Jeunes filles impudiques

Not that it matters, but the "plot" is about two "schoolgirls/ high school" girls (who look like they're in their early 20s) out hiking in the woods and stumble onto a once lavishly furnished but now seemingly abandoned house and make themselves at home. Their little night of lesbian fun is interrupted by a balding, stick-skinny guy who, after they have a three-way with him, turns out to be involved with jewel smugglers. The two girls are then suspected of taking their loot, and are then (mildly) tortured to get them back. There's also a voice-over narrative, as though the lead girl was recounting the story to the audience at a later time, but, why?

Let's be honest here: nobody is going to watch a movie with a title like "High School Hitchikers/ Schoolgirl Hitchhikers/ Jeunes filles impudiques (Impudic Young Girls)" because of its plot, acting, photography, or elaborate effects. People are going to watch this film to see a bit of nudity, and maybe have a few laughs at the film's expense. On that level, the film works fairly well. The girls are cute and nude often enough, and none of the violence is overpowering, so it never goes off into torture-flick territory. A few laughs can be had with this one, if watched in the right frame of mind.

This movie recently showed up on the DVD collection "The Grindhouse Experience" (as if I haven't bought enough Jean Rollin's movies on purpose) under the unlikely title of "High School Hitchhikers" because apparently the original English title "Schoolgirl Hitchhikers" sounds too perverse or politically incorrect by today's standards (don't worry though--the lead actresses look mature enough that this could have easily been called "Post-Doctoral Hitchhikers"). Actually though it would probably have been more accurate to use directly translated the French title "Impudent Young Girls"--I don't know if the protagonists are all that "impudent" but at no point are they ever seen hitch-hiking.

The "plot" (people familiar with Jean Rollin's body of work should be rolling around on the floor laughing right now) involves two female drifters who go into a strange château for no apparent reason. After some typical girl-on-girl action they run into some criminals on the lam who. . . well, that's pretty much it. It is similar to a lot of better Rollin's movies like "Requiem for a Vampire" with the gratuitous lesbianism and silly and unconvincing bondage and torture scenes, but it lacks the bizarre surrealism or more "fantastique" elements that mark the director's more interesting work. This is just a knock-off softcore sex flick along the lines of "Bacchanales Sexuales" but with shorter sex scenes (which may or may not be a plus depending on your motives for watching it).

The best thing about this movie is that the two lead actresses are very appealing (at least, if you're not some drooling pervert drawn in by the lurid title). Joelle Couer had a short but memorable career in early 70's French sexploitation film, including Rollin's own (much better) film "The Demoniacs", but she refused to make the leap to hardcore and was supplanted by much less attractive actresses like Claudine Beccaire. The other, more obscure lead looks like a 1970's French version of Mena Suvari. She is wearing a plaid skirt at the beginning of the film (though not for long!), which might partially explain the misleading title. I guess this movie isn't a TOTAL waste of time but just about.

Two hiking girls, apparently teenagers based on the film's title (though we never see them "hitchhike"), reach a wall in the woods. What mystery lurks on the other side? A mansion, abandoned and waiting for a client? Hmmmm...

Directed by Jean Rollin, who is known for this stuff.

The tone is set from the opening credit cards, which each show two women engaged in some sort of lesbian act... after a dozen or so of those pictures, you might be surprised if the picture was completely clean and family friendly. And do not worry, ten minutes in the girls are undressing each other.

Yes, this film has close-ups on nipple-licking, among other things. It is really only one step about soft-core pornography. Not long after a lesbian scene, a thief named Fred (who looks like a French Tom Savini) shows up and the girls have their way with him.

The plot does develop when the girls are accused of stealing something valuable from Fred and his associates. But by then the film is half over. And it devolves into stripping and torturing...

In the end, what is the point of this film? No idea. My guess is the director and writer conjured up a story that involved girls being naughty and tried to find two girls who would meet their demands. Successfully doing that, they filmed it. It has really no artistic merit whatsoever.

I caught this on the UK free-to-view London Live Channel-I assume it cost them just a few Euros to purchase.

It wasn't till I read the reviews here that I realised that the director is Rollin; they've just finished a season of his vampire flicks so presumably this was in the package.

What a load of crap! Us Brits like to denigrate the 1970s run of awful Brit. Soft core movies that blushingly concentrated more on "comedy" than eroticism. We always rather admired the French for a certain stylishness, and-almost always-their soft core entries during that era were pretty damn erotic even if the acting was only so-so and, of course, the dubbing (in ghastly American) was laughable.

But hey-with this movie-us Brits can hold up our heads again. This is just about the worst French entry in that genre that I've ever seen.

Others here have detailed all the horrors (no pun intended) so all I'll add is that I quite liked the brunette (in all her glory); her blonde pal didn't appeal, but..one man's meat is another's poison!

Avoid, unless you enjoy a masochistic laugh...

Two young girls travel the country side and spend some time in a secluded and seemingly unoccupied house. When some people show up they get mixed up with some torture and stolen jewels.

Odd film seems to be a porno film with the sex cut out. Reasonably well acted with a good looking cast this is an off beat little "thriller" that isn't really much of anything. its not bad, but it isn't really worth bothering with on its own (I got this part of a 20 film DVD set and as part of that the film was worth trying but had I picked it up on its own I would have been rather upset) 4 out of 10. If you don't spend any money on it