Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueChantal is a hot, naive and dangerously delusional young woman, wandering the boulevards of L.A. looking for her first big break. There she meets Tracy who warns of the harsh realities lurki... Tout lireChantal is a hot, naive and dangerously delusional young woman, wandering the boulevards of L.A. looking for her first big break. There she meets Tracy who warns of the harsh realities lurking beyond the glamorous facade of Hollywood.Chantal is a hot, naive and dangerously delusional young woman, wandering the boulevards of L.A. looking for her first big break. There she meets Tracy who warns of the harsh realities lurking beyond the glamorous facade of Hollywood.
Erin Brown
- Chantal
- (as Misty Mundae)
Wayne Edward Sherwood
- John - sleazy casting director
- (as Wayne Sherwood)
Avis à la une
The film starts so much like Candy Goes to Hollywood I wonder if at least the opening scenes were an homage. But this is not an especially sexy film. Sure there is plenty of nudity. And Misty Mundae is something very special indeed. She has a natural beauty and innocence to her that makes me homesick for the old days. Nowadays most times you see a female heroine, particularly in an adult film, she seems like has had sex with millions of men, her body is covered with tattoos and she talks like a gangster. Maybe I'm old fashioned but I like actresses who look and act like Misty Mundae (in this movie at least).
I don't know what the story is with the hotel clerk. He talks like he has emphysema. I guess he is supposed to sound scary but I imagine it was hard for anyone to keep a straight face while filming his scenes.
Again this is not at all like Candy Goes to Hollywood. I wish it was. The story of the ingenue who is taken advantage of and corrupted is not politically correct nor does it instill good morals in a person, but it is sexy, or at least it is to a gen xer. I think twenty-first century people are no longer interested in such things. No instead of a sexy tale of some airhead getting fooled into doing sexy things this is more a tale of a foolish girl's descent into degradation and madness. It is not fun.
Mind you like I said Misty is a lovely girl and I will certainly seek out some of her other films. Maybe she has made some films that are a little more cheerful and fun.
I don't know what the story is with the hotel clerk. He talks like he has emphysema. I guess he is supposed to sound scary but I imagine it was hard for anyone to keep a straight face while filming his scenes.
Again this is not at all like Candy Goes to Hollywood. I wish it was. The story of the ingenue who is taken advantage of and corrupted is not politically correct nor does it instill good morals in a person, but it is sexy, or at least it is to a gen xer. I think twenty-first century people are no longer interested in such things. No instead of a sexy tale of some airhead getting fooled into doing sexy things this is more a tale of a foolish girl's descent into degradation and madness. It is not fun.
Mind you like I said Misty is a lovely girl and I will certainly seek out some of her other films. Maybe she has made some films that are a little more cheerful and fun.
Mundae's portrayal of Chantal, a sweet innocent girl from a small town trying to become a movie star in Hollywood hits all the right clichés.
In fact the whole movie fit all the stereotypes of how Hollywood eats young girls like Chantal up and spits them out.
But a little different than the soft-core porn Mundae became infamous for, this tale has some enduring moments but I think it rides the line of erotic drama and pornographic parody too strong.
It was a good way for Mundae to show she's more than "visual material" for those "many lonely nights", but the movie itself is a little too dark for that "activity", unless you're really into the ideal of a bright eyed innocent, spiraling down a dark path that gets very surreal as it goes.
Definitely something for real deal Mundane fans but I would stick with the movies that Julie Strain starred in rather than this one which she made a cameo in.
Good effort but takes what it is too seriously.
In fact the whole movie fit all the stereotypes of how Hollywood eats young girls like Chantal up and spits them out.
But a little different than the soft-core porn Mundae became infamous for, this tale has some enduring moments but I think it rides the line of erotic drama and pornographic parody too strong.
It was a good way for Mundae to show she's more than "visual material" for those "many lonely nights", but the movie itself is a little too dark for that "activity", unless you're really into the ideal of a bright eyed innocent, spiraling down a dark path that gets very surreal as it goes.
Definitely something for real deal Mundane fans but I would stick with the movies that Julie Strain starred in rather than this one which she made a cameo in.
Good effort but takes what it is too seriously.
As an actor in the film, l did it for fun, not to win an award for acting. Also the director was a friend, which was another fun reason I did it.
Like the commenter above, I have a degree in Theatre which they don't give unless you can do the work. Plus, not to forget to mention, I am also friends with the commenter and had fun working with him.
The budget on this film was less than what most people earn yearly, and as a result you're lucky to get a movie as well done as this one was on it's budget.
Judge it for what it was done for, not on what other films are done for.
Besides, as previously mentioned, I had fun working on it.
Like the commenter above, I have a degree in Theatre which they don't give unless you can do the work. Plus, not to forget to mention, I am also friends with the commenter and had fun working with him.
The budget on this film was less than what most people earn yearly, and as a result you're lucky to get a movie as well done as this one was on it's budget.
Judge it for what it was done for, not on what other films are done for.
Besides, as previously mentioned, I had fun working on it.
I watched the "Tubi cut" of this junk. Apparently most of the sex and a lot of the nudity was removed from this version. This leaves exactly nothing of value or interest. Really, given the lack of talent in direction, cinematography and screen writing, coupled with the abysmal cast, we really can't be missing much.
The actors are horrible. The dialog is laughable and the whole thing is shot in closeups, apparently with a hand held Betamax camera.
This intended to be soft core entertainment. If that's what you are looking for, there are myriad better options. Don't waste your time. You can easily do WAY better.
The actors are horrible. The dialog is laughable and the whole thing is shot in closeups, apparently with a hand held Betamax camera.
This intended to be soft core entertainment. If that's what you are looking for, there are myriad better options. Don't waste your time. You can easily do WAY better.
Typical girl next door comes to Hollywood to be a star. I have a soft spot for these types of movie.
There is always something that set them apart from one another. You have the impression, a little tweak here and there, this movie could be so much better. The movie attempt to show the gritty, seamy and hedonistic side of the Hollywood falls short. The plot and pacing drags. The bright spot: I did find myself caring about the lead actress Misty Mundae/Erin Brown. To watch her progress as an actress from soft core to B movie is fascinating. I believe is the principle cause for the restraint in the movie. A bigger budget and the commitment to being more gritty; a much better picture. A Misty Mundae fan? You might find it interesting.
There is always something that set them apart from one another. You have the impression, a little tweak here and there, this movie could be so much better. The movie attempt to show the gritty, seamy and hedonistic side of the Hollywood falls short. The plot and pacing drags. The bright spot: I did find myself caring about the lead actress Misty Mundae/Erin Brown. To watch her progress as an actress from soft core to B movie is fascinating. I believe is the principle cause for the restraint in the movie. A bigger budget and the commitment to being more gritty; a much better picture. A Misty Mundae fan? You might find it interesting.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesShot in five days.
- ConnexionsRemake of Chantal (1968)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
Détails
Box-office
- Budget
- 60 000 $US (estimé)
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant