ÉVALUATION IMDb
5,4/10
7,1 k
MA NOTE
Tout en recherchant des appartements à Londres pour son copain vénitien, Carla loue un appartement qui surplombe la Tamise. Là, elle rencontre l'agent immobilier lesbien hyper excité Moira.Tout en recherchant des appartements à Londres pour son copain vénitien, Carla loue un appartement qui surplombe la Tamise. Là, elle rencontre l'agent immobilier lesbien hyper excité Moira.Tout en recherchant des appartements à Londres pour son copain vénitien, Carla loue un appartement qui surplombe la Tamise. Là, elle rencontre l'agent immobilier lesbien hyper excité Moira.
Tinto Brass
- Man in Photo Shop
- (uncredited)
Osiride Pevarello
- Voyeur
- (uncredited)
Avis en vedette
This film was hilarious. Tinto Brass is a very sweet director, I'm hoping to find more of his back catalogue other than Caligula. This film was presented at American Film Market this year. Usually, investors come in and out of films after 20 minutes with a decision to buy or distribute, but for some reason, nobody could stand up until the end of this film. If you see the film, you'll understand why.
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?
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?
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.
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.
This movie was pretty shocking at first, but shortly became just ridiculous, it was filled with silly scenes, and no real plot, lots of genitalia even more than derrière. If you are looking for a titillating, plot less, sex-filled, gratification centered, Italian dud...this would be my pick. I suppose it would have helped to know that subtitles weren't available on this film, but after a few minutes one understands that no subtitles are necessary, as it is easy to figure out, without them. Good to watch if you are enticed by lipstick lesbian love, and Italian horny boys and girls doing it. Great eye candy, and masturbation material/sex material. It was visually and physically exciting, but mentally void of anything worthwhile.
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.
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.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesThe title is presented in reference guides as TRA(SGRE)DIRE and in the film itself with the middle four letters smaller than the rest of the title. The verb "Trasgredire" translates from Italian as "to transgress" while the verb "Tradire" (minus the "sgre") translates as "to betray."
- Autres versionsThe English dubbed version is missing about a minute of explicit footage and had all of credits re-done in English, featuring the new title "Cheeky." The opening music theme, while technically remaining the same, uses different, much heavier orchestrations.
- ConnexionsReferences La chiave (1983)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et surveiller les recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Cheeky?Propulsé par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Langues
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Cheeky
- Lieux de tournage
- Cubitt Wharf, Storers Quay, Isle of Dogs, Londres, Angleterre, Royaume-Uni(Carla's apartment - Ext.)
- société de production
- Consultez plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
- Durée1 heure 31 minutes
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 1.66 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant
Lacune principale
What was the official certification given to Tra(sgre)dire (2000) in Brazil?
Répondre