‘an unfinished feel that sacrifices a degree of ambience” and he is probably right. There is something about that narration track that reminds me strongly of the narrator spiels of the SPEED RACER episodes I used to devour as a boy, so it worked for me and did not detract from the visual cornucopia that is offered throughout. The other flaw has to do with the “caliber” of the visuals offered in the extras.

As has been the case with most of the Retro-Seduction offerings, SEXPERTS is a 2-disc set that includes a rich haul of extras, such as bonus SEXPERTS color scenes, television spots starring Audrey Campbell (a minor star in THE SEXPERTS), a bevy of trailers, Michael Bowen’s outstanding liner notes and NAUGHTY NUDES ’65, a sizable selection of 1960s nudie loops that do show Friedman’s feared Fidos and Fifis. After the allure of Lana Lynn and Rusty Allen, the NAUGHTY NUDES of ’65 settles on the stomach like Bromo-Seltzer. It is probably a good idea to watch NAUGHTY NUDES first and then move on to the feature film, kind of like when you used to bolt your green beans before savoring the cherry pie at dinner.

For twenty-something guys raised on Vivid Girls and other ridiculously crafted “actresses” of the modern age, THE SEXPERTS may seem quaint and out of date. For anyone yearning for a glimpse of the past other than the sterile news reels we see over and over again on The History Channel, THE SEXPERTS is a wonderful slice of vanished Americana during a time when life was changing faster than we knew. By the end of the 60s, Drive-In theaters were starting their decline, the once-mighty American car was ready to be unseated by foreign competitors and our faith in our leaders was going to receive a savaging we still haven’t been able to assuage. THE SEXPERTS is a naughty-but-nice look at a time when all things seemed possible, even an American Dream filled with sexiness that still seemed as sweet as the girl next door.

http://www.eicinema.com/

HATCHET (2007) d. Adam Green

Reviewed by Simon Oakland

Guy goes to Mardi Gras to forget longtime girlfriend, goes on a ghost tour through the bayou and runs up against your typical, run-of-the-mill, southern, backwoods, inbred, serial killer.

HATCHET has a lot of good things going for it, but indecision on the filmmakers part about which direction to take the movie ultimately dooms it to failure. Despite marketing it as "Old School American Horror", it's far too modern day "tongue-in-cheek" in it's sensibilities to be considered a true throwback to '80s slasher films. In fact, for roughly the first half of it's running time it's a fairly successful road trip comedy, and I was kind of into it, but when the killer finally makes an appearance and the red stuff really begins flowing it only served to run the train off the tracks (so to speak). Yes, the gore was impressive (albeit over the top) but the killer was far too generic/derivative (Inbred backwoods mutant man: Gee, I've never seen THAT before!) to be either scary or interesting. Plus, the immortality of Victor Crowley is completely unbelievable, even by "old school" slasher standards. By the time the credits rolled I was left disappointed, unfulfilled and a tad bit angry at the direction it went (south) after a promising first half. Too bad. It had such potential. As much of a horror fanatic as I am, I feel HATCHET would have played a lot better with those elements removed, and if writer/director Adam Green stuck strictly to the comedy which he so obviously has a much firmer grasp of.

But anyways, if you want to see some fairly spectacular gore, a fantastic cameo by Tony Todd as Reverend Zombie, and Mercedes McNab (Harmony of Buffy/Angel fame) topless, check it out. Those are about the only three reasons I could ever see myself watching HATCHET a second time for.

www.hatchetmovie.com
www.anchorbayentertainment.com

THE HOUSE OF USHER (2006) d. Hayley Cloake

Reviewed by Rick Trottier

When a film maker produces a new project, they must carefully balance style and substance, for going too far in either direction can end in ruin. Too much style and not enough substance can finish up like Dario Argento’s INFERNO, which looks spectacular, but suffers from a weak story and weaker acting. Too much substance and not enough style kept THE LAST MAN ON EARTH from being as great a film as it could have been. The story concept was superb and Vincent Price was marvelous as always, but the film could have looked so much better. THE HOUSE OF USHER certainly wins a few style points on occasion and it tries hard to bring in some substance at the end, but there is never a successful marriage of the two and the focus on style cripples the final product.

