Write to Imperator at [email protected]
On this scale of 0 to 4, with a precision of 0.05:
COPYRIGHT NOTICE
This message is copyright (c) by Imperator, email [email protected] Anybody wishing to archive/redistribute my reposts and new reviews for non-commercial purposes can do so as long as:
Let's begin with our good friends at Private. Their "Private Film #20 and #21, "The Tower" (two parts, with a third allegedly in production) are their most recent efforts to show us a good time. As usual they try hard; they pump money in the production, don't give a flying fuck about securing the "Non-Violent" label on the box, and cater well to their fan base by keeping up to their proven raunchy formula. So, what's the verdict?Well, this time there's good news and bad news. The good news: the videos succeed in being fun, the plot is quite tittilating at parts and the action is, as expected, incredibly raunchy, brilliantly shot and EXTREMELY long (each video lasts almost 2 hours). This, however, we've come to expect >from Private. The bad news is quite disconcerting and unfortunately spoil the enjoyment of the flick.
Ron very appropriately subtitled the film as "Jim South invades Europe", and it's true. When the credits started rolling in the end, I made two wagers: that the main star, Aliza, is Russian in origin, and that Mr. South had at least some responsibility for the disgraceful parade of bleach, Silly Cones and, most disgustingly, tatoos my eyes had just witnessed. Sure enough, the "Casting" credit confirmed how infallible I am :-). After the usual bottomless source of Hungarian talent, the local wealth of French girls, and the recently very pronounced British participation had been credited, the credits I had expected fell into place: Moscow bureau for Ms. Aliza and LA bureau (World Modelling Agency) for the rest of the petrochemical products.
But let's take things from the beginning. "The Tower" is an unashamed ripoff of the mainstream turkey "Sliver". The funny thing is that when I saw that terrible film last year I immediately thought: "Sharon Stone isn't in the buff long enough -what a ripoff" :-) and "Gee, as bad as this works for mainstream, it should make one hell of a porn movie". And indeed our pals at Private didn't prove me wrong. The plot works: Ms Aliza rents a flat in a tower where several mysterious murders have happend in the past (all on screen); she looks exactly the sort of dumb, confused person the part calls for, and is quite convincing as being liberated to the point of sluttiness at the same time. Of course this is a porno: "Hi, let's fuck" premises abound. When Aliza goes to check the flat before she moves in, it is very natural she'll fuck the real estate agent. Later on, when two policemen come inquiring about the recent rapes and murders, the -female- tenants are most anxious to cooperate with authorites putting -literally- their collective asses on the line. Aliza cannot of course lag far behind, and in Part 2 she engages in a 3some with a male and female cop (an absolutely SUPERB scene -who's the lady who plays the female cop BTW?).
[Update 7/13/95. Once again the Master from The Hague gallops to the rescue of the senile Emperor and his crappy memory:
> From: [email protected] (Peter van Aarle) > Subject: Private's the Tower... > Date: Sat, 1 Jul 1995 10:29:29 > > [...] you posted a review of the Tower parts 1 and 2. > Yesterday I got to watch part 3, and there were credits at the end. Not > just credits, but very usable credits (with a picture of every performer). > Of course it would have been more useful if they had tacked those credits > onto each volume :-) > > Anyway, with those credits I was able to ID just about every performer in > the three parts (mainly thanks to the short 'what happened in the first 2 > parts' at the beginning of the movie), so I decided to upate your review for > you in that respect: > > [...] > > The female cop is Monica Tanner[Imp. comment: D'OH! She used to be one of my European favourites and I can't recognize her! :-)]
> The complete rundown of scenes is as follows: > > Part 1. > Barbara blows killer then gets thrown of the building. > Aliza does real estate guy RLangin. > Brunette Louise Tchekan is kidnapped in garage, fucked and killed. > Blonde neighbor Andrea comes by, then goes home to screw husband and an > artbuyer (Jean Louis and Christian). > Boss David Perry forces blonde Shayse Manhattan to fuck him at the office > (I don't remember exactly what she looked like, could this be the US girl > Chayse Manhattan, I wonder). > Laurent is reading the paper, with blonde Monikat and Shannon when > policemen Jean Yves LeCastel and Stanislas come by gfor questioning. > Laurent leaves before the sex. > Aliza is jogging and meets he owner of the building, Frank Versace. > > Part 2. > Frank Versace shows Aliza how he spies on everyone with his cameras: > Yves Baillat has his wife Betty [a+f] and his daughter Anais [a+f] > fuck him. > The killer does blonde Bernadette in the elevator [a] > Blonde Nathalie fucks the black maintenance man Jean Pierre Quipre [a+f] > Aliza is 'interogated' by cop Monica Tanner, then her collegue JYLeCastel > joins in. > Killer watches Salvatore fuck maid Djamila [f] until wife Agnes comes home > and joins in [bald+a+f]. The kiler comes in, decks the guy and fucks the > women. > The younger daughter of Yves Baillat, Monon [a+f], seduces her new blonde > tutor Rachel[a+f], until Yves comes in and fucks then both. > finally the killer spies on > Joo Min Lee masturbating. > > Peter van Aarle ([email protected])Ain't this Peter amazing? :-)]
