TYTD Reviews

The opening title on 'The Daylight Years' set, the concluding part of AGFA and Something Weirds compendium on the career of 'Doris Wishman' finds us 'Nude on the Moon' a…frankly charming and eccentric offering, thats maybe a touch on the slow side, but definitely worth the price of admission.

The film revolves around two scientists who've been exploring the possibility of life on the moon for a number of decades at this point, when the sudden death of a rich relative lands the pair with a cheque to realise all their hopes and dreams of building a rocket, ready for mans first manned space flight to the moon! Which they do!

However; disaster strikes when a bumpy landing means they arnt ENTIRELY sure they actually DID land on the moon. But whatever planet they DID land on, its a leafy paradise, a place where the temprature is clement, theres a sweet smell in the breeze, lumps of gold are just scattered here and there, and large brested telepathic, semi nude women and posing pouch Adonis figured men roam the fields and valleys helping maintain utopia for their Queen.

The pair are quickly captured, but when they're deemed to not be a threat, they're released and spend the rest of the movie documenting the simple and naturalistic lives of the men and women of the moon. In the hopes that on returning to earth, they'll be able to convince the government to fund more trips to the moon and further exploration.

A charming, eccentric and fascinating time capsule, given we wouldnt actually send a man to the moon for a further 7 years after this film was made. Its hard not to like this goofy little 'erotic' sci-fi Nudie Cutie flick.

Yes, the scripts paper thin and by modern standards absolutely goofy, it runs about 10 minutes longer than I could personally stand…but for the first hour or so, I really had a hoot with this very daft, paper thin excuse to show boobies.

The characters are all camp as christmas, nothing is serious, the tones positively daffy. and to top it all off, it looks great! Because of the budget for this film, a LOT of the production looks and feels like a late 50s production (despite the '61 release date) and its amazing to see such crisp high definition colour footage of that particular era of time.

Its a bright, colourful and vivid viewing experience, and a much needed refresher after 6-8 black and white 'roughie' films. shots are gorgeously composed, sequences are simplistic, but effective and the whole thing really just pops in a very enjoyable and pleasent way.

The cast are all hamming it up good and proper, half the cast I firmly believe had NO idea what they were actually filming. and any and all dialogue is HORRENDOUSLY ADR'd. But given the tone and vibe of this production, if anything it adds to the rediculousness of the whole thing.

Throw in a VERY fitting soundtrack of muzak string tracks…punctuated at multiple points by the films title track 'Mooning over you my little moon doll' which WILL be an earworm for all onvolved. and you have a film that, while maybe not the most interesting production ever comitted to 35 or 16mm. IS a fun time non the less. The kind of film that plays in the background of some kind of farce comedy.

I highly recommend catching 'Nude on the Moon' at least once. a bizarre and colourful experience. especially if you can find a HD copy of the movie. I really had a soft spot for this one.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/nude-on-the-moon/

We've reached the end of AGFA and Something Weirds fairly comprehensive 'Doris Wishman: The Moonlight Years' collection, and its 'Too Much, Too Often!' a somewhat generic, seedy exploitation roughie film that once again, doesnt really do enough to put it head and shoulders above Doris's other exploitation roughie (or generally surreal) pictures) but does do enough to position itself in the upper middle portion of her filmography (in my opinion at least)

The film follows Mike Torson…And I dont really know what Mike does for a living…'Criminal' seems like too broad of a career definition. But he's a thief, a rapist, a pimp, a blackmailer, a molestor, a manipulator, a muscle for hire, and seemingly, he's taken it on himself to also be a Dom to repressed men in his area. And as the film opens we find Mike flogging Gordon Dite, a respected businessman for the area.

Mike is blackmailing Gordon, as he documented one of their 'sessions' and is threatening to release the footage if Gordon does anything Mike doesnt like, he's also levying Gordon for protection on that front, which is allowing Mike much higher access to women, and further criminal activity than he would have had before. Gordon detests Mike, but is somewhat helpless to really do much of anything else.

