Volupté

I watched this movie because I'm a fan of Gina. The screenplay really sucks.

When you haven't seen a Gina Lollobrigida film in ten years her beauty really hits you in the face. She's also decked in glamorous, slinky gowns that show off her beautiful figure. Borgnine drives a gorgeous 1960 Chrysler New Yorker convertible in the film.

Those are the only good things I can say about this movie. It us absolutely pointless. It is also boring and annoying. Franciosa overacts, Borgnine just yells and Lollo acts like she's doing everyone a favor by just appearing in the film. Well, actually, she is.

You aren't given the time to care about the characters or get any insights into their motivations. Its just a lot of yelling.

"Go Naked in the World" is a very bad film....a glossy, good looking bad film. The more you watch it, the more you realize it's a bad film....with too many characters who seem like caricatures and absolutely no subtlety. It's a shame, as there are many interesting story elements but the sum total is just bad...really bad. Better writers EASILY could have made this into a very good film...but apparently these were not better writers!

When the story begins, Nick Stratten (Tony Franciosa) has returned to his hometown after serving a hitch in the army. While you might think he'd go straight home to see his parents, Nick doesn't as his relationship with his father is extremely problematic! Pete Stratten (Ernest Borgnine) is a loud, blustering and controlling father....and Nick claims that he wants to be free of his father's control. However, although this seems admirable that Nick wants to make his own way in life, he's a jerk-face...who goes to his father for money but then, at the same time, resents his old man and makes it obvious. As for the father, he's no prince....as he's never been faithful to his wife and has spent time schtupping a high-class prostitute, Guilietta (Gina Lollobrigida). Later, Nick finds out that his new girlfriend, the one he's head-over-heels over, is the girl Pete's been seeing for years. And, apparently, so have many, many of Pete's friends! This is obviously NOT a super-healthy family!!

So why did I dislike the film so much? I blame much of it on the writers (as I mentioned above) and the director. After all, Pete is supposed to be a large personality....but there is zero subtlety about the guy and he spends most of the movie screaming his lines. I know Ernest Borgnine was a fabulous actor, so I don't completely blame him, but his character is so unreal. As for Nick and the rest of them, it's so sad that the LEAST over-the-top and most real character was the prostitute!!

The film COULD have been a great film about a father and son who are estranged. There ARE interesting things in the movie. But instead, it's just badly written, unconvincing and dumb....and filled with a bazillion and one plot holes. Ut also suffers from one huge problem....you simply don't like most of the characters! It's a pretty looking bad film, but a bad film nonetheless.

I find it extremely hard to believe that no one who's seen Go Naked in the World has made the connection that it's a non-operatic version of La Traviata. It's based on Tom T. Charmales's 1959 novel, but it's a shameless copy of the famed story about a young man who falls in love with a prostitute.

Anthony Franciosa plays the young man, his strong, stern disapproving father is Ernest Borgnine. They come from a strict Greek background, and Ernie is just as tough, demanding, controlling, and larger-than-life than you'd expect any self-made man who wants the best for his kids. Yes, he's loud and challenging and impossible, but he also had to battle more in his life than his ingrate children have had to. He's earned the right to be gruff, and beneath it all, you can tell he's coming from a place of love.

Tony is too angry and youthful to appreciate his father's love, so rather than take a job at his extremely successful construction company, he slums it in an apartment and takes up with a beautiful prostitute, Gina Lollobrigida. He has no idea she's "the biggest call girl in town," but the audience knows it from the first scene. If you know La Traviata or Camille, you know how upset he'll get when he finds out. If you don't, you'll be extremely entertained by this heavy drama. There's an added twist to this movie that isn't present in the other stories, one that I happen to love and won't tell you about. You'll just have to rent it to find out why this particular version is so heavy.

If you rent this naughty, post-Code "romance", you'll see three very meaty performances. All three leads are given a lot to do, and they're all very convincing. Ernie certainly made good use of his Oscar, Tony broke free of his Italian-Burt-Lancaster-persona, and Gina was challenged most of all. She's given an enormous range in her scenes, so if you're a fan of the beautiful Italian actress, you're not going to want to miss this one.

In this lurid early 60's melodrama, Gina Lollobrigida plays a high-class call girl who meets Anthony Franciosca, the son of millionaire construction magnate Ernest Borgnine, a self-made Greek immigrant whose forceful personality and wealth dominates everyone around him. Franciosca has just gotten out of the service and is "finding himself". Franciosca is at first ignorant of Lollobrigida's calling in life, but soon gets wise and also learns that his father and seemingly half the male population in town has used her services.

This is a fairly big budget, lushly made film, set in what looked like possibly San Francisco (?) with a side trip to Acapulco. I'm kind of a sucker for films from this era, their look and style, so it was enjoyable enough though certainly nothing great. Borgnine gives the best performance, though even his character showed a lot of inconsistency - at times, he was quite likable then you wanted to beat him over the head. Gina is voluptuous and sexy, but Franciosca, playing the weakest character, could not overcome the deficiencies of the writing. The biggest problem with the film is the inherent double standard of the time, making the sexually free woman the victim who must pay for her "sins". I'm certainly happy that things have changed in that regard.