All the while, the unidentified -as yet- rapist/serial killer goes about his evil ways. Amazingly enough the US version has left all the non consentual stuff uncut, including all the knife threats, forceful sodomization and eventual killing (only the first murder is shown on screen, the rest are off stage). What is most disturbing is that all this is presented in quite a light, almost fluffy, manner that pisses me off more than the NC aspect.That said, from a sexual point of view these NC scenes are excellent, particularly the one in Part 1 that includes some of the best anal sequences I have recently seen (the girl is natural, thank God). My verdict for this particular aspect of the film is that I personally don't feel much titillation by such premises, but I understand that many do and still remain entirely harmless to society. These are, we must not forget, "adult" movies, i.e. they are addressed to supposedly mature individuals. If a viewer actually goes out and commits similar crimes because of what Ms. MacKinnon claims to be the influence of the video, then he is immature and does not deserve the appellation "adult" any more. Such a sick person would IMHO commit the crime regardless of the stimulus. It's the lack of reason and mental balance that "made him do it", not the flick.
Personally however, NC scenes don't do much for me. The voyeur aspect of the film however is IMHO quite delightful. This is a parallel plot; as in the mainstream, our heroine becomes involved with the owner of the building who has installed a high tech surveillance system in each appartment to get his thrills. This is a first rate fantasy prescription, at least for myself. The action spied upon is also quite good, particularly the opening scene where a father, concerned about his daughter's morals, takes it upon himself to teach her a lesson. Very conveniently this includes screwing her and another lady (her friend? mother? father's girlfriend? my French is unfortunately quite rusty) generally in the ass.
The Imperial Verdict: both films are solid rentals but will no doubt leave you with mixed emotions like myself. The sex is invariably scorching, there is one outdoor (rooftop) scene and the girls are generally very attractive. But the plastic-and-tatoo plague will ruin your peace; the FF key inevitably comes to the rescue and, when this happens, a film cannot go beyond a 3.00 rating. Why the need for Mr. South's mannequins I ask? I would be extremely surprised if the tough European crowd does not resent this sudden invasion of Americana in the porn they are so deservedly proud of. If I judge from the mood in alt.tv.satellite.europe, where American movies are invariably derided (including, amazingly enough, the Golden Age as well) Private is going to feel a lot of heat, very soon.
Rating: 2.90 for both videos.
-More Private disasters: Frank Thring's "Chateau de Passion". Main star is a blonde, Russian looking girl credited as Natasha in the box, but Olinka in the credits. Good looking lass, though IMHO nothing exceptional. Also starring are April Summer (of "Forbidden Desires" fame) and the more well known Kai Nobel. This video drags: the usual curse of Private (with the notable exception of the Ricaud and Perry cycles). April Summer is very obviously trying to hide the -fresh- scars from her boob operation by placing her bra/arms strategically. Barf. Kai does her usual wilder stuff; to quote Peter's entry in Ron's dbase: "Kai Nobel (facial anal dp bottle)". I think that says it all :-). Finally, Natasha does a mini-gb at the end. YawnRating: 2.35. Avoid.
Curious to see how one-day wonders look like in Sweden? If you do (you sicko! :-)), go rent "Sex Yacht". A bunch of boys n' girls on top of a rather diminutive vessel screwing around. This sucks: the boat was TOO small, the scenery appeared to me as prime swampland and the director/cameraman (one camera only) an utter and complete dickhead. Pity the girls were actually rather attractive. One of them is actually that "Natasha" chick in "Chateau de Passion". Does she have a name?Anyway, this is poor. There is some anal but the end result is neither sexy, nor raunchy, not even watchable. Skip.
