Starring:  Dirk Bogarde

Running Time:  96 minutes

Louis Farr is a man with a secret; and a successful career in law and a loving, beautiful wife give his secret a much greater weight.  Louis Farr is homosexual--a crime punishable by prison time in his home of late 1960's London.  He is a member of a faceless subculture, one of men on the fringes of society, ashamed of their feelings of love for one another.  Farr is content with denying his lustful urges for one particular young man, and reaping the benefits of good reputation.  Content, of course, until he finds that his would-be lover committed suicide in prison under the pressures of blackmail. 

A very controversial and challenging film for its time, Victim deserves a great deal of praise.  Quickly, though, I will mention one of the pitfalls of the film:  the soundtrack.  The orchestra is much too dramatic--even for a film containing such grave social commentary.

Moving on, one of many of the film's triumphs lies in its "normalcy."  There are no queens, and no overdone effeminate gesticulations--just people trying to keep themselves out of the glaring eye of public scrutiny.  Not to mention, Farr's sexuality is not rigid.  He feels what can be categorized as lust for "Boy" Barrett, the aforementioned young man; this does not mean that his love for his wife is a false one.

In fact, Mrs. Farr is aware (although not happily) of her husband's potential bisexuality.  She knew before they married, and hoped a ring of Louis Farr's finger would calm his... "tendencies."  However, once the blackmailers get too close for comfort, Mrs. Farr does not falter--preferring to remain supportive of her husband's stand:  to have the law against homosexuality challenged in court.

So, what makes this sensitive take on homosexuality so special?  The fight.  Farr sacrifices his untarnished career to bring this injustice to the foreground.  Whether or not you are interested in LGBTQ issues, this is an important film to take a look at.  It will help to shatter even today's misconceptions of the social boundaries placed on sexuality and love.

Daniel Craig plays Joe Scott, a one-time big deal in Hollywood whose life is just empty, drinking, drugs, and self obsession are his only interests. Living in Los Angeles his life is far from his roots in the east coast of England, in a small seaside resort. For Joe though life turns further upside down one day when a phone call from his mother Grace (Olivia Williams) tells him that his childhood friend Boots has died. After a morning of anger Joe heads to the beach with a bottle, heading into the sea he floats on the surface reflecting on that crucial point in time where his life changed forever.

 

Flashbacks Of A Fool is the sort of movie that would appeal to a person of a certain age, and into a specific scene at the moment of their life where things changed more than at any other point in their lifetime. I grew up in the 70’s and 80’s, I lived on a beach (in a house obviously) and found a certain wonder in the magic of that beach, during my early teenage years I was obsessed by two things sex and music, the movie is centred around exactly the same time. One of the pivotal moments of the movie occurs when an old World War two mine is washed up on the beach all the characters live on, where I was growing up this happened all the time. For all these reasons I can relate to the character of Joe, watching the movie was like a glimpse back into my past, with me being the titled fool. Like all flashbacks you remember the weather either to be perfect or horrendous and as such the weather in the movie is one or the other, usually perfect. I think if you’re below 35 years old (unless you are an old soul in a young person’s body), that you really will not get this movie. This is a movie that offers a dreamy time to reminisce the good times, along with a rather unpleasant series of events.

Sex features highly in the movie, rather like the way Channel Four (a UK based television station) used to lure its viewers in, Flashbacks Of A Fool pulls in its audience with the promise of sex and a certain sort of titillation. Opening with silhouetted figures enjoying a threesome, sex next raises its head during a flashback to a fairground ghost train, where young Joe and his friend Boots are vigorously masturbating in order to obtain enough sperm to wipe in the hair of the girls that pass by them in their carriages. Joe finds himself later caught in the crossfire between two women, sexually frustrated neighbour Evelyn (Jodhi May) and the delightful David Bowie/Roxy Music obsessed Ruth (Felicity Jones). Like any child, the most straight forward option, the quickest way to get to the goal (the goal here being sex) is the path that Joe takes.  It’s one of these diversions that cause the issues that change his life, and cause him to put his childhood behind him even though he was still a child.