The film from there largely centers around Mike taking advantage of school girls, bored housewives and anyone he can find down at the docks. At first scmoozing them into a semi-codependent relationship, before turning abusive and demanding of his victims until they either slip up and get horrendously abused to the point that they cant do much of anything anymore…or they leave town. Gordon infrequently recieves word of these incidents and increasingly becomes more and more mortified of what Mike is enabled to do.

But things really cross a line, when Mike decides that Gordons Daughter is his next target, manipulating her into a rushed marriage and poisoning her against her father by convincing her he's jealous that shes marrying into a better place than Gordon can provide for her. Leading to a final confrontation with an old face from Mikes past who may be the answer to Gordons problems.

What we have here is a seedy and grimey little picture that really showcases Doris Wishman and her cinematographers best talents honestly. While the script itself is fairly middle of the road for the 'roughie' scene, it does have some dramatic punch and weight behind it, which is something thats been missing from a lot of Doris's roughie pictures. The characters have history, backstory, depth and more importantly they grow and develop across the runtime in a meaningful and non superficial way.

Quite a few of Doris Wishmans films all felt like character development on a surface level, if there was any development to be had at all. This felt quite a bit meatier. And while I do think its a bit of a cheap trick to, 10 minutes off the end of the film, introduce a new character from Mikes past who had a serious incident with him 3 years prior…Only to then flash the film back 3 years to show the incident, then flash forward to show an inconclusive resolution to the main plot we've been following. Everything up to that point I felt was pretty solid, if not a little slow.

A key problem i've had with a lot of Doris Wishman films is the pedestrian pace as it struggles to hit feature distribution runtime. This handles it better than most, its still on the slow side, but it at least moves quicker than 'Indecent desires' or 'My Brothers Wife'.

Tonally; the film doesnt ease up for a second as we unflinchingly follow Mike as he destroys or disrupts life after life with horrifying antics, its probably one of Wishmans nastier offerings honestly. Which in someways makes it standout a bit more than a lot of her 60's offerings.

The direction is fast paced, and feels like Wishman was definitely enthused by the topic. theres some really creative story and world building, and it feels like Wishman really wanted to get this story right and in a way that only Wishman at this point in time could deliver it. Theres some striking moments, and the whole thing feels quite carefully crafted (…for the most part…)

The cine too is rock solid, I didnt notice any soft shots, composition is great, theres some very nice creative work, the lighting is incredible and the film really leans into that Black and white aesthetic, creating something altogether murky, but fascinatingly beautiful.

Sequences are carefully curated and scenes flow smoothly, while you can sometimes feel the cheapness of the budget on this one. its undeniable that they really tried to make this film feel as expensive as they could, and I feel it really succeeds in that sense.

As for the performances, This is a great turn for Buck Starr as Mike, a malevolent presence, he plays evil so effortlessly, its genuinely unsettling. Probably my favourite performance in a Wishman film to date. he has a fantastic physical menace and his line delivery is largely faultless. He's great!

Bob Oran as Gordon also gets a great turn as the utterly frustrated and totally helpless captive of Mike. you really feel the rage in his performance, and by the end theres a tremendous melancholy added to the mix that only makes the performance stronger still. He's great!

Add to that the staple library soundtrack and Obligatory Doris Wishman apartment tour. and 'Too Much, Too Often!' is a solid Doris Wishman feature in my opinion. Definitely one of her better 'Roughie' offerings. i'd recommend it as a great starting point to get into this era of Doris Wishman film making, and if you havent seen it, but have seen other Doris films, this is definitely one of her better offerings. One i'd almost certainly revisit, and one that I can definitely recommend. its grizzly, but VERY compelling!

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/too-much-too-often/

The second of two films Doris Wishman purchased for US Distribution while Holidaying in Greece, and then lost the dubbing scripts, meaning she had to basically make up the story and script based on Visuals alone. 'The Hot Month of August' is, in my opinion a marginally better offering than 'Passion Fever' but still falls significantly short of what I want in a Doris Wishman production.

The plot revolves around 2 men meeting on a cruise ship, Al, a gigalo who travels the length and breadth of Greece dating and sleeping with older women (as arranged by his father in law) meets Jason, a young impressionable 20 something, looking for a steady income and luck with the ladies.

