Sacred Flesh

Nigel Wingrove cocks a snook at the then recently retired James Ferman for his banning of 'Visions Of Ecstasy' a decade earlier.

A feature length shot on video imbroglio of cosmetically enhanced and fully shaven nuns doing close-up 'penance'.

Yes the scenes of the devilish succubus reciting arch dialogue are amusing, in a Lair Of The White Worm type way. But they are few and far between, and if you're not into the heavy breathing stuff, it's too boring waiting for them.

Very poor stuff all round. Redemption was so much better than this in the beginning when they got so many of us into obscure foreign horrorsploitation.

British nunsploitation, made as a tribute to the European nun flicks of the 70s (director/writer Nigel Wingrove is actually the founder of UK media company Salvation, which distributes work by directors such as Jess Franco, Jean Rollin, Dario Argento, Mario Bava, Bruno Mattei, and Lucio Fulci).

In the past (we don't know exactly when, but people travel around on horseback) a Mother Superior has become obsessed with lustful thoughts after hearing confessions from some of her young nuns. In her agitated state she imagines having a conversation with Mary Magdalene and (for some reason ) a zombie nun, during which she recounts four of these confessions. As she does so we see them played out.

All the young nuns are played by 'adult entertainment' actresses - not surprising given the scenarios are nude soft-core involving self-flagellation and/or sex between nuns. The acting is atrocious, and the 'story' is nothing but an excuse to show... stuff. However... compared to most skin-flicks (IMDb classifies this simply as 'horror', but let's call it what it is), it clearly has a budget, with a nifty title sequence, good location work (inside and outside), costumes, props, a (relatively) large cast, and a 1 hr 15 min runtime. The camerawork is also pretty good, and the girls are hot (although obvious boob jobs, lipstick, and nail-varnish do look out of place on nuns; no wonder so much stuff was going on!). Oh, for Brits there's a cameo by cult actress and sometime TV presenter Emily Booth. 5/10.

What we have here is a film designed to shock. Anyone who goes about making a film about the repressed sexuality of nuns realises and no doubt encourages the fact that some will be shocked by this. In my opinion this film makers tangle with this has left nothing but a laughable piece of amateur soft porn hoping to fool people into thinking it has deep, important themes by topping and tailing the sex scenes with terribly written and awfully acted discussions about the morality of sex and sexual repression. 'The Devils' walked the line between exploitation and art but due to the superb performances and clinical direction managed to avoid desending into voyerism, something this film can not claim.

I am sad to see that some people commenting have actually been taken in by the "moral arguments" that run through the film. All I see is a very weak device to allow a group of soft porn scenes to run their course. The rapid editing and camera movement does little to disguise them for what they are either.

The acting is terrible. I got the impression that the actors either had no clue what they were saying and therefore lacked any sort realism or were trying their hardest to remember the reams of dogmatic nonsense they spewed - which had much the same affect.

One hilarious element are the performers in the scenes of "sexual gratification". Most appear to have breast implants, full make up including lipstick, eye make up and nail varnish, and some even have pierced tongues, belly button rings and tattoos not to mention their incredibly neatly trimmed pubic hair. I'm no expert but I doubt that these things would have been common place in most Convents. This does not add up to a high level of realism and is just another example of the fact the film-maker's intentions were as far from high art or art house as you can get.

Avoid this film, if God exists he'll help you resist.

One has to have some justification for watching a film like this. Surely, we cannot be just voyeurs, are we? This is probably the ultimate in nunsploitation films. I am certainly not through investigation, but I cannot imagine something more perverse than this one.

So, we have to follow along with the writer/director who apparently wanted to justify the sumptuous feast of nun flesh in this film by having not one, but two or three philosophical discussions going on about mean and women, nuns, and satisfying your carnal desires. Bugger! Just fast forward through all that and get to the action.

And, what action you will see in this film. It stretched the line between soft and hard core porn so far that I actually felt it may bust through if there was one more scene. Full frontal nudity was the norm, and those none were certainly passionate about satisfying each other - or themselves if no one was about to help. A nunnery full of bodacious babes and all there for us to enjoy. Even the priests got in on the act somewhat as they wanted to make sure that a particular nun knew what she was sacrificing.

Whew! I am just overwhelmed at what goes on behind those walls.

Now there are some people who watch porn movies who say they like to see a bit of a story and there are some who like to see just action and no story (i fall in the second catagory). In Sacred Flesh we see have a film that fits into neither catagory. This joke of a film does try to show a story but it is so full of religious clap trap that you can't help but reach for the fast forward button to search for the fleshy good bits. Thats were we have the other problem, apart from a couple of flashes of soft porn we see nothing that would get anybody exited .If your thinking of seeing this for the sex ,watch something else because this wont do it for you.

The costumes look like they had been made at the local primary school and the acting was so laughable , especially from the men , that it provides the only entertainment. Dont touch this with a barge pole. 1 out of 10.