silentgpaleo
Joined Apr 2000
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges2
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Reviews55
silentgpaleo's rating
When one of the first scene of a film contains the line, "Well, let me tell you the story about what happened," you know that you're in for a classic. This is that kind of classic. KISS ME MONSTER is a short, sometimes dull, and always sleazy film that makes you wish there were still drive-ins. How else could this have made it into theaters, except for maybe a few grindhouses.
KISS ME MONSTER is a hodge-podge of cliches, lots of red herrings, and a plot that is practically indescribable. In fact, I'm not sure if there really is a plot, just a series of scenes that are excuses to show the two female leads in different stages of undress. The dialogue is ridiculous (to be fair, this may be the fault of the below-par dubbing), and the characters are mostly unlikable.
But, in its own cynical yet silly way, the film has its charms. The blonde lead is very attractive, and she gives karate-chops, too. Plus, Jesus Franco, as cheap a director as he is, usually accomplishes come good photography. Plus, some of the jazz on the soundtrack is pretty good.
I liked KISS ME MONSTER, but for all the wrong reasons. I laughed out-loud so many times, I kept wondering if it was supposed to be funny. Alas, I don't think so. If anyone can explain how the plot leads to the island with the mad scientist, please let me know. Because I was scratching my head the whole time...
KISS ME MONSTER is a hodge-podge of cliches, lots of red herrings, and a plot that is practically indescribable. In fact, I'm not sure if there really is a plot, just a series of scenes that are excuses to show the two female leads in different stages of undress. The dialogue is ridiculous (to be fair, this may be the fault of the below-par dubbing), and the characters are mostly unlikable.
But, in its own cynical yet silly way, the film has its charms. The blonde lead is very attractive, and she gives karate-chops, too. Plus, Jesus Franco, as cheap a director as he is, usually accomplishes come good photography. Plus, some of the jazz on the soundtrack is pretty good.
I liked KISS ME MONSTER, but for all the wrong reasons. I laughed out-loud so many times, I kept wondering if it was supposed to be funny. Alas, I don't think so. If anyone can explain how the plot leads to the island with the mad scientist, please let me know. Because I was scratching my head the whole time...
DRIVE-IN MADNESS is two things: a documentary, and a collection of old trailers for exploitation films. There are ads for Independent International pictures (NURSE SHERRI, BLAZZING STEWARDESSESS), and other assorted odd-ball fare(THE NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD, MASOULEUM). There are also interviews with scream queens (Bobbie Breesse and Linnea Quigley) and filmmakers(George Romero, Sam Sherman, Joh Russo). There is a fairly long piece on NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD, and what the makers of that film have done since.
My favorite part of this docu-paste-up was when George Romero talks about the state of films today. Romero says he feels that films are much more disposable nowadays(because of video), and it makes it harder for people trying to make something unique. Tom Savini, next to him, agreed, and so do I. Alot of films are very genre-based currently, and you very rarely find a renegade director like Romero anymore. (Incidentally, I think DAWN OF THE DEAD is a classic.)
DRIVE-IN MADNESS is a cheaply made, shoddily edited affair, but it is well-worth seeing for film buffs. The narrator (POLTERGEIST star James Karen) has a perfectly pleasant voice, and he obviously has respect for his subject.
If anyone can grab a copy of BLAZZING STEWARDESSESS, let me know, because that one looks like a hoot.
My favorite part of this docu-paste-up was when George Romero talks about the state of films today. Romero says he feels that films are much more disposable nowadays(because of video), and it makes it harder for people trying to make something unique. Tom Savini, next to him, agreed, and so do I. Alot of films are very genre-based currently, and you very rarely find a renegade director like Romero anymore. (Incidentally, I think DAWN OF THE DEAD is a classic.)
DRIVE-IN MADNESS is a cheaply made, shoddily edited affair, but it is well-worth seeing for film buffs. The narrator (POLTERGEIST star James Karen) has a perfectly pleasant voice, and he obviously has respect for his subject.
If anyone can grab a copy of BLAZZING STEWARDESSESS, let me know, because that one looks like a hoot.
In the future, the government has established colonies on the bottom of the ocean to contend with the threats of global warming. Priscilla Barnes plays a scientist who becomes dazzled by what discoveries she makes living underwater.
This is dull, dull, dull. There is no action, no violence or nudity, and Roger Corman has a cameo. The special effects are passable, but some of this stuff is lifted from past Corman flicks, which ads to the cheapness. Mostly, the characters just talk a lot, and argue.
This is no way to spend 79 minutes, unless you like looking in at fake aquariums.
This is dull, dull, dull. There is no action, no violence or nudity, and Roger Corman has a cameo. The special effects are passable, but some of this stuff is lifted from past Corman flicks, which ads to the cheapness. Mostly, the characters just talk a lot, and argue.
This is no way to spend 79 minutes, unless you like looking in at fake aquariums.