Rating: 1.75
That's what I call an honest cheapo. They promise a Dyanna Lauren anal and they deliver the goods with no hesitation. Only three scenes in this flick but each last at least 30 minutes. The camera work is generally good (with a notable exception -see below) and, surprisingly, the sound is the original from beginning to end. Well done. Before each segment, there is an "interview" part with the participants with lots of lame strobe action a la "Radical Affairs". Fortunately, when the sex starts, the director gets down to business.Kaitlyn and Jay Ashley have a very nice outdoor shag; amazingly the anal sex is IMHO the least interesting part of the action, but that's only because the vaginal part has good rythm and is nicely captured. Then Celeste, Lynn Le May and Christina Angel go about one of those g-g scenes that seem to be so typical nowadays. You know, toys, orifice stretching and tons upon tons of saliva (Lynn is actually giving Celeste a run for her money in the spitting department if you can believe that). Yuck.
Of course the best part of the movie is the first scene, the Dyanna L.-Brad Armstrong scene. This is excelllent stuff. I have only one complaint: the director insisted on shooting the whole scene in a pitch black room with only a single light illuminating the principals. This means lots of shadows, even with the source behind the camera. There is however quite a bit of action with the camera AGAINST the source, and naturally we only get to see the outline of the actors. Why this lunacy?
Fortunately, by the time he gets to shoot Dyanna's ass being reamed, the director had pulled his head out of his own prosterior and we get the best possible vantage point. The action is brilliant. Dyanna seems to be in some discomfort but, as I have repeatedly said in the past, I like this in an anal scene because it stresses the "athletic achievement" aspect of the action (same thing with RC and other strenuous positions). In any case, it is IMHO much more preferrable to the poor, frightened girl unconvincigly professing her delight at what is taking place in her behind. To each his own I guess.
The Imperial Verdict: Must rent for Dyanna fans, this is an OK insurance rental for anybody with some interest in anal. The fact that all girls have implants is a drawback ,but I personally like Kaitlin and -especially- Dyanna and I tried to overlook it.
Rating: 2.85
It is not like me to waste an opportunity like seeing Nina Hartley's famous behind engaging in rare anal activity. Unfortunately, Nina's resources are again squandered as in the case of her CFB 14 outing. This is actually worse: the anal is from the missionary position, i.e. we don't get to see Nina's buns which is the whole reason for this fuss. What a downer. Also featured in the video are the usual mainstays: Trinity Loren (very nice scene in general, with the anal insertion being from the very flattering spoons position), Melanie Moore (poor scene) and Rachel Ryan undergoing one of the numerous DPs of her repertoire.CFB 16 is a standard anal tape, recommended only as insuarance to people who want to make sure that they have some guaranteed anal action with big stars. Other than that, its merits are very limited.
Rating: 2.60
This one stars Moanna Pozzi, Trinity Loren, Rachel Ryan, Nina dePonca, Jade East, Peter North, Tom Byron, Mike Horner, Ray Victory and more. A 1989 film production with some attempt at pursuing a plot, this is a very frustrating experience. The stars are good and the sex is -visually- scorching at parts. I say "visually" because this film has perhaps some of the worst sound I have ever encountered. Almost ALL the sex is drowned under Corny Porno Music(TM) and the performers are not heard at all. It's almost as if watching a 1920s silent movie. The very nice scene between Peter North and Rachel Ryan (blonde variant in this one) that includes some good anal is the one hit by this problem most. There is also quite a bit of looping. Three other scenes are of note: Trinity Loren and Horner (no anal, surprisingly enough), Moanna and Ray Victory (with anal as expected), and finally Moanna DPed by North and Byron. Again the sound leaves much to be desired.Boy, is this part tedious or what? All these crappy or mediocre flicks. Whatever happened to the famed Imperial astuteness? Well, we all get burnt sometime. Most fustrating are the cases like Private, when you are expecting something at least decent and then you find it sucks. However, there is an answer, and no, today it's not gonna be the dreaded "Rent Classics" one. It's: "When in doubt, rent Stagliano". With the exception of the disgracefully plasticised outing in "Wet Dream" John has never failed me. Particularly when he packs his bags and goes abroad -- preferrably dearest Britain.Overall this is some major waste of resources. The sound problem is indefensible, particularly since this is clearly NOT a one-day-wonder where the usual "the director needs to talk and there is no time to shoot extra footage" excuse can be applied. My suggestion is: skip it
Rating: 2.40
This is one of his latest trips to the island whose inhabitants reputably hate sex. Boy, are reputations undeserved sometimes! :-) This brilliant little video returns to those parts of the Buttman formula that never fail: "Miss, I seem to be lost"; "Dario, put your dick back in your pants"; "Jeeeeeezus Christ"; "Oh my God"; "John, look at theeess assss" and the other beloved characters of the Butt show :-)It suffices to say that whenever Rocco stars in a Buttman video, Stagliano is absolutely glorious. Rocco is by far his best sidekick. In this flick he also has Joey Silvera as an occassional companion. Joey is miscast; he tries hard, it's true, has a little-boy grin all the time that is very appropriate to the "naughty" aspect of the Buttman formula. But he's too quiet and when he does speak, it's never the memorable Dario quotes. Still, he's a seasoned pro and never detracts from the quality of the flick.