Director/Writer Baillie Walsh lived through the period of time portrayed in Joe’s flashbacks, as a result he pictures everything just perfectly, delivering us to a time where everyone made home-grown produce, and a highlight of living near the beach was beachcombing looking for treasures washed ashore. I love the fact that Joe’s mother has a “friend”, a woman whose presence is unexplained and giving you good reason to suspect she may be a lesbian, this sort of thing happened a lot back then. He also has given good attention to the clothing, makeup, music, and the sort of filming locations used; if it were not for the fact that you are fully aware when the movie was made you could easily believe that this movie was a product of the day. Aspects of the movie are biographical in the movie (from Walsh’s life); though nowhere does it explain what aspects these might be.  Realising that the majority of the audience are not going to be above the age of 35 Walsh tries his best to explain as best he can about that point in time, specifically using the wild, mysterious and mature Ruth (the same age as Joe but way above his level of maturity) to explain things, in an educational moment she explains to Joe the meaning behind Bowies Jean Genie, although really she is explaining to the audience. While trends of the day like putting your head in a polythene bag to see how long you can breathe for without suffocating,  help us to understand how the more innocent aspects of this time were never far away from something far more serious.

There are moments in the movie that have been framed and captured so perfectly, Ruth dresses up young Joe (played in flashbacks by Harry Eden from Bleak House) with a jazzy Bryan Ferry style jacket and make-up, then the two perform a mimed version of a performance to Roxy Music’s “If There Is Something”, a track legendary in both its running time and its style. This same score later becomes the theme for the movie, personally when I think back over the movie it’s the most vivid image created in my head.

The cast are particularly good many of whom are doing favours for Walsh, because like Craig not only did they live the time, but they fully understood it and know that this is an area of history forgotten to all but those that lived it. Along with the cast members mentioned there is also the delightful Claire Forlani, Keeley Hawes, and Mark Strong, all of whom act very naturally, there is no faking here.

 

The cleverest aspect of the movie is that for the Los Angeles scenes of the movie, Walsh captured similar looking environments from both the UK and South Africa in order to save money with the movies production costs, and unless you knew better you would never for one moment  suspect this.

The crucial aspect of the movie, its mission statement if you like is all about change, and most importantly letting go of the past; life is short and it’s important to make the best of everyday, as the movie progresses Joes reflections of the past help him to address his future.

While not for everyone, Flashbacks Of A Fool is for someone, and if nobody else it was for me; from providing me with forgotten images from my past, and breaking free all those memories; to most importantly keeping me entertained for two hours. So for every bad review on this movie you read, remember this one and hopefully you’ll give it the chance to work its charms on you too.

This is a film all about love, although it takes a whole new cynical approach to love, or the lack of it. It criticises modern relationships and explores the aspects that ruin love such as jealousy and betrayal. Also unusually for a love story, the characters are arrogant and difficult to sympathise with, which is a challenge to the audience as it is difficult to take sides with any of them. It certainly doesn't offer the similarity of a usual love story; I will applaud anyone who comes close to guessing the ending.

The script is extremely witty and honest: it will have you watching the characters as you would a tennis match. Most lines are spat out without much passion; they really hit you in the face. "I don"t love you anymore. Goodbye.' They are mostly very short and snappy, and anything but poetic.

The plot is about four strangers whose lives intertwine together: Alice, a stripper (Natalie Portman), Dan, an obituaries writer (Jude Law), Anna, a photographer (Julia Roberts) and Larry, a doctor (Clive Owen). These four strangers form unhealthy and unbalanced relationships with one another, involving betrayal, cruelty and obsession. Although it is a very dark story, the tension is often broken down with laugh-out-loud humour, so the audience doesn't feel suffocated.

Law's and Robert's characters are catalysts to the story although they are anything but charming. Owen's and Portman's outstandingly chilling performances outshine that of Law's and Robert's.

At the scene of the two major break-ups, Owen's character cruelly and bluntly asks Robert's about her sexual encounters with Law. "Did you come?" it is deeply unsettling and uncomfortable to watch. In contrast, when the scene jumps to Portman and Law's break up, we feel more at ease with this much more emotional encounter, and we feel sympathy for Portman's character. These scenes are certainly emotionally challenging to watch- it is difficult to take it all in the first time you watch it; you might not know how to feel about it.

The script, however, can be to articulate for the characters to be believable and sincere. Despite that, it cleverly highlights the differences in the personality of the characters which is very interesting to watch. For example, Portman says she doesn't eat fish because "Fish piss in the sea", in contrast, Roberts' character finds fish "therapeutic". Spotting these differences should be rewarding for the viewer.