THE HOUSE OF USHER, based on the Edgar Allen Poe short story of a similar name, is the story of Jill Michaelson and her ties to the Usher family. Jill returns to the embrace of her former lover, Roderick Usher, upon learning of the death of his twin sister and Jill’s best friend Madeline. Once back in the Usher fold, Jill begins unraveling the twisted threads of the Usher curse and before long becomes enmeshed in its clinging cords. Despite urgings to escape before it is too late, Jill must unearth all she can of the buried secrets of the Usher ancestry and face the skeletons in their crypt.

There are many things to like about this film despite its many weaknesses. When the camera work is well lit, there are many beautiful, atmospheric and compelling establishing shots of the Massachusetts interiors and exteriors that are truly sincere and there are some moody scenes that have much impact. Izabella Miko, who plays Jill, is the most engaging and effective star of a Gothic-inspired film in a long time. Her elegant demeanor and smoldering sophistication, despite her youthful appearance, are deeply reminiscent of Euro-beauties of a bygone age. In today’s world of crass and cutesy dimwits, Izabella Miko’s winsome vulnerability and incredibly emotive aura make her a rose in a field of actress dandelions. Miss Miko’s fine performance coupled with some occasionally good camera work and mixed with an eerie soundtrack produce a stylish feel to THE HOUSE OF USHER that almost makes a viewer forget its weaknesses, but not quite.

Too many of the film’s sequences are shot so dark as to be ineffective. Instead of developing mood and mystery, they engender frustration and the frequent query, “What am I looking at”? The pace of this film starts out as being patient, then slows down to ponderous, steps it up to plodding and then leaps forward like an evil pixie at the end. There is nothing wrong with a slow pace if the payoff is worthwhile, but the end of the film does not live up to the slow rising action that seemed to be preparing for a more shocking climax. In addition, Austin Nichols’ performance as Roderick is uneven. He gets the dark, brooding part right, but is unable to sell himself as a degenerate, diseased descendant of a familial curse until his rapid character development during the hasty denouement, and by then it is too late. Mr. Nichols’ exchanges with Miss Miko have the right chemistry but their delivery of their lines is even harder to hear than a Steven Seagal-Edward James Olmos whisper competition. I often had to engage the subtitle function to be sure of what was being said. Finally, Beth Grant as Mrs. Thatcher looks menacing and that appearance fits the established style of the film but her performance is uninspired and doesn’t raise the level of suspense as it should.

THE HOUSE OF USHER has a small extras menu that includes some deleted scenes. More importantly, the commentary by director Hayley Cloake is quite interesting and her anecdotes lay bare the dark heart of this film and its inspiration from distant Poe relative, producer/writer Boyd Hancock. What might have been even more appealing would have been some deeper delving into the sets of this film. All the interiors and exteriors were shot in Danvers, Newburyport and Rowley, Massachusetts and while mentioned in the commentary, a short feature on that subject might have been advisable. In addition, since the director even mentions the old-world appeal of Polish-born Izabella Miko, an interview with such a mesmeric young actress may have also been a good idea.

In the end, THE HOUSE OF USHER has its heart in the right place and tries very hard to succeed at updating a story that has been made into a movie uncountable times, but by going for style over substance, it is unable to deliver on its promise. It is a worthy cautionary tale for film makers to study. Just as a painting must be more than glitzy color, just as a novel must be more than word-smithing and just as a fine meal must be more than plate composition, a film must be more than strong establishing shots and one impressive performance. Substance must equal style, or the end result is potential unrealized.

http://www.thinkfilmcompany.com/

HACK! (2007) d. Matt Flynn

Reviewed by Rick Trottier

Whether you are a scientist or an artist, creating a hybrid takes a great deal of vision, skill and intelligence. Hybridized crops have revolutionized agriculture, while hybridized music has set new trends. Sometimes though, there are some species that just can’t be combined. There is no way to cross a billy goat and an owl and expect you’re going to get a hoot nanny. Marrying the best elements of serious horror satires like SCREAM with sophomoric spoofs like SCARY MOVIE would be an ambitious undertaking. There are some projects though that no amount of ambition can accomplish.

HACK is the story of Emily and her college class mates, who blithely head off to a remote island to study wildlife as part of a “school field trip”. While “studying”, they meet amateur film makers Vincent and Mary Shelley King, who welcome the coeds to their eccentric island home and begin to weave them into their movie making designs. Before long, students begin to disappear and suspicion grows as it becomes obvious that the Kings want to do more than just create films.

HACK works hard to bring together two seemingly related subgenres of horror films that just can’t be successfully grafted. HACK starts out trying to be more like SCREAM in its slightly more “serious” satirizing of the horror genre. All the characters are obvious stereotypes, there are blatant references to better films and film makers and the attempt to make the characters unsympathetic so that their demise will be that much more pleasurable is painfully apparent. This strategy backfires though, for some of the characters and much of their dialogue is so immensely irritating that the viewer’s connection to the story is stretched to being tenuous at best. When the plot begins to twist and a somewhat more sophisticated form of ludicrous humor begins to unfold, it is too late and the damage has been done. In the end, it is unfortunate for there are some enjoyable performances by Danica McKellar as Emily and William Forsythe as Willy. There are some intentionally ridiculous death scenes and outlandish comedic moments that create a smirk and some equally deliberate plot devices that are worth a chuckle. After a rocky start that was reminiscent of the putrescent SAW films, which sadly are referenced, there is some reasonably good camera work on occasion, and some nicely done sets/exteriors. Gabrielle Richens is magnificent eye candy and even Danica McKellar gets into the act, putting on the sex appeal after spending most of the film as the archetypal geeky student. For fans of THE WONDER YEARS, I am sure that they will enjoy seeing “Winnie” strut her stuff. All of these laudable efforts keep HACK from being a disaster, but they are not enough to cancel the force of inertia. Once this film began its downward spiral, gobs of energy keep the ship from descending into the Black Hole, but no amount of power can help it to escape the gravity whirlpool, and HACK is destined to remain in a fixed orbit, far below the lofty aspirations that it may have set for itself. In the end, I don’t think it was a lack of effort and carefully spent cash. Some projects can’t be made to work no matter how hard you try.

As is too often the case today, this dvd is another bare bones offering. In addition to Ms. McKellar and Mr. Forsythe, this film’s cast includes Juliet Landau (yes, Martin’s daughter) and Burt Young, so that it stands to reason that some cast interviews would have been advisable. Director Matt Flynn also produced HACK and wrote the script. A commentary with the man at the helm would have also been nice, and even better would have been a commentary with Matt and producer/actor Sean Kanan or Danica McKellar. Hell, just a stills gallery of Gabrielle Richens’ best glamour pinups should have been a consideration, but there was nothing to be had. As has been said before, an entertaining extras menu can often soften the heart of the most caustic critic. When there is a pedigree to a film like HACK, an extras menu with irresistible goodies becomes a moral imperative. Is it that expensive? If so, better financing needs to be arranged.

In a world filled with super cheap, direct to dvd movies that have more in common with a sewer pipe than they do a feature film, HACK is a more carefully crafted specimen, but it is not high cinema, nor is it lightning in a bottle created under the most unique of circumstances. HACK’s humor will probably appeal to some and its ham-handed referencing of better films may seem witty to others, but it is not SCREAM, and it probably never tried to be. It will probably end up being one of those films that takes its place on a rental shelf, finds its way to the bargain bin and finally enters the last journey of being traded from owner to owner through used dvd stores or used on-line sites, never quite knowing what it means to be real.

http://www.alluminationfilmworks.com/

THE ATTIC (2008) d. Mary Lambert

Reviewed by Rick Trottier

The complexities of the mind are rich ground from which screenplays often spring. Since the earliest days of film, neuroses and psychoses have been the motivating forces of movie heroes and villains alike. Since Alfred Hitchcock’s PSYCHO, thrillers and horror films have mined the warped passages of the brain even more heavily, but it rarely gets old. Insanity and its related psychological ailments touch some of the most deeply seated fears in our souls. THE ATTIC is a film that tries to blend a descent into madness with elements of the occult, and has a degree of success doing it.