The two part ways, but its revealed that a woman Jason ends up romatically entagled with, is ALSO in fact Al's Wife. When Al's father in law instructs him to leave Athens for work, with no return date in sight, Al and his wife concoct a plot to kill his father in law and pin it on Jason. However, things dont quite go to plan, and murder, sex, police investigation and crazy jazz music winds up as the soup of the day!

I will say up front, I can appreciate what the script is trying to do here. its a neo-noir style sexploitation flick that, if your into neo noir sexploitation, will probably more than scratch the itch. Im not though, and as such I found this one to be a bit plodding. We essentially spend a not insignificant amount of the runtime flicking between softcore scenes and extended plot drops…The joy of these kinds of films is the twists and turns…But the film almost has a compulsion to tell you EVERY DETAIL sometimes 10 minutes in advance of the twist even happening. Which I found particularly frustrating.

The pacing is consistent, but slow, there is a three act structure, but the middle sags outrageously, and the 1st and 3rd while…mostly harmless, are just dull. with a very brief shoot out posing probably the most interesting thing this film has to offer.

The characters are all a bit flat, they predominantly speak in quips or with a kind of tone that feels disingenuous. Its the wrong side of camp for me. It just feels messy and unfun.

The directions fine enough, passable even, and the cine is clear and crisp. But the shots are largely kind of uninteresting, ultra basic setups, no flair, no polish. a handful of establishing shots that look quite pretty is about as good as it gets (and when your in Greece, the fact that a handful of establishing shots is about as good as it gets is concerning!)

The performances range of watchable to poor, I dont feel they gave either the voice actors or the real in person actors enough material to help give them any kind of significant depth. and in the case of the ADR cast specifically, it feels less like a professional cast recording, and more like Doris had a whip round of her apartment complex for anyone who was free to belt out a line or two in between shift work.

The sound edit is a bit problematic too, with poorly mixed music to ADR work, dropouts occasionally and other technical issues. Its not the best.

I understand that this film has a bit of a cult appreciation within the ouvre of Doris Wishmans works…But it wasnt really for me. As I said at the top of this review, I can absolutely appreciate why people would like this, but its just not really my kind of flavour. Not her worst offering by a long shot…But in my opinion, just a kind of boring piece with occasional pops of interest, that I was clock watching to be over.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/the-hot-month-of-august/

Im back in the building again…its time for another Doris Wishman film. And this time around its 'The Sex Perils of Paulette'. Another 'Middle of the pack. Offering from Wishman. Not a bad entry by any stretch, but one that I felt just failed to really draw me in.

Anna Karol plays 'Paulette' a fresh of the bus newcomer to the big city with aspirations of making it big as an actress. Paulette finds a room with Tracy, a woman who's MORE than comfortable in underwear alone, who promises to introduce Paulette to some 'big time' movers and shakers, with the aim of helping her get a foot in the door.

Unfortunately for Paulette, these big time movers, are in fact in the 'Adult' industry, and the party Tracy has invited her to is essentially a full blown swinging orgy. Paulettes crestfallen, and the rest of the film is basically a downward spiral, as she battles trying to make a go of her dreams, while realising that all anyone who can enable that dream wants is her body. leading to a bittersweet finale.

This ones basically a bit of a rosetta stone for what would come from Doris's movies through the 60s, theres pangs of 'Bad Girls go to Hell', elements of 'Another Day, Another Man' and 'My Brothers Wife'…and while its interesting to see the seeds of what would go onto become those fully fleshed out films here. There isnt a moment in this film that tops the best of those movies. This films consistent. But its also very VERY dry, the Wishman 'Spark' is but a flicker at this point in time. and what we're left with, is a kitchen sink drama with sexploitation elements that doesnt quite cut the mustard for me.

The script is a lot slower paced than Doris's other works, tonally its consistent. But for me? its kind of inescapable that this is just a bit of a dry offering. gyrating semi nude ladies can only take a script so far, and there just isnt enough 'tang' here to really hook me and bring me in. I appreciate this was Wishmans first step out of the 'naturist' genre and into something more 'roughie'/'exploitation' adjacent. But It doesnt feel like a fully formed idea for me. It feels like some very rough carvings…and while those carvings WILL eventually take a more defined shape. Here? its still a work in progress.