Another unusual aspect that makes this film interesting is that there is not a single sex scene in the entire film. Sex is talked about in a very cruel and blunt way that makes the viewer cringe ('you know she likes a guilty fuck') without the use of any physical contact, except kissing and subtle touches. This focuses on the moral aspects of sex and at times, the consequences of lust, although it does not enforce a morality on the viewer.

The narrative also differs from usual romantic films- out leaves out the periods of the smooth sailing relationships and focuses instead on the beginnings and ends of them. This emphasises the point that the film makes- love can be short, blunt and cruel.

Although some people argue it is more admirable than enjoyable, it is a contemporary masterpiece that challenges the audience's experiences from a romantic film as well as challenging them to think about the real definition of love. All in all, it has amazing script, beautiful cinematography, brilliant acting and an unforgettable soundtrack. Definitely worth seeing, although maybe not ideal for a first date.

When Chiyo arrives at the okiya, the movie gives a soft feeling to how she is treated. The life of a Geisha is hard and at times is isolating. The movie gives the feeling that Chiyo had many people to help her on her way, as well as to guide her through everything that was needing to be done. This is hardly what the book states happens, because it does not give the grandmother yelling all the time or the troubles that Hatsumomo causes fore Chiyo, as well as Pumpkin. The okiya life almost seemed pleasing and lovely, where the book clearly showed that it was all work and no play. The problem with the portrayal of the movie is that it does not show why Chiyo is constantly wanting to leave, or why Chiyo is so willing to become a Geisha. It makes being a Geisha seem simple and easy instead of being a struggle.

The single most important part in the book for me is when Sayuri meets Nobu at the Sumo match. In the book it states he is considered to be “Mr. Lizard” due to his face and arm missing. Well, in the movie, we come to this part and Nobu has both arms, as well as his face being beautifully scared. The scares in the book are deep and gruesome making it hard to look at Nobu. In the movie, his face is not that hideous. The entire purpose for Sayuri having to be cautious on where she sits in order for Nobu to be able to pour tea or sake is no longer relevant, because in the movie, Nobu has both of his arms. The movie does state that Nobu is a Vet, but the meaning of what he has done for his country is not as effective as it was in the book. I do not like the fact that Nobu is not as “hideous” as he is in the book, because it makes it hard to understand why Hatsumomo is so delighted that Sayuri has taken interest in him instead of another man.

The other part of this section is extremely important because Sayuri finds the Chairman, once again. The problem with the movie is that we don't know if Sayuri has realized that the Chairman is the same man from the bridge. We see Sayuri looking at him whenever she can, but this could have many different meanings. It could be to see how he reacts to the Sumo compared to Nobu. It could be because she is attracted to him. There is no hint in the movie that Sayuri has realized who the Chairman is until it goes to the next scene and we see her tucking a newspaper clipping away with his handkerchief. If the audience of the movie is not paying attention closely, you could miss the entire fact that the Chairman was the man on the bridge. I feel that this was a scene that lacked in many areas to help the audience understand the meaning and significance of the Sumo match.

The whole incident where Sayuri has to have a cut on her leg so that she can meet Dr. Crab is a mess. The book states that Sayuri enters to get dressed and notices there's a hole in the kimono. Mameha and her servants come in and Mameha draws the line on Sayuri's inner thigh. The movie shows Mameha do this, however, it is on her outer thigh. This is hard to understand why the sudden change because the significance of the cut on the inner thigh is to get Dr. Crab to begin imagining things happening. The cut on the outside thigh is less significant because it is not close to the “parts” needing to be imagined. The other thing that I noticed is that Sayuri makes the cut herself in the movie. The book, Mameha has her servant cut Sayuri's leg. This again is really confusing because all the movie is showing is that Sayuri does what Mameha says when she says it. The book is more significant, in my opinion, because this helps us to see how significant of an event this is for Sayuri. I say that having someone else cut her leg is significant because this will help Sayuri become a full Geisha when she gives up her virginity. It is stated over and over that a Geisha is not a peasant or worker and that she does nothing for herself. The fact that in the book Sayuri has someone else cut her leg helps to demonstrate that a Geisha does nothing for themselves.

