highway234

I think this may be one of the most underrated movies ever. Yes, it was plainly made on a limited budget, the male lead seems a bit lost at times, and there are some other problems. But it has really good music, tight editing, a very talented and funny female lead, and -- and I think this is the strongest thing about it -- it's well written. Yes, I said it and I'd say it again. It's founded on a solid premise. (Katie loves her friend Ryan because of a kiss she believes they shared when they were kids, but because Ryan won't have sex with a virgin, if Katie wants to have him, first she has to find someone else to sleep with before the night is over.) There's a lot of raunchy humor, but the writer puts some thought into it. A lot of the jokes are about NOT showing the male penis, for instance, which I think puts the movie into the camp of retro softcore like Flesh Gordon and Fantasm (although I actually think 18-year-old virgin is better written than either of these).

The movie seems to have a lot of compassion for Katie and really delves into some of the confusions and anxieties of a young woman confronting sexual issues for the first time. It's really funny how she's simultaneously drawn to and offended by the penis. (I loved the bit when she asks "Is that what it's supposed to look like?", takes a cellpicture of a guy's naked penis and shows it to her more experienced friend...) There's a lot of amazingly Freudian moments in it too. Katie likes to correct people's grammar (and that's another thing, I'm a copyeditor and loved how the writer took the time to make all of Katie's grammatical corrections actually correct, rather than just putting in throwaway lines) and at one point refers to a dildo as a "dangling modifier," which Freud would have a field day with. It's a pun that works on a variety of levels.

I can get why people would hate this movie because of its low budget, or because they're expecting something like "40-year-old virgin" (despite the name, this movie is almost completely unlike 40-year-old virgin), or because it's raunchy. (It's VERY raunchy, much more so than American pie and mainstream movies of that ilk, but I don't mind that. Chaucer was raunchy, too.) But I wanna take exception to people who call the movie "mindless" or "just a T&A movie." A lot of thought went into the writing with this movie and because of that, I found it to be a delightful surprise for more than just the obvious reasons. Naomi Selfman wrote the screenplay and based on this movie alone I'm definitely going to be seeking out other movies she's worked on. Well done, Naomi, and remember, haters gonna hate.

like i'm sure at least half the people who grew up in the late-70s i loved the Disney witch mountain movies with the brother and sister with supernatural powers who were forces for good. (i think a comic book series would have totally been in order, but that's a story for another time.) i had no idea the two child stars from those two movies were in anything else together until a couple of years ago, when i found out they were in this other made-for-t.v. movie called "devil dog: the hound of hell."

the movie itself is pretty campy, but hilarious for all that -- i bought an Asian bootleg on ebay and the quality of the new print from rareflix is much, much better. and it was such a great idea to have this bonus DVD, where they interview one of the movie's producers and find ms. Richards and Mr. eisenmann (now known as Mr. eissinmann, i believe) and get their recollection on the movie and on their careers in general. the anecdotes from devil dog are great (particularly the bizarre tale lake tells about the carny dog trainers) and from the various other movies the two were in throughout the 70s (who knew Kim Richards was so frequently almost mauled by wild animals?). a great purchase for anyone of our generation, those in their 30s and 40s who remember these two as childhood icons of the disco era, and interesting in its own right as a document about what it's like to perform for movies and television.

only thing is, where's the commentary track?