It Couldn't Happen to a Nicer Guy

About the only good thing I can say about it is that it isn't Rabbit Test. This bottom-of-the-barrel made-for-TV makes light of rape, a crime that is arguably even more grievous than murder. Probably the most amazing thing about it is that Get Smart alumni Arne Sultan accepted writing and producing credits under his own name, and that as many stars participated as did.

It could perhaps be argued that it at least attempted to point out the difficulty women have historically had in getting rape taken seriously, but its success at that attempt is debatable at best.

Paul Sorvino plays a very faithful husband who is raped at gunpoint by a woman one evening on his way home. This is a comedy, believe it or not. I remember that the husband had a hard time convincing anybody that he had been raped. The husband was sexually taken advantage of by another woman in the story, who thought he was a stud. I doubt that this one will ever see the light of day again; the subject is too distasteful.

There was a big controversy when this first played on TV. It was on at 8:00 (I believe) and the TV station (I THINK it was ABC) was blasted for showing such a movie of questionable taste so early in the evening. Well, I was 12 when I saw it and I wasn't particularly shocked or upset by it. I found it pretty lame and stupid and didn't find anything funny about a woman forcing a guy to strip nude at gunpoint. And despite what other reviewers have said here rape wasn't even suggested (from what I remember). And she just did it for kicks (!!!!). This movie also goes out of its way to make fun of Sorvino's character. Sorry but I don't find sexual assault that funny. There's no way this will be seen on TV now (except maybe VERY late night) but that's no great loss. I wonder what Paul Sorvino thinks about this now.

Silly, stupid and pretty sick. Don't bother.

There is some merit to the idea of examining the question, "what if a woman were to rape a man," notwithstanding the fact that, unless the woman had some drug capable of inducing an uncontrollable erection, such an incident is physiologically unlikely.

Unfortunately, while this film did manage to bring up the question, it did so mainly for the sake of a few tasteless laughs, which managed to overshadow anything meaningful it might have tried to say.

This movie has stood out in my mind until this day. I loved this movie

because of the laughs but it is also good that we got to poke fun at a man crying rape instead of a woman. It wasa comedy and was meant for us to laugh about it.

The father, played by Paul Sorvino either gave a ride or got a ride with a much younger beautiful woman. I won't give everything away suffice to say he ended up naked hiding in the back of a woman's house, trying to get clothes from her clothes line to cover himself with, she saw him and called the police. He told the cops he was raped and of course they do not believe him. They were all snickering and laughing at him, they just thought was a pervert. It was not a serious movie, it was more of a comedy and was made for laughs and should be looked at that way. That is what most movies are for, for us to have fun. People should not be so serious about something that should be funny.

Those days we were not as politically correct as today and people was able to poke fun at things they could not get away with now. Don't know why.

I watched and love it for the laughs and you will too, if you ever get to see it. I would love to see it again myself.