Taking a nod and a wink from the 70's and 80's vignette style movies The Ten follows a story that surrounds each of the Ten Commandments, all stories are interlinked by the breakdown of a relationship between Jeff (Paul Rudd) and Gretchen (Famke Janssen). While trying to garner a Woody Allenesque feel, the movie actually comes off more like a terrible car crash, where the only civil resolution would be that all those involved were to perish.

I appreciate that my open statement might seem rather harsh; however try making an adult movie with lots of swearing, nudity, sex, and touchy subject matter; then try aiming it at an audience with the intellect of a five year old and you might just begin to understand where I am coming from. The terrible vignette stories include an uptight woman who has sex with Jesus, two men who feud over who has the best and most Cat Scan machines, a drug addict Rhino who tries to warn the community about an incoming bunch of AIDS infected wiener dogs who want to have sex with the locals so they die; and possibly the most bizarre a man who jumps out of a plane without a parachute only to become surgically attached with the earth, while he ponders how to get out of the ground without his internal organs falling out, his girlfriend has sex with the local news anchor before leaving him to have an illicit affair with a ventriloquist doll. And if you think things have got as bad as they can, there is a story about male rape, given a hysterical spin; of course I'm joking when I use the word Hysterical.

The humour is far from funny in this movie, it's in fact possibly the most puerile and worthless humour offering since the likes of Date and Epic movie. Worse still, the trailer makes the movie look half way worth watching, so imagine seeing the trailer, getting all psyched up for what appears to be a worthwhile comedy then having to endure something so terribly abysmal. Things go from bad to worse sadly with this movie, because as well as all the terrible humour (I use the word humour lightly) there is a terrible song and dance number where all the actors sing about themselves (not the characters they play).

"Sometimes I wonder what it might be like if I were the one ass raping you every night! I can't look at you without fantasising about shoving you up against the wall in the laundry room, and punching you in the mouth, and then raping you... Without your consent of course... That's what makes it rape!"

What I do find fascinating about the movie is exactly who stars in it, they have a fairly reasonable calibre of cast including Winona Ryder, Adam Brody (The OC), Ron Silver (Blue Steel), Gretchen Moll (3.10 To Yuma), Justin Theroux (Mulholland Drive), Liev Schreiber (Scream), Jessica Alba, Oliver Platt (Flatliners), and Janeane Garofalo (24, Mystery Men). And if that were not enough there are handfuls of actors from some of the most successful TV shows of recent years. Somehow in my mind the actors and the story just do not add up, this is not a big budget movie, although it is certainly Hollywood. How on earth did so many reasonably sized actors get involved in such a terrible movie? Were they doing someone a favour? Were they repaying a debt perhaps with the devil himself?

What I find most annoying about the movie is the intercut pieces that divide the stories, set on a giant soundstage it's like one of those artsy fartsy theatrical pieces where the actors interact with nothing, trying to make you use your imagination as to what you see. On this giant blacked out soundstage are the two tablets of stone (giant size) containing the Ten Commandments. Both Rudd and Janssen are so so actors either performing well or incredibly badly and this backdrop does neither any favours.

The Ten is due in UK cinemas later in the year, if you're going to take my advice on one thing this year, take my advice on this, because this really is abysmal.

 

Okay first up in kiss your wondering, what is a Carom? Chances are if you're not from America this terminology might have you scratching your head or reaching for your dictionary. A carom is where in pool you bounce one ball off another in order for it to land in the pocket. The Kisses of the title refer not to literal kisses but effectively the kiss shot, which in certain circles is also regarded as a Carom... Confused? You will be.

Kisses And Caroms circles around a group of staff that work in a Pool store selling tables, cues and more popular than anything else chalk. All the events of the movie take place on one day, a day that begins with a threesome between Tara (Bicole Rayburn), Zack (Drew Wicks) and Jennifer (Nicky Stanzione). The crux of this threesome is that nobody can walk away unscarred, Zack and Jennifer are a recently separated couple, and all three just so happen to work in the same pool store. What follows on from this act are a series of comic moments and situations all caused by this threesome.