Set in an aging rural, New York estate, THE ATTIC is the story of the Callan family and their 20-something daughter Emma. After moving into this old house, which was the scene of past violence and disturbing events, Emma begins to see a person who looks like her, which feeds growing fears about going outside and staying within the house itself. Emma’s fears degenerate into phobias and paranoia, as she suspects her parents, her therapist and even her brother of plotting against her. Emma’s behavior slides into the realm of bizarre, even as what she sees becomes more frightening and inexplicable, causing her to resort to drastic measures to save her sanity and soul.

THE ATTIC is a very mixed bag of strengths and weaknesses. While most people today would consider the slow pace a detriment, it is also of benefit, for it gives the viewer the chance to enjoy some of the fine camerawork in this film. There are some artfully composed shots that meld color, form and subject into some very compelling scenes. While there are some derivative camera and computer generated effects similar to scenes from THE RING, these are few and do not detract from some of the genuinely appealing atmosphere that is reminiscent of 1970s, Euro-suspense. Elisabeth Moss’s performance as Emma is quite strong, as she shifts her character from one moment being the sweet and breathy-voiced youth, to the darkly disturbed femme fatale and all the moods and affects in between. As a result of her changes of tone, temper, makeup and dialogue, Miss Moss’s portrayal of the complex Emma Callan is the best performance in the film. Tom Malloy’s portrayal of Emma’s damaged brother Frankie is also sincere and their chemistry is palpable, but Frankie’s character and other potentially important characters are shouldered aside for other plot elements.

The story is not as strong as the camerawork or some of the performances, as it wobbles between being predictable, baffling and full of illogical gaps. Part of these fissures in reason is explained at the end when the character of John/Brad/Ronald is “unmasked”. Prior to that point, John’s character, played by Jason Lewis, adds a layer of romance to the story that is unneeded and unwanted. The focus needed to be on the Callan siblings and the parents, played by veterans John Savage and Catherine Mary Stewart. Their talents were wasted on parts that were sadly under developed, but should have added layers of tension to the plot. When the more intense and violent acts of the film are played out at the end, the viewer has not had the time to fully form feelings for the feature characters. In addition to unnecessary characters, the very short run-time of this 76 minute film did not allow enough character development either.

Unlike Allumination Filmworks offering of THE OTHER SIDE, which contained a sizable and interesting menu of extras, THE ATTIC is not typical of most people’s upstairs. It is not crammed with goodies, trinkets and mysteries, instead it is pretty bare. With the exception of four Allumination previews and the film trailer, there is nothing to be had. When you consider the pedigree of this film, with PET SEMETARY’S Mary Lambert directing, two screen veterans in supporting roles, an actor who is also the writer and an up and coming actress in Elisabeth Moss, who has a pretty impressive resume for a 25 year-old, some short interviews, commentaries or behind the scenes short features would have been advised. What is often forgotten when producing and releasing a dvd is that seeing inside the mind and motives of the film crew and cast almost always lends a degree of warm sentiment in the soul of the viewer and reviewer. When a disc is “bare bones”, the film is the only line of defense against full-scale criticism.

THE ATTIC was neither time wasted, nor an emotionally crippling experience as too many films often are today. It had redeeming qualities and some unrealized potential. As a lover of old-school film techniques, it would great to see more film makers use patient, well composed photography. In addition, it is heart-warming to see a young actress give a strong performance and not just trade on her bright eyes and pretty face. Despite these strengths and others, THE ATTIC may not be for everyone. It is not brutally gory, does not move as fast as a video game and it is not needlessly crass and boorish. For me, that is a good thing because it means that THE ATTIC is a lot like films of yesteryear, in that it tries to get you to relate and reflect. Had the story been a bit better constructed, that might have been a little easier to do.

http://www.alluminationfilmworks.com/
http://www.atticmovie.com/

THE SEXPLOITERS (1965) d. Al Ruban

Reviewed by Rick Trottier

Exploitation Cinema was just what the name implies. It was a vehicle to use some theme like sex, violence, race relations or taboos to lure patrons into theaters and get them to spend money on the promise of a “thrill”. By the video age of the 1980s, exploitation titles of the 1960s saw a revival as they were brought to vhs. Lurid box covers and licentious tag lines made these films even more enticing to the unwary or uncaring. Retro-Seduction Cinema has been restoring a boatload of exploitation titles of the past like HIDEOUT IN THE SUN, THE SEXPERTS and CHANTAL, many of which are enjoyable films in their own right and with lots of goodies in the extras menus, the historical/nostalgia value of these dvds is inestimable. THE SEXPLOITERS has some charming elements, but it is a great reminder of why this genre was labeled “exploitation”.

THE SEXPLOITERS is the “story” of bored suburban housewives led by “Lynn”, who use their looks and talents to make extra money in the seedy heart of the Big City to support their materialistic lifestyle back in the ‘burbs. Women like Lynn take gigs posing for “camera club” photo shoots, attend swinger parties and fulfill fantasies of perverts only to end up with a fistful of cash back in the mundane world of track housing, manicured lawns and the two-car garage.

THE SEXPLOITERS doesn’t really have a “story”, but is a series of vignettes or nudie loops loosely bound together by Lynn’s tale. The underlying intent is to explore scenes like the seedy world of shutterbugs who leer at the occasionally attractive, but more often pedestrian women. There are scenes where the “models” of the “agency” do more than pose nude, but go to parties or arranged “liaisons” where their “talents” are tested more fully. Even taboo subjects like necrophilia and lesbianism are delicately broached. What is assembled is a perfect example of “exploitation” cinema. While some of the “actresses” are attractive, like “Lynn”, played by Terri Steele or Gigi Darlene’s “model eating ice cream”, most of the women would be considered fairly plain by today’s standards, but that is part of the charm of 60s exploitation cinema. In addition, like most theatrical releases of the time, only boobs and butts could be displayed and actual “sex scenes” were pretty tamely shot. The idea is to “tease” and get people in the seats with a “hint” of what they might see. What is surprising is the occasionally well-composed shot, witty camera angle or tongue-in-cheek exchange that keeps this film from being perilously dull. The problem isn’t that THE SEXPLOITERS doesn’t deliver on its promise of skin. Unlike a lot of exploitation film that is set in interesting locales or includes wonderful cars, fashions or kitsch of yore, THE SEXPLOITERS is set indoors for the most part and the sets were extremely simplistic. As a result, you have to dig to find anything of apparent nostalgic value, but it’s there. THE SEXPLOITERS is the very definition of what exploitation cinema was, from the grainy black & white film, to the archetypal drooling scumbags, to the lasciviously built “housewives” and the amiable incidental music that sounds like it was taken from Woolworth’s sound system. THE SEXPLOITERS reels you in with a great dvd front box cover, some fine box photos on the back and great use of old-school tag lines that promise all kinds of sleaze. In the end, you’ll get a laugh or a thrill. It just won’t be from what you expected.

Unlike a lot of Retro-Seduction’s recent offerings, the extras menu is a bit thin, but like the film, there is more than meets the eye if you search around. The commentary by C. Davis Smith is very interesting and entertaining. Michael Bowen’s liner notes are chock-full of historical information worthy of the serious film buff. The Retro-Seduction trailer vault is pretty similar to what can be found on other discs, but the vibe is right and the producers of this project avoid adding trailers from the other satellite imprints of PopCinema, which just wouldn’t fit.

While not up to the loftily set bar of HIDEOUT IN THE SUN or THE SEXPERTS, THE SEXPLOITERS is another worthwhile addition to Retro-Seduction Cinema’s growing “vault” of gems of long-ago. Americans have long had a poor relationship with history as we still tear down historic baseball parks, build malls on Revolutionary and Civil War battlefield sites, “refit” old farmhouses and brownstones and restructure City Squares and downtowns. What was and is lost can never be recovered. Film is a lot like that. If it is not carefully restored, old film is lost to history and all that is left is memory, which is never as accurate or as clear as we think. THE SEXPLOITERS may not be THE GRADUATE, but it is a snapshot of 1960s culture and mores none-the-less and as such it is worthy of preservation.

http://www.eicinema.com/