The gals are absolutely gorgeous. Makes me feel impatient to go back :-). Most notable are Roxanne Hall, Nickyteen (talk about a dumb name) and, of course, the famous British pinup Linzi Drew in her second explicit role (first one was a g-g with Sybill Rauch in "Dirty Woman). Again it's a g-g; she is supposedly a hairstylist with Nicky her second in command. The passage of time is beginning to have some mark on Linzi but she remains as hot as ever. The g-g is very nice: not enough kissing perhaps, and a bit too much toy use for my taste, but the breast play is brilliant and long. Nicky has a lovely natural bosom of her own and John puts it to its deserved use without fail. Nicky is also in a 3b-1g scene later on. Again she looks absolutely gorgeous. Yummy.
I will not go into each and every scene of this video, both because this post is getting out of hand again and because it's nice to let oneself to be surprised by the turn of events in John's videos. You know there's gonna be fucking, you just don't know how much and in what form. Scenes that appear obviously heading for a wall-to-waller end abruptly with only some foreplay or camera-fawining over a set of buns. Other scenes explode into sexual cauldrons out of the blue. This flick is a bit more conventional than say "Ultimate Workout" (where you finally throw things on screen in anticipation of Zara having sex), "European Vacation" (where the buildup to the famous Zara-Silver-Rocco scene is at least as hot as the actual sex) and "Inferno" (where the Gerry Pike- 10 girl orgy does NOT after all go beyound a few BJs). Variety, the spice of porn :-)
I will just say two words: Rosanna Melendes. You can make the connection in your minds as to what happens in her scene :-) (hint, it's a two letter initial :-)).
The Imperial Verdict: Stagliano continues to rule contemporary porn. Not even the Europeans have his titillating premises. My congratulations and strongest recommendation.
Rating: 3.45
To close this monster let's examine the other Post-Golden Age masters, the Dark Bros. "Between the Cheeks" is one of their most well known works because it best showcases their hilarious weird plots and dialogue, but mainly because of the amazingly raunchy acts some of the biggest stars in porn go into in this one. Ginger Lynn's DPP+TP is by far the most notable of course. This is simply Ginger's best anal/DP scene available on tape. The "New Wave Hookers" outing is nothing compared to that. The action is long, the camera angles PERFECT, and I personally don't think that Ginger is in pain -just the usual "athletic discomfort". Ginger was always overacting a bit, so we should take her screams with a grain of salt. Let me repeat: this scene is AWESOME; whoever hasn't had the pleasure of seeing it is misisng out in one of porn's greatest indulgences.But that's not all. Another mid-80s favourite of mine, Summer Rose, undergoes the same deli treatment. Ms. Rose is certainly not the most striking starlet to grace our screens but, after the incomparable Lysa Thatcher with her dirty schoolgirl looks (not to mention killer body), Summer is the best specimen of the "girl-next-door-regardless-of-the-block-you're-living-in" :-). Finally, it is always a pleasure to watch the vivacious Sheri St.Clair; here she only does a couple of anals instead of the DPs one would expect of her, but is no less hot.
You get no marks in guessing that the male leads are Mark Wallace, Steve Powers and Tom Byron. What a shock, eh? :-)
The Imperial Verdict: This film is not to be missed. It is a primer for anybody claiming to be into anal porn but should be enjoyed by everybody. Don't watch this with your girlfriend, however :-)
Rating: 3.45
The sequel is, as expected, a much less memorable outing. Surprisingly, the plot is much, much better than the original (in terms of weirdness and laughs -don't expect drama in a Dark Bros flick :-)). Unfortunately the camera work is worse and the sex tamer. Bionca does a very nice DP with Byron and TT Boy but there are barely 10 seconds of full body shots (compare that with the brilliant Ginger DPs in the original as well as NWH). Tianna and Heather Lere have a very animated girl-girl in the beginning of the film; Lere looks at her best here. Also of note is Debi D. (still having a bit of meat over her bones and hence looking less gross than usual) being gb'ed by a bunch of hilarious "aliens"; there is a very brief anal shot, but it's with Blake Palmer's cruel dick. Ouch.BtC2 is not a bad effort, but it does not come anywhere near the original. The lesser stature of the stars is an obvious explantation, but the general tameness (by Dark Bros standards) and lesser technical merit are much to blame as well. Still, it's by no means a bad film.
Rating: 2.85