Kisses And Caroms is very similar to the movie Clerks, with the supermarket environment changed to a Pool store; seemingly okay with this similarity director of the movie Clerks brands his stamp of approval on this incredibly low budget movie. The difference this time however is that Zack is more than just an employee, he own Break time Billiards, a fact that makes his half interested views of the store all the more amusing. I say amusing, but to be honest there are few laughs on offer with this movie, it's all pretty bland stuff, that's nice enough to watch and at times a little educational, but not in the same league as the aforementioned Clerks; this movie will never get the same sort of cult approval that Clerks generates, although to be honest there is little more than a couple of laughs between then (though not here).

All the movie surrounds for the most part is the fallout from the threesome incident, and the effect it has on a number of relationships in the store. Most importantly it's about change, the biggest reference being that Zack sees that Jennifer acts differently around her friend Tara, something I'm sure that you'll relate too if you're in a relationship and have certain friends around.

You could really criticise the movie quite considerably, and to be honest with you I really want to, because despite being okay watching it's the sort of thing you can easily do without seeing. What I commend about the movie however is the fact that is was made for less than a million dollars, features a reasonably capable acting cast, and yet somehow manages to upon release on DVD in the United States push itself up to the extent that it took more money in DVD sales than the blockbuster movie released on DVD that very same week. Imagine how sickening that would be to invest a few 70 odd times the capital that Kisses And Caroms had invested in it, and reap in a considerably less. Despite the fact that the movie is one of those "Nothing really much happened today" style offerings, it's financially a great success.

Kisses And Caroms is currently lined up to appear straight to DVD in the UK, although it may arrive under the title American Pool. While I commend the movie for its achievements, it's not something I'd recommend buying or renting, when it turns up on TV then by all means give it a shot but until that time don't pay it too much consideration.

Silver is a normal kid, he works in his mum and dad's takeaway pizza joint as a delivery boy; he is nothing special and quite withdrawn. Slightly unbelievably this rather nerdy kid has a stunning girlfriend called Sheila who wants to wait for the time to be right to have sex; I'll leave you to decide which part I find unbelievable.

Silver however wants sex more than anything, after all his friends are all having sex, none more so than the Virginator (a guy who only has sex with girlfriends, and acquired the name after he named Silver the Masturbator). After an attempt to have sex with Sheila goes terribly wrong after finding condoms in his pocket, Silver is forced into the single life. Deciding to ditch the condoms however causes Silver to discover that they were obviously designed for elephants, and before he has time to bat his eyelids the town is rocked by the news that Silver has a two foot penis, suddenly the towns most desirables are all queuing up for a little "home delivery" but can Silver keep his newfound reputation in tact?

The sicker side of me really quite enjoyed this movie, not because it was overly funny, not because it had a gripping storyline, but because it was like a time warp for me, these sort of sex comedies were everywhere in my youth when I was being "dragged" up and if it existed you could pretty much guarantee I had seen it. These movies were often of a very cheap nature, but at least shot on film so they did not look quite as cheap as this offering.

Some of the performances in the movie are horrendous most notably Salvatore Crivelo who plays Arturo Silver's father, an actor who did nothing on screen before Gettin It and at the time of writing after, if anyone's career has ended as soon as it began its Crivelo's and regardless of your views of the movie I'm sure all would agree that this is one of the most terrible performances of all-time.

It's unlikely that any of the cast you would have heard of least alone Patrick Censoplano who plays Silver, this being said there is a good selection of ex-Playboy models and porn actresses all turning their hand at acting for a change. To be honest the balance of good and bad actors is well matched, luckily it's mostly the reasonable actors that you have to spend any time with.

Gettin It does have a pretty good stab at humour, and to be honest with you it's not a bad attempt, there are a couple of scenes where you just kind of want to bury your head in your hands, but in a good way. The film does feature mainly old jokes, and borrows heavily from the Patrick Dempsey movie Loverboy which also involved a pizza delivery boy who took more than pizza to his high paying female clientele. I don't however want to understate this movie or overstate it, if you loved Porky's then this will undoubtedly appeal to you, there is a certain American Piesque feel about the movie specifically the relationship between Jason Biggs character in Pie, and Silver's here.

I guess I could be stereotypically classifying the people of Israel, but when I think about the country I think about three things, religion, war and the Jewish community. In the Lemon Popsicle movies only one of the three things is ever really present. When I first saw Lemon Popsicle (Dubbed into English, or at the very least American) I honestly believed that the movie was filmed and made in America. It was a few years later before the revelation that these were in fact Israeli movies; clever editing hiding most of the tell tale signs.

