Playboys

This is perfect after a long week of work. No thinking, just sit back and enjoy Carla (Yuliya Mayarchuk) as she romps throughout London.

First stop is to find a new apartment. This is where she meets Moira (Francesca Nunzi), who is more than willing to share hers at no charge in exchange for some small favors. Oh my! Although the title is Cheeky, and you would expect a focus on that part of the anatomy, I can assure you that there is more than enough focus on the rest of life's treasures in the film. Panties, if worn at all, do not stay on long. In fact, Carla seldom has anything on.

There is a story here, but who cares?

This movie makes me ashamed of the modern soft-core American porn that I see on the premium cable channels. Every part of a woman's body is shown, without apologies. You could say that no punches have been pulled; HOWEVER, the sex and nudity aren't treated as punches. Penises, both flaccid and erect are shown, as if the average adult actually knew what one was.

It is a beautiful movie, if one likes the female form. The movie's star is gorgeous with no silicon or evidence of a personal trainer. There is a plot, but it doesn't get in the way of the movie very much. The dialog is stupid, but sincere. They don't make movies like this anymore and I doubt that they ever will.

This flick is a trademark of Brass' films: lots of crotch shots, voyeurism and posterior views of women's rears.

The story starts out about a girl, Carla, who is in London looking for a flat. She gets a break when the realtor is a lesbian and makes sexual advances. Carla's boyfriend, Matteo, gets jealous as he senses his woman is being unfaithful.

This movie has the same plot as "All the Ladies Do It." Nothing original is here, especially the ending when it seems the director says it's okay for a woman to cheat on her man. Oh brother.

All in all, if you like Brass' style of erotic cinema, you'll like Monella 2.

Cheeky is actually a much better film than most of the crappy softcore porn stuff out there. It's directed by Tinto Brass; the same director who gave us 'Salon Kitty', a film that I've been meaning to see for ages and have never got round to, in spite of the fact that I have a copy. Anyway, for most of this film the camera focuses on Yuliya Mayarchuk's backside, but it's a nice backside so that isn't really a flaw. Yuliya Mayarchuk and her backside take the lead role, and she stars as a girl named Carla; who is on the lookout for some flats, right near a park filled with perverts and horny couples. She goes to an estate agent and meets a sexy woman named Moira, who wants her. She rents a large apartment and Moira gets her own way, and this causes trouble as Carla is in a relationship with a young man named Matteo. Naturally, Matteo is none too pleased with the way that his girl parades her assets all around town. He comes to London, and the pair has an argument over the pictures that he found in Carla's bedroom.

How much you like this film will largely depend on exactly what you want to get out of movies. If you're looking for something deep and meaningful, don't see Cheeky - but if you just want some cheap and cheerful softcore porn, then this could be for you. There's plenty of nudity, and the leading lady's body gets completely exposed on numerous occasions. There is a lesbian subplot, which is always nice to see and the scenes between the women are actually quite well done. The fact that they're both really hot helps a lot. There are also some regular sex scenes, and plenty of teasing and general nudity. It's all extremely light-hearted; there's plenty of scenes that see the lead in a flimsy short skirt which is being blown about by the wind, and if you ask me; that sort of stuff pretty much sums this film up. It's always obvious where the plot is going - usually another sex scene - so there's not a lot of surprises. There's a couple of scenes that take place to music which are decent, and that's pretty much all I have to say about this one.

Some films are simply about the appeal of one character. That's all that matters.

There seem to be two types: those that depend on the charm of attractive women, and those that have to work some other engagement. Often that's the acting challenge.

I'm thinking in particular of Audrey Hepburn and "Funny Face." The story and all else is there only to showcase the woman; She is only there for us and we for her. Soft porn should be the place we see much of this, simply because it affords a wider set of seductive options. But it just isn't so. I think there are several reasons for this. When a film is marketed as smut, expectations aren't very high and what you usually get is something that is measured as less than "the real thing."

Tinto Brass, in some of his later films tries to make something genuinely seductive I think, something that is itself. And he has a good eye, a good cinematic sense. Unfortunately for me, what he thinks is seductive in terms of body types doesn't score. Its a cultural thing.

But what he aims for is casual intimacy, the type of casualness that isn't deliberately seductive, but the center of being of the woman. So when you see the nude actress, it is more likely to be her lounging around the house. Its a study in a woman.

A second reason you see this so little is, well, there are few women on screen who can charm like say Audrey Hepburn. The ones that can act go to a different market. The ones who can't end up in the higher paying "adult industry." So it must be quite a challenge for Brass to find a woman sufficiently natural in a sexual appeal to built a film around.

The story in this case if you don't know it is that he found this woman as a waitress in a pizza place and charmed her into the role. She IS successful at being what he needs, apparently because its what she really is. So in a way, its a documentary, if you subtract out the story, which you'll do even if you aren't interested in the process.

Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 3: Has some interesting elements.