The Naughty Stewardesses

"Where do I go from here?" ponders protagonist Debbie (Connie Hoffman) in the final scene of the film, "everywhere or nowhere?" Ironically, this is precisely what The Naughty Stewardesses spends its hefty 107- minute running-time going, everywhere, and more accurately, nowhere. Amongst the thread-bare 'plot', the film shifts gears and genres faster than the film's leading ladies get out of their clothes, going from the familiar small-town-girl-hits-the-big-city story, to soft-core exploitation flick, to relationship drama, to kidnap thriller, and disappointingly, none of these themes work at all.

Debbie arrives in Los Angeles to become a stewardess. She is a wandering soul, we learn this as she explains her situation to a hitch-hiker, and if she doesn't like it, she will simply hit the road again. Her first night in her new stewardess dormitory sees her fellow stewardesses indulge in a bit of man-eating at a house party, as a naked man covered in cream is brought out as the cake. Repulsed, Debbie embarks on a 'journey' on self-discovery, getting close to 70-odd year old Brewster (Robert Livingston), a rich and horny old dog who takes an interest in the beautiful Debbie. She also meets photographer Cal (Richard Smedley), who, after a nice day of photographing Debbie, reveals himself to be the psychopathic, jealous type.

Director Al Adamson, whose back catalogue include titles such as Psycho A Go-Go (1965), Satan's Sadists (1969) and Horror of the Blood Monsters (1970), doesn't do much to dismiss his reputation as one of cinema's most inept, as he brings very little titillation (which is what these type of sexploitation films we're made for) to the proceedings (Adamson was shockingly murdered in 1995). What we do get in a sex scene involving a 70 year old (who Debbie describes as being in his 50's - who is she f*****g kidding?), wrinkly man boobs and all. The film isn't actually that awful. It's rather nicely filmed (given it's budget), and the script is far better than it should be, but at 107 minutes, it's a tough watch, and even the out-of-nowhere kidnapping and blackmail sub- plot fails to spice up what is ultimately a boring mess.

www.the-wrath-of-blog.blogspot.com

"Debbie" (Connie Hoffman) is a new stewardess who comes from Kansas City and is trying to figure out what she wants in life. So she rents a room with three other stewardesses and whenever she gets some time off goes out either with them or sometimes with one or two men she has met recently. One particular man named ""Cal" (Richard Smedley) really interests her but he begins to act a little weird and so as a result she tries to avoid him. Yet another man by the name of "Brewster" (Robert Livingston) also seems interested in her and even though she feels comfortable around him she doesn't quite get the feeling that he really cares about her. Now rather than reveal any more I will just say that this film starts off slow and proceeds at that speed for almost the entire length of the picture. Fortunately, it picks up a bit towards the end but not enough to drastically change the movie for the better. Likewise, although Connie Hoffman was certainly attractive enough her performance wasn't enough to improve this film to any great degree either. In short, it was kind of dull and boring. Below average.

Such is the dilemma(above) that Debbie must face at the close of this Sam Sherman production Naughty Stewardesses. Debbie has just hit town, become a stewardess, slept with an elderly rich man(who she describes is in his 50's but obviously hit that mark a decade or two ago), shoots nude scenes for a photographer she just met, and then is the central element to a kidnapping/extortion plot. Through it all and amidst all that emotional upheaval and soul-searching, what in heaven's name will Debbie do? Well, I cannot give it away completely but don't expect any real epiphany here. Let's face it. Naughty Stewardesses is just what it wants to be(at least two-thirds through): a soft core porn film with lots of topless women and a funny in that kitchy 70's way film. There is no grand art here. The movie was designed to make money and exploit a growing trend at the time to put nymphomaniacal stewardesses in films so that the audience could live out vicariously their voyeuristic tastes. By todays standards, the film is pretty tame. What this film DOES do wrong is try to be some kind of statement film at the end. C'mon, anyone here believing that little diatribe by Debbie while on the beach contemplating life. She would spend more time picking out which halter top she will wear that day then do that. And what about the ridiculous plot to steal 50 grand? It didn't make sense to me so how on earth did these characters "dig" it? Anyone buying Cal as a member of the PLO(something like that) or even as a director for hardcore pornography? He would be luck to get work at Seven Eleven! This is, as another reviewer noted, more of a Sam Sherman piece then and Al Adamson piece. You can tell when Al is in complete charge. There is virtually no budget and the film doesn't look nearly as polished as this. Adamson does a decent job directing this time and I have to give Sherman credit to a degree. While this film is bad just for what it was meant to be, it has a certain style to it. I liked the opening credits with the animation and photographs. I even liked the music of Sparrow. "Silver Heels" was a somewhat catchy tune. The movie doesn't look cheap really at all. Compare that to ANY of Al's horror films. As for the cast, yes, Bob Livingston is a bit old for the lead, but some examination went into his character and the obvious thread that young women are attracted to men with money was explored as well. I had major problems with Robert Smedley who was just plain awful in his role. The girls have all got great sets, so what else was required of them huh? Naughty Stewardesses is relatively harmless exploitation film from the 70's and will serve as a living time capsule for certain aspects of life during that decade. By the way, did I mention it is a pretty bad picture?