Lemon Popsicle circles around three boys Benji (Yftach Katzur), Bobby (Jonathon Sagall) and Hughie (Zachi Noy) who during the 1950's are finishing up their schooling while making all sorts of discoveries about love. The main focus of the movie is Benji who unlike Bobby and Hughie has more on his mind than just sex, Benji is looking for love. When Benji believes he has discovered the girl of his dreams, a newcomer in town called Nicky (Anat Atzmon) he sets his heart on winning her over. Sadly for Benji however his friendship with Bobby is about to be put to the test as he makes moves on Nicky before Benji has even been able too. But while Benji wants love all Bobby wants is to bethe first person in school to have sex with Nicky. As the inevitable draws closer Benji is torn apart by his now love for Nicky, can he win over her heart.

Even today the Lemon Popsicle movies push certain boundaries that Western movies have failed too, featuring often incredibly embarrassing scenes if you find yourself watching the movie in company. While nudity is fairly minimal, you are kind of made to feel almost as if you are watching pornography. I remember as a child seeing the movies passed around my school like they literally were the most pornographic things ever. While watching the movie all these memories came flooding back, and amazingly I actually found it more lewd and crude now than I did then, maybe back in the days of video they were heavier edited.

There are lots of things that appealed to audiences of the time, penis measuring competitions, cheeky con tricks, lots of making out in underwear, and sexually transmitted diseases. In fairness a lot of the humour now is more embarrassingly funny than actually amusing, especially given the fact that now preserved the movie is obviously Israeli, although courtesy of dubbing it still tries to convince you its American.

Underlining the humour (although this is not the funniest of the movies) is a great little love story that kind of charts the thoughts that lots of us had when we were young. The pain that Benji feels really comes off the screen at you, made sadder by the fact that out of all the characters in the movie he is the only one with thoughts beyond that of sex.

In fairness there is not a lot too this movie, but you can see where Animal House and Porky's got their ideas from, the references were striking, especially when you compare the Porky's movies to this movie.

There is a pretty high chance that if your reading this you might not have come across the Lemon Popsicle movies, or know of them. It's hard to describe the effect that these movies had on the film industry, while not being over popular in Israel in America the movie caused viewers to flock to cinemas, particularly those of the Grindhouse mentality and the drive ins. The movies two financiers Yoram Globus and Menahem Golan created one of the biggest movie blockbuster production companies off the back of the movie. Forming Golan Globus, and taking control Cannon (Superman, Death Wish, Delta Force) they were the financiers for The Rambo movies, forming a secondary company Carolco whose movies included Chaplin, Basic Instinct, and Terminator 2. It's sad that the movies could have caused such a lasting impression on the movie industry that we know so well today yet still be forgotten.

After being overlooked for over 20 years Lemon Popsicle is about to make it onto DVD in the UK though without any special features.

It's hard to know where to start with this movie because to be honest with you it's all kind of a blur. Following the story of Martel "Too Sweet" Cardone (Leon Isaac Kennedy), from the outside world into prison; once inside Too Sweet through bullying decides it's important to fight in the prison boxing team, from here on out it's all kind of....Yawn.

I try never to write off a movie too soon, and in doing so watched Penitentiary until the very end, what I sadly was doing was not giving a movie a chance, but literally throwing away a hundred minutes of my life. Watching this movie is rather like spending 20 years doing a job you hate, it's offensive and almost painful. The story itself staggers between bad storytelling to bad editing; this is the reason why I find trying to tell the movie in a review so much of a blur.

The movie is pretty much an opportunity to display black people in the worst possible light stereotyping them into the category of rapists, drug addicts, murderers and crazy folks. From the first ten minutes of the movie you really get the feeling that this is a piece of racist paraphernalia. What is most sad about the movie is that is written and directed by a black filmmaker known as Jamaa Fanaka, committing the offence of selling his own race down the river.

After thirty minutes of stumbled storytelling the movie moves onto the fighting, which seems to dominate the following forty minutes. While Too Sweet fights in the ring, some of his fellow inmates use the opportunity to subdue some visiting women from the nearby women's prison, when i say subdue they have a choice have sex, or be raped; used as a tool of pleasure, obviously this is all women are worth. While having to endure the unending series of systematic sexual activity you are forced to hear the sound of the boxing match over the top of the lovemaking, further annoyance is that this sound is on a loop, so every few seconds you here the same shrieks and chants along with some wailing noises that you could only associate with a hippo standing on a spear.

