Black Emanuelle en Amérique

EMANUELLE IN AMERICA is clearly a testament to the declining CineCitta film industry of this time. Exploitation film-makers were being forced to throw genres together in bizarre hybrids to try and cover as many commercial bases as possible.

This film, without doubt, is the flat out WEIRDEST example of that I've ever seen. The first 50 minutes or so play like a typically flaccid D'Amato softcore sex movie, before kicking into high octane with hardcore bestiality footage, hardcore porn, and pretty grueling "snuff" footage (shot in a verite, hand-held and shaky style that reminds me of the latter half of CANNIBAL HOLOCAUST). None of it really fits together well within the narrative (particularly the XXX footage which is clearly spliced in from another film) and all the excessive stuff is quite brief. I don't really understand what the commercial motivation for the production of this film was, but that certainly interests me. The whole film has an air of not being complete, especially when you consider the bizarrely truncated ending.

An interesting and VERY sleazy watch, but don't expect the rest of the film to be anything but appalling. D'Amato's straight horror (specifically BLUE OMEGA and ABSURD) do the job way more for me, and I usually love sleaze with all my grimy heart. Before anyone yells at me, the copy I own is the "fully uncut" Venezuelan print so I really don't think I'm missing anything here.

"Emanuelle in America" has the reputation of being one of the sleaziest, most vile films ever made. Well, having watched it a couple of times I have to say that its reputation is a tad overblown. Yes, the average movie-going public would probably be offended by many parts of EIA but when you think about those objectionable scenes, they're not that freaky. There is much worse on the internet right now than what is seen, briefly, in EIA. EIA was made during the greatest period of exploitation films, a period, which alas, will never be recreated again. The mores of the 1970s made it possible for films to explore the sleaziest, darkest part of the human psyche. Remember, these films were released theatrically. There's almost no chance today for a film like EIA to be released on the big screen, no matter how many sleazy or super violent films have been made recently, like, hmm, "Passion of the Christ"? Arf!

Anyway, there's something backwards and ahead of its time about "Emanuelle in America". It's painfully backwards in the attempts the producers tried to shock jaded 42nd ave viewers with bestiality and such but forward thinking in the way sex is shown so carefree and dare I say fun? It's like the realization of a silly Penthouse forum story made come to life...seriously, the film is sexy in only the way 1970s can be. The beginning is great. Seeing Laura walking around New York, which the groovy theme song, makes EIA look like an adult version of the MARY TYLER MOORE show intro: Laura is a free woman (who's almost always in control), a career woman and is sexually active. The only thing missing in the intro is Laura tossing a hat in the air.

The biggest problem with "Emanuelle in America" is the script. Films like this are not known to have solid scripts but the producers actually tried to create a semblance of an interesting story, amidst the sleaze and lurid goings on, but then completely forgot a satisfactory ending for this. I love the fact that film suddenly veered into snuff-like territory at the very end but it became sorta pointless without a proper conclusion to that last minute plot line.

All in all, I think "Emanuelle in America" is a masterpiece of 1970s exploitation. It has almost every exploitation element in it (the only thing missing, like most of exploitation films, is male homosexuality). Laura Gemser is hot. The music is amazing and the cinematography is actually pretty good. I only give it 8 because of the missing ending and because of some boring, drawn-out spots.

If want to see a film that captures the warped side of the 1970s in all its Euro-cult glory, make sure to watch "Emanuelle in America".

If pernicious is a stronger word for ugly, then it applies here, but I'm not referring to the "snuff" footage sequence, I'm referring to the non-sex/non-horror scenes. They're so unbelievably boring and poorly acted that you could end up leaving the theatre (or living room) and missing out on the sleaze.

The film's soundtrack is outstanding and captures the era wonderfully.

As always, Laura Gemser is captivating and too sexy for words, and the film's explicitness verges on hardcore for most of the time and crosses the softcore line once or twice.

