Strange, mixed-messages British porn, now playing on Netflix
SEX CLINIC is not a good film, but like so many other mediocre & forgotten efforts (not a single self-appointed "expert" back in Blighty has submitted an IMDb comment) it has been revived by the porn video label Salvation Films and found its way to America's guilty pleasure known as Netflix.
Like most Netflix offerings, the blurb to "shill" the movie, which appears on the little white mailer, is thoroughly misleading, pegging the film as a homosexual S&M package. Instead we have a rather grim, downbeat tale of a beautiful massage parlor lady financially & emotionally mistreating her customers. Had this been made in NYC a few years later (see: Joe Davian, Phil Prince, etc.), the S&M would have been included along with a solid dose of verbal humiliation, also lacking here.
Georgina Ward makes a pretty if tepid villainess; it is interesting that her film and TV career ended soon after this turkey -she had made solid appearances on many fine shows like "Danger Man" and "The Avengers". She preys especially on older people, bilking a geezer (who unfortunately bares his unappealing backside for the camera) out of 500 pounds early in the show, and the main plot line involves her grabbing every penny that good ole Carmen Silvera can raise, latter having a lesbian crush on Ward.
The melodramatic plot line of revenge unravels in straightforward fashion, but what I found diverting (if only ephemerally) was the glum, dour tone of the movie. This is a case where rather talented, and some famous at the time (from their TV appearances) cast members are called upon to enact sleazy roles, and not in the typically comical, who cares? mode of so many British sex comedies of the period. I had a similar reaction watching BLUE BLOOD, a vanity film from 1973, in which it is almost shocking to see Derek Jacobi in endless bed scenes with beautiful unclad actresses - a man of his talent clunking through soft porn!
End result is indicative of a culture where, for historical reasons involving funding -see Alexander Walker's essential tome "Hollywood England" to get the background picture - movies were considered junk while theatre and TV reigned supreme in Blighty at this time. So actors would appear in demeaning roles in poverty-budget films without a second thought or even damage to their careers -bouncing right back to quality work on the boards or the tube.
Like most Netflix offerings, the blurb to "shill" the movie, which appears on the little white mailer, is thoroughly misleading, pegging the film as a homosexual S&M package. Instead we have a rather grim, downbeat tale of a beautiful massage parlor lady financially & emotionally mistreating her customers. Had this been made in NYC a few years later (see: Joe Davian, Phil Prince, etc.), the S&M would have been included along with a solid dose of verbal humiliation, also lacking here.
Georgina Ward makes a pretty if tepid villainess; it is interesting that her film and TV career ended soon after this turkey -she had made solid appearances on many fine shows like "Danger Man" and "The Avengers". She preys especially on older people, bilking a geezer (who unfortunately bares his unappealing backside for the camera) out of 500 pounds early in the show, and the main plot line involves her grabbing every penny that good ole Carmen Silvera can raise, latter having a lesbian crush on Ward.
The melodramatic plot line of revenge unravels in straightforward fashion, but what I found diverting (if only ephemerally) was the glum, dour tone of the movie. This is a case where rather talented, and some famous at the time (from their TV appearances) cast members are called upon to enact sleazy roles, and not in the typically comical, who cares? mode of so many British sex comedies of the period. I had a similar reaction watching BLUE BLOOD, a vanity film from 1973, in which it is almost shocking to see Derek Jacobi in endless bed scenes with beautiful unclad actresses - a man of his talent clunking through soft porn!
End result is indicative of a culture where, for historical reasons involving funding -see Alexander Walker's essential tome "Hollywood England" to get the background picture - movies were considered junk while theatre and TV reigned supreme in Blighty at this time. So actors would appear in demeaning roles in poverty-budget films without a second thought or even damage to their careers -bouncing right back to quality work on the boards or the tube.
- lor_
- 15 dic 2010