THE LOVERS’ GUIDE 2: MAKING SEX EVEN BETTER (1992) ***

The British sensation of sex education returns with another entry.  This one is broken up into nine chapters. Chapter 1 is about “Sex and Communication”.  This is full of basic information for couples that makes sense and seems redundant, but I guess some people just have to hear it out loud.  Chapter 2:  “Planning Erotic Times” is about taking time out from your busy schedule to make room for quality romantic interaction with your partner.  Chapter 3 is self-explanatory:  “Foreplay”.  The dry British narration is good for a few laughs in this segment.  Some of my favorite lines were:  “Non-penetrative pleasuring” and “Some men like a well-lubricated finger in the anus!”

“Intensifying Intercourse” is next.  It shows us various positions and techniques to heighten stimulation.  The highlight is when we get a Superman X-Ray vision shot of the man’s penis while it’s thrusting away inside the woman.  While the narrators sing the praises of prolonged lovemaking in this segment, they also acknowledge the fun of the “quickie”. 

Chapter 5 is on “Creative Lovemaking Positions”.  It’s kind of hard to shock me, but I was genuinely surprised by the one position where the guy rolls up into a ball, and the woman sits on him like a human rocking chair.  Never seen that one before.  That’s followed by Chapter 6:  “Beyond the Bedroom" (which includes sex in places such as the kitchen, bathtub, and in public) and Chapter 7:  “Sex Games” (which encourages taking photos, role playing, and performing stripteases for your partner). 

Chapter 8 is entitled “Safer Sex and First Nights”.  It’s a brief guide for couples just starting out and/or are non-committal.  It also stresses the use of condoms.  Since the scenes of people boning are shown alongside sobering AIDS statistics, it kind of throws cold water on the whole thing.  The final chapter is on “Overcoming Boredom” and features tips to spice up your sexual adventures within a long-lasting relationship. 

Sex education is inherently funny.  When I watch shit like this, it takes me back to 6th grade Sex Ed class when we used to giggle at all the videos they used to show us.  Like the original, The Lovers’ Guide 2:  Making Sex Even better is full of softcore scenes of canoodling and kissing that eventually gives way to some hardcore action (mostly jerking off and suck jobs).  

For couples, I have to say there’s nothing especially revelatory here. It’s all rather basic information, really.  As a sequel, it’s not quite as good as the first one and the hardcore action isn’t as steamy either.  Nevertheless, it’s still a fun way to spend an hour. 

The highpoint of the hilarious narration had to be:  “Do be careful when it comes to inserting things into your vagina!”

SPIDER BABY (2024) * ½

Remaking Spider Baby isn’t the worst idea in the world but turning it into an ersatz Grindhouse movie was a big miscalculation.  It also doesn’t help that the filmmakers constantly ape Rob Zombie’s House of 1000 Corpses as It uses the same washed-out kind of interstitials that bookend scenes and are filled with clips from old cartoons and nudies.  (House star Robert Mukes also appears as the narrator.)  The Zombie-style heavy metal song that plays over the opening credits is laughably bad too.  I mean nothing could top the original film’s theme song (sung by its star, Lon Chaney Jr.).  However, this shit is terrible.  

Siblings Virginia (Skylar Fast) and Elizabeth (Emma Keifer) are stricken by The Merrye Syndrome, a rare condition that reverts them back to a childlike state.  Sometimes, they even regress so far back that they inhabit a primitive mindset which makes them capable of unspeakable violence.  When Aunt Emily (Jennifer Moriarty) comes to the house to send the children away, they turn on their nasty relatives. 

While the Jack Hill original had some disturbing elements, the humanity that emanated from Lon Chaney Jr.’s performance and his outpouring of unconditional love for the “children” made it a surprisingly heartwarming and unique motion picture experience.  This one is just a cheap cash-in trading on the name and reputation of a classic.  Director Dustin Ferguson has made some good low budget movies (like Axed to Pieces).  He’s made some bad ones too (like Amityville in the Hood).  I think you can guess what category this falls into.  Like I said, this is more of a miscalculation than anything.  The Grindhouse filter on the camera would’ve been fine for flashback scenes, but to make the whole movie with the obvious filter just calls attention to itself.

