The Pleasure Drivers

I had to post this because I've been reading all of these really bad reviews and I just can't relate to any of them. I think most of the people writing the reviews have missed something fundamental which is (I think) Pleasure Drivers is much more of an art film than your standard b-movie thriller. Lots of people have posted that the movie's too slow -- that's what I love about it. I think its strangeness makes it really unique and you get sucked in, in ways you don't understand and have to see it again. I think it's really too bad that this movie is being judged by what it isn't (a slick, stupid, fast paced thriller) instead of what it is, which for me was this really austere investigation of morals and motivation, or I don't even know, but it feels like it's doing a lot more than like say Kill Bill. I'm sure if it get released in Europe (if it hasn't already) it'll do much better. Why do we have to relate to the people in it? I had so much fun just watching all these trashy people get more and more messed up. The one thing I didn't like was the whole "lesbian" hit woman. That was really underdeveloped, but whatever,it's like this ultra cheap movie and they probably ran out of money or something. I don't know about you but when I see a movie that's this different it makes me feel alive and excited. Hopefully these people will get more money for their next project.

A nurse and her patient, a professor and his nymphomaniac student, Meat Loaf, Billy Zane and a showdown at the Big Cock Inn. Just another day in the lives of our hapless heroes.

I like films and stories that have multiple story lines that converge into one connected plot. Tarantino does this well. I myself wrote a novel with four interwoven plots. "Anna Karenina" did this very well. This film did not pull off the magic as well as we could have hoped.

A professor leaves home when he finds his wife has a lesbian lover and along the way picks up a sexy escort (played by the ravishing Lacey Chabert). But this plot is full of such annoyances -- every time something cool is about to happen, it is stopped.

A nurse takes her patient away and kidnaps a girl to raise money. She even involves Meat Loaf (who, like his character in "Pelts", likes to kill raccoons). This has some potential, but is plagued by the fact it just doesn't make much sense. A nurse kidnapping someone? I guess, but it seems extreme.

The worst part is that the best character is the priest played by Billy Zane and Zane only shows up for a brief time (delivering some great lines). Had he appeared more often, the film would have been significantly improved. But we are left wanting.

And that's what it really came down to: a teaser with no satisfaction. Not enough Zane, not enough sex (especially with as much as they hint at) and a plot that ultimately seems more forced than fluid. I enjoyed the movie, but it was nothing special and certainly doesn't warrant a second viewing on my part. Maybe I missed something deeper, but I really doubt it.

FIRST, these commentaries on IMDb are of course subject to padding by interested parties, people whose egos are invested in a piece of dreck like "The Pleasure Drivers." There's no other explanation for the mildly favorable comments to be read here regarding this ... thing.

SECOND, it would be too easy to blame the writer--though to be sure he must be an abysmal sycophant and scrotum-lapper to Taratino and others, not to mention an abject adolescent (despite the pock-marked age visible in his photo). The question one must confront is: HOW DID OTHERS--DIRECTORS, ACTORS, ET AL.--SWALLOW THIS SCREENPLAY? I read better scripts back in Junior High School.

THIRD, the answer to #2 is that the people with access to the money, incapable of paying protracted attention to anything at all, thought they saw a vague resemblance between this script and the work of Tarantino and a gaggle of other fleeting fads, and gave it a go.

FOURTH, despite what I said in #2, the writer must be the focus of blame here. Self-conscious "quirkiness," dialogue that could only be mistaken as clever by LA bimbos & gym bunnies.

" Pleasure Drivers?" Pleasure Drivers is a gut wrenching, nauseating, Horror Movie and just not what I was looking for at all. Google told me this was a very sexy movie with Lacy Chabert in it which is only partly true and only in a twisted, kinky, slasher kind of way. "Pleasure Drivers would have been more appropriately named "Can't Get No"; "There is no"; or "Epic Pleasure Fail ".

Pleasure Drivers is without a doubt the darkest movie I have seen in a while and it most certainly has nothing whatsoever to do with pleasure. My stomach hurt for hours after watching this movie. The story predicts a happy ending but in my opinion this happy ending exists only in a weird imaginary conspiracy theory kind of way.

Is the acting well done? Yes, I suppose you could say the actors did exactly what they were supposed to do. It's the story line I have a problem with. The movie jumps about in fits and jerks and I am not sure if we are flashing back to another time in history or moving forward ahead in time.

Only in the last half hour does the movie become more predictable, more understandable and you realize the classic horror that is about to happen as it unfolds.

I'll level with you...this is a lame movie with mediocre acting & totally uninteresting characters. It starts out strong & shows some promise but, just give it another 10 minutes....your thumb will find the eject button. HOWEVER, there is one saving grace....her name is Lacey Chabert! Trust me, guys (and girls who like other girls), you should really rent this flick just to see the delicious Lacey in rare form! This adorable morsel (who was age 23 at the time of filming in 2005), absolutely has one of THE Best figures I've ever seen!! Unfortunately, we don't get to see all of her (which is seriously weak for an unrated film!) but, our girl does juuuust fine. Skip to chapters 9 & 10, and see if you agree. ;)