But it's the "snuff" footage sleaze fans want and it doesn't disappoint. Almost SALO-esque in its intensity and terribly well executed, it arrives in context but blurs its context quickly because it is unexpectedly extreme and realistic.

Worth seeing once or twice. Or owning, if the inclination's there.

Ah, that Joe D'Amato...you can't help but watch his films no matter how curiously interesting or just plain bad they are. If it weren't for the explicit versions, I think most folks would forget about them soon after viewing, unless just gawking at naked gals here and there in the guise of a "legitimate film" is your kind of thing. The BIG problem with Emanuelle In America is that it can't make up its mind if it wants to be mere exploitation or hardcore, as it bounces back and forth but never really completes those goals.

Li'l Miss Sexpot herself Laura Gemser is "Miss Emanuelle" who will travel anywhere and subject herself to any danger in order to get an ultimate story to further her journalistic endeavors (her sneaking around and snapping pics reminded me a lot of later Charlie's Angels adventures). She joins a harem of sorts and fondles women and watches bestiality, mingles with horny aristocrats, gets an expose of a women's pleasure resort (ah, finally a bunch of naked men in a movie), and shmoozes with bad men behind a snuff film ring. Yes, a film like this DOES need lots of sex to keep it going, but it's strange how much of it doesn't show up until much later.

When sex scenes start, they end abruptly like a bad tease. During the sex, lots of jumpcuts jar the viewer so that it's not easy to get any pleasure out of viewing it. When hardcore footage appears, it usually never "finishes" (okay, there's a lack of money shots). When there ARE money shots, the scene has zipped by so fast you wonder if you were supposed to get excited or think that folks finish sexual encounters within one minute or less. Sex scenes in films like this are usually intended to arouse, and these leave you somewhat confused.

Here is where I DEFEND something about this film: Those people who are only turned on by shaved, squeaky-looking pretty people in porn should not be so harsh to those of us who actually like a bit of body hair on men, or if women aren't so artistically trimmed. I have a feeling that most are bitching about the "hairy men" because of the bearded guy in the hut (in the Tarzan fantasy sequence). If anything, his hirsute appearance enhanced the energy of the too-brief scene, and I'm sure there are plenty of folks that appreciated a natural-looking man instead of plastic pretty boys. As for the women, it's funny how so many "reviewers" are calling the actresses unattractive -- seems there are too many men out there that have ridiculously high standards for women. I didn't find these women unattractive; if anything they seemed real and still even out of the league that most of the drooling heterosexual viewers would ever get in real life. You know the kind, guys with beer guts who wear hats and t-shirts that say "No Fat Chicks" and think that all women are inherently bisexual. I say HOORAY for '70s hairy porn, let's have more of it!

For me, instead of being creeped out by physically follicle-blessed men, I was creeped out by the sordid footage of the snuff films. Instead of a glimpse of one, we are subjected to several scenes of it, and it reminds me of those harsh slasher films that get women naked before they are dismembered. Are we supposed to be aroused by the nudity AND the physical violence at the same time? Otherwise, why so much of it in this film? I say fill out the other basic hardcore sex scenes more, and less of the poles and hooks being used as sexual torture. And to think David Cronenberg got his inspiration for "Videodrome" from this film.....eek!

So, take a look at Emanuelle In America so you can say you saw it, and if you got a kick out it, then it's actually okay. I saw it as a curiosity that had to be done and over with. It just really felt like a longgggg tease to me, so that I had to dig into my stash of hairy '70s porn afterwards to feel satiated!

The late smutpeddler, Joe D'amato, has released hundreds of disgustin' sleaze epics but the 100 min. uncut version of "Emanuelle In America" takes the cake. Horsemasturbation, hardcore porn, castrations and the most vile "snuff" images you ever will see on film. Canadian maverick David Cronenberg was actually inspired by this flick to make his masterpiece, "Videodrome". Forget "Salo", "Caligula", "Man Bites Dog", "Man Behind The Sun" and "Cannibal Holocust" cuz this one will eat your mind!