I guess the good news is that it’s less than an hour long.  Even that is a mixed blessing as the finale feels really rushed and the potentially poignant ending isn’t given enough room to breathe.  At least Ferguson was smart enough to not overstay his welcome. 

Chaney’s son, Ron has a cameo as a doctor early on, which was a nice touch.  It’s Noel Jason Scott though who takes over Chaney’s old role as Bruno the caretaker.  He certainly tries, and although he can’t compete with Lon, he easily gives the best performance of the movie. 

They somehow wrangled Hill into serving as an executive producer on this.  I’m not sure what he got out of it other than a paycheck.  This version ultimately winds up feeling like those actor recreations you see in true crime shows.  It also sorely lacks the humanity, wit, and warmth that made the original a classic.  Maybe if you’ve never seen the original, you might not be as incensed.  For me, there is no comparison. 

AKA:  Spider Baby, or the Maddest Story Ever Told. 

SWINGING WIVES (1973) ***

Swinging Wives is a West German sexploitation movie made in the Schoolgirl Report mold.  It purports to be an expose about marriage and infidelity that is supposedly taken from “real” case studies of actual couples.  Sprinkled in between are man on the street interviews.  It’s all just an excuse to show some T & A. 

You know a movie is on the right track when it features a housewife doing nude housework including vacuuming, ironing, and washing the dishes during opening credits. 

The first segment is about a couple who are full of passion on their wedding night, but the spark quickly runs out.  Next, we have an interview with a door-to-door masseur who caters to the needs of his married female clientele.  Then, a frustrated housewife defies her husband and visits a swingers’ party next door.  That’s followed by a bridge club who surprises a delivery man by playing their game in the nude.  A teenage girl learns her mother is having an affair and sets out to seduce her mom’s suitor in the next vignette.  Afterwards, a wife tries to take her own life after having an affair with her husband’s best friend.  We then learn a mailman’s guide to servicing the lonely wives on his route.  Next, a woman puts the moves on her gynecologist when he drops in for a house call.  Then, there’s a segment on a door-to-door smut peddler who gets it on with a married client.  That’s followed by a story about a bored housewife who takes to turning tricks to make a little money on the side and predictably winds having her husband as a client.  Finally, we return to our first couple to check on their progress. 

Most of these kinds of movies have an episodic nature, which can yield uneven results.  The good news about Swinging Wives is that the episodes are all rather entertaining.  The best segments manage to blend humor into the mix.  In fact, the movie sort of gets better as it goes along, mostly because the sequences in the second half feature wives who seem to be having fun while they are swinging. 

The dubbed dialogue contains some real howlers too.  My favorite line comes when a swinger sees a sexy housewife and quips to his friend, “That’s real humping material right there!” 

AKA:  The New Hot Report:  What Men Don’t Think is Possible.

CARNE (1968) ** ½

I attended a John Waters Q & A a while back and asked him who his favorite under-the-radar B-movie director was and he responded with Armando Bo.  Since I had already seen (and loved) Fuego, I knew I had to start checking into Bo’s back catalogue.  The fact that he always cast the buxom and beautiful Isabel Sarli (his on-screen muse as well as off) in his films, didn’t hurt either. 

The first thing you see in Carne is Sarli posing nude.  That’s quickly followed by a love scene AND a rape scene… all BEFORE the opening credits!

See, Sarli loves her boyfriend, who is an artist and paints her in the nude.  They both have a day job at the local meat packing plant.  Her rapist is a trucker who delivers meat to the place.  After raping her again, he kidnaps her and holds her captive in his meat truck where he shares her with his friends. 

Bo has been called the Argentinian Russ Meyer, and for good reason.  Not only does he love to feature hot busty babes in his movies, but the stylized editing and camerawork is very reminiscent of old Russ.  He certainly isn’t subtle.  Consider the scenes of Sarli in the factory as she symbolically handles raw meat.  The way her attacker views her as “meat” is so “on the nose”, it could very well be up the nose.  The scene where she is chased through a veritable maze of hanging beef in the meat locker by her rapist is effective too, although some will be put off by the scene when he throws her on a slab of beef and says, “Meat on meat!” before defiling her.  Oh, and did I mention when he throws her in his truck, there’s a cutaway to some signage that reads, “Meat in Transit”?

Most of the drama comes from whether her beau will A) Avenge Sarli’s defilement and/or B) Forgive her.  I’m sure you can pretty much guess what will happen. 