I sought out this film for one reason--Al Adamson. He is among the worst directors of all time--right up there with Ed Wood, Jr. and Ray Dennis Steckler and the pantheon of awfulness. However, I was a tad disappointed because although the film was indeed bad, it never approached the levels of awfulness of some of his earlier schlocky movies. Because of that, this film wasn't particularly fun to watch for us bad movie fans.

Now I was wary about watching this film, as the title "Naughty Stewardesses" makes the film sound like a pornographic film--something I wouldn't be reviewing on IMDb. However, this film appeared to be this at times--particularly the first 10 minutes. But, you could tell that the script underwent many changes, as for much of the film there isn't any titillation at all and towards the end of the movie there is a plot that comes out of no where that is violent and certainly NOT sexy! The result of all this is total confusion.

Sadly, none of the many parts are even good. For example, as a porn video, it shows surprisingly little AND it's incomprehensible why they would put a 71 year-old guy in some of the love scenes. Sure, for a 71 year-old Mr. Livingston looked pretty good--but he was still an old man and no one would want to see him getting it on with young nymphet! Then, when the final 20 minutes becomes very violent, as Livingston became a Rambo-like guy! Talk about weird and inappropriate.

Overall, there is little to recommend this sad movie. It's not bad enough or sexy enough to care about and the film manages to be rather boring even with such a crazy title like "Naughty Stewardesses".

From the start, you know this is a Sam Sherman film more than an Al Adamson film because as the credits roll, "A Sam Sherman Production" appears in letters as big as the title credit. Not only that, Mr. Sherman co-wrote the screenplay and it was his idea to use Bob Livingstone, a washed-up, 69 year old Western star of the old Hollywood era to be his male lead in a picture that Sherman thought would capitalize on the recent success of "Swinging Stewardesses".

Now why would you want to have a wrinkled old man as your male lead in what is supposed to be a soft-core exploitation feature? It defies explanation, but that is Sam Sherman for you. His obsession with old Hollywood colored a lot of his films for Independent International Pictures, and he and Al Adamson frequently tried to get has-been actors for their films (e.g. J. Carrol Naish, Russ Tamblyn, Lon Chaney Jr.,etc.). But Bob Livingstone? Tell me the drive-in demographic knew who this '40's second-rater was; it's ridiculous!

But then again, "Naughty Stewardesses" was a successful picture for them, so we can't just write this off as a Sherman fiasco. Still, by any aesthetic standard, it's an incoherent mess. Al Adamson wanted out of this picture, and it is easy to see why. First off, it has no genre focus at all and drifts around from super soft core (tits and ass/simulated sex only) to a kidnapping thriller (shades of Steckler's "Rat Pfink and Boo Boo"!) In between, we get subjected to painfully boring sequences of the stewardesses traipsing around Vegas to the hackneyed music of Sparrow, or Richard Smedley and Connie Hoffmann on a photo shoot in San Francisco. Worst of all, we get Bob Livingstone as a Jack LaLanne wannabe in a blue jumpsuit trying to be sexy...gag! (Thankfully, his big sex scene with Connie Hoffmann was deleted, but you can catch him slurping on her titties on the DVD in the Special Features section. Creepy.)

This is a terrible, terrible movie, but I'll give it three stars for Gary Graver's photography and out of sympathy to Connie Hoffmann for having to make it with "Wrinkles" Livingstone. "Naughty Stewardesses" is for Al Adamson completists and/or scholars of exploitation film as Sam Sherman's commentary offers vital inside info. All others, BEWARE.