All the way through the movie you feel you're not watching a serious piece of cult cinema, but a spoof; it resembles in some ways the Scary Movie films, with black people with over the top afro's smoking cigarettes through their ears. While another individual runs round with foam pouring from his mouth and covering his face while holding a monkey, demanding to see the naked rear end of whomever he finds offensive. I spent a great proportion of the movie laughing my socks off, but not at the great humour playing out on screen, but because of the sheer absurdity of the piece.

Further annoyance is delivered in the fact that when the cast are not talking in a as yet unchartered "negro slang", they are more often than not inaudible due to poor care of the print over the 30 years since the movie was made, in bringing the movie to DVD no time or effort has been spent trying to improve the sound, or the incredibly grainy images on screen.

What started out mildly amusing because of the overall "badness" of the piece soon turned to annoyance, I was annoyed that I was watching a movie that literally stood as a piece of intolerable racism at a time in American history where all cultures were supposedly being embraced after years of inequality.

 

YPF is an interesting low budget movie that looks at a series of relationships surrounding the act of sex, there is a couple, some work colleagues, roommates, Ex’s, and best friends all who over the course of a night have sex. What separates the different stories are the status of the relationships and the lack of, or sometimes too much sexual experience.

While the movie features a variety of familiar looking cast, possibly the most know cast member is British actor Callum Blue, who started his acting career in Channel Four’s As IF, before moving on to the popular Grim Reaper based American comedy show Dead Like Me, where he played the loveable Mason. Here he displays a similar roguish charm to the character he played in Dead Like Me as a womanising employer possibly pursuing “the one” who just so happens to work in the same restaurant, for reasons left unknown this player decides that the woman he has taken home is different from all the other employees he has seduced before.

Other stories follow two roommates whose fading friendship means that the one in the relationship now has the excuse to act out his fantasy, to see his girlfriend have sex with his now estranged roommate, the tip of this iceberg being that the soon to be evicted roommate has something rather large to offer his one night only lady friend.

Bored of the dull sex life a woman one night decides that it’s time to drag her husband kicking and screaming into the new sexual generation. But Abby wants this night to enjoy anal sex for the first time, trouble being she is not going to be the one on the receiving end.

A couple of opposite sex friends through circumstance find themselves in a situation that was plotted out on the cards some years prior, that if they were ever feeling the need for sex but unable to get it, that they would help each other out. While the woman is all too eager, the man just cannot get the friendship out of his head.

Finally two long time partners now separated, having enjoyed a night out together decide to take things a little further, feeling that both should have gotten over each other. The idea of quick convenience sex comes with a razors edge when the subject of other lovers since their relationship dissolved is bought up.

YPF is a very cleverly knit story, and despite the fact that it’s all about sex, the conversation and visual images are surprisingly tame, you could almost say it’s a very innocent piece, having lured you in from the shock value of the title. Each story is cleverly developed with a good mix of humour and an underlying serious edge that does rightly raise some incredibly valuable questions and answers. I’m reminded of a movie I saw earlier this year called After Sex, though the messages here are not so straightforward. After Sex was the ultimate lesson for young people considering having sex for the first time, while YPF is all about pushing your boundaries when it comes to sex; its literally all about trying new and different things, and the effects that those different things has on a relationship.

What is so odd about YPF is that after the humour of the story as a whole, there are some devastating conclusions to the stories that quite literally have the potential to shake the foundations of the said relationships to the ground. Trust is broken, sexual boundaries are pushed far too far, and some literally feel like they have been raped. Having delivered the horror of some of the conclusions, the envelope is pushed one step further by looking then at the reactions of those seen as the conquering party.

YPF is one of those movies you can watch as a disposable piece of entertainment or as something that needs some levels of deep analysis. When I watched the movie some seven days ago I took it to be a fairly lightweight piece, yet it’s only now as I write this review that I fully appreciate the harsh realities of the movie. And thinking on, that’s quite an achievement to see a movie just once and have two completely opposite views of the same film... Clever stuff indeed!

YPF is going to be available shortly on DVD in the UK.