The reason to watch it is for Sarli.  Despite this being an exploitation flick, she doesn’t get naked as often as you might expect.  That’s appropriate too, given the subject matter.  However, those brief nude scenes are really something.  Because of Sarli, Carne is enjoyable even if the rest of the film isn’t exactly well done. 

MITCH APPEARS ON THE DTVC PODCAST!

Matt from The DTVC Podcast invited me to discuss the immortal classic, Champagne and Bullets.  If you have ever done the "Shimmy Slide" or have always been curious about doing so, I wholeheartedly encourage you to give it a listen.   DTVC Podcast 264, "Champagne a… - DTVC Podcast - Apple Podcasts

ANYONE BUT YOU (2023) ***

Sydney Sweeney and Glen Powell Meet Cute in a coffee shop and spend a lovely evening together.  After a misunderstanding, they quickly become mortal enemies, which is a problem since they are both going to attend the same wedding in Australia.  Since both of their respective exes are at the event, they decide to make them jealous by masquerading as a couple.  Naturally, their dubious displays of affection cause more problems while they predictably wind up falling for each other for real. 

I’m not much of a romantic comedy guy, but if you put my girl Sydney Sweeney in it and have her parading around in various skintight outfits… well, heck, I’ll probably get around to watching it at some point.  Directed by Will (Easy A) Gluck, Anyone but You is loosely based on William Shakespeare’s Much Ado About Nothing.  Because of that, you may be inclined to think it’s a highbrow comedy.  Fortunately for me, it has some legitimately funny moments, especially when  it sometimes unexpectedly heads into Farrelly Brothers territory.  The scene where Powell finds a spider in his shorts is a highlight, as is the “anteater” gag. 

Powell and Sweeney have plenty of chemistry together and have surprising comedy chops too.  They play off one another so well that you would imagine they could easily become a viable comedy duo for years to come.  Since the movie was a big hit, I don’t see why not. 

Yes, it falls into the same predictable cliches that the genre demands.  Yes, some of the Shakespeare shit feels shoehorned in there.  (There’s probably one too many scenes where Powell and Sweeney overhear their friends chatting about them.)  However, the bottom line is I laughed a lot more than I was expecting.  Because of that, I’d recommend Anyone but You to anyone who enjoys romantic comedies and… hell, just comedies in general. 

REALITY (2023) ** ½

Sydney Sweeney stars as the improbably named Reality Winner.  In reality, uh, Reality was given the longest sentence in history for leaking confidential government documents.  This film is a recreation of her arrest taken directly from the actual FBI audio recordings. 

This strict adherence to fact can be a double-edged sword.  While people who are familiar with the case will be thrilled by the attention to detail, it doesn’t really do much for guys like me who are only watching it for Sweeney. 

Sydney does a fine job dressed way down and sans make-up.  Her reaction to the Feds’ arrival is more like an “Aw shucks!  Ya got me” kind of deal.  She doesn’t ask to see the warrant or demand an attorney.  That raises a red flag to the Feds and the viewer.  Is she just being cooperative or is she itching to get caught?

Since this is essentially a filmed transcript, the actors have to work overtime to squeeze any kind of characterization in there.  I liked the way the Feds made small talk about her pets as a way to ingratiate themselves as they try to get her to drop her guard. 

The film keeps cutting back to the real audio files and transcripts mid-scene.  We also see actual social media posts of the real Winner.  It’s like… okay.  We get it.  This is based on real events.  It’s just that in the search for verisimilitude, these asides become more distracting than anything else.  

One cool aspect is that when it comes to the classified information, the sensitive material is redacted.  It’s here where the film gets visually interesting as Reality gets deleted from the film every time she mentions the redacted material.  In an age where nearly all important information is redacted for the public, it was a nice touch to see her completely disappear at the most vital parts of the story. 

Ultimately, Reality is a mixed bag, but Sweeney’s performance makes it worth a look.  She does a lot with a little, and the way she is able to find character beats in the middle of what is essentially a seventy-five-minute interrogation is rather impressive.  Overall, the film itself is a bit too slight to fully recommend.  However, seeing how the American public still has to deal with pointless redactions and be continuously denied the truth by its government means the film will remain relevant for years to come.