The direction and cine is really what saves the day here. Yes. We're still in Doris's apartment, but theres a heavy emphasis on handheld footage, which makes everything feel a bit more manic, particularly the party sequences that give a great sense of feeling 'out of control' Wishman clearly knew how to light and set dress for B&W and heres one of her more striking works, with gorgeous lighting and some really nice compositional and sequence choices. Its probably one of her more 'fresh' offerings, and while she would go on to make better, more coherent and more striking works. This manages to go above expectations and overdeliver if anything for me. Which I had to respect really.

The edits a little rough in places, but thats more to do with cutting times than with the sequence shot selections. the cuts feel a bit rough around the edges, and I have no doubt that the footage, in more capable hands, could have been presented in a more solid format.

Performance wise, Theres only really Anna Karol to talk about, the supporting cast are fine, if not a bit ethereal in their performances. But Karol gets a good range, handles the ADR work really well, and gives a genuine feeling and sincere performance that doesnt shy away from getting a bit gritty and real from time to time. I really enjoyed her on screen presence and she was probably one of the main things keeping the film ticking over honestly.

Aaaand the soundtracks still library pieces…it fills the silence, though im not convinced they were the best picks.

All in all? 'The Sex Perils of Paulette' is fine. Not one Id openly recommend, a fine base level introduction to Doris Wishman, not her best, far from her worst. a mixed script married to some good direction, cine and performances. By the skin of its teeth, i'd say that I dont think i'd revisit this one, unless I was going through her whole filmography again. Theres a lot better Wishman to be watched. But if you are looking for something that wont set unrealistic expectations of what to expect with Wishman. This or 'Another Day, Another Man' would be great starting points.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/the-sex-perils-of-paulette/

I swore blind that i'd rewatched 'Total Recall' in fairly recent memory…But according to 'Letterboxd' its been at least 5 years since the last spin. This was before I started writing reviews on Letterboxd, and with the missus having never seen it before (but curious to check it out after the Kuato episode of 'Rick and Morty'.) We decided to give it a re-watch So that I can check this one off my 'written review' list.

Honestly; I dont have much to say that hasnt been gushed on by my peers and/or elevated film critics. The wonderfully bizarre decision to adapt this Phillip K. Dick novel of an average 'everyman' in the not too distant future, who decides to try 'Recall' a service that implants memories into your head, creating the illusion that you had a 2 week vacation, for a fraction of the cost. Only to end up having something go wrong, when its revealed theres already a surpressed implaneted memory in his head, and that he may infact be a secret agent undercover who's repressed memories have driven him to seek a Mars Vacation…

Leading to an 'inception before inception' style multi-layer narrative where the viewer is never quite sure if 'Douglas Quaid' IS in fact an international rebel spy double agent set to help fight the rebellion on Mars…or just some schlubby guy in a mental feuge state strapped to a clinic chair…AND THEY DECIDED THAT THE SCHLUBBY EVERYMAN SHOULD BE ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER…Is frankly an inspired choice. As was hiring Paul Verhoven (Fresh off the set of 'Robocop') to direct? Genius.

Frankly; I could fawn over this film endlessly. So its probably easier to just pick at the things I didnt like, which stopped it from truely being a perfect Sci-fi movie. My critiques are small, and I dont feel that unfair. One is that I feel the films a bit overlong, the 2nd act could have been refined a little more to bring the film under 100 minutes, theres a lot of 'running down corridors' style padding that I feel drags the film out unnecessarily. I appreciate they want to create a sense of scale and getting close to the 120 runtime means it has the feelings of an 'epic'. But it ran just a little too long for me. 10-15 minutes lopped off, and it'd be goldilocks.

The other issue I have is the tone, I feel 'Demolition Man' handled the Sci-fi Utopia, revealed to be a dystopia. vibes a bit better than this. This film kind of flip-flops between wanting to be seen as a serious action sci-fi flick…While also peppering in liberal amounts of humour and tongue in cheek side eyes to the audience. The trouble is, I dont feel like both elements balance as well as they could. Making some of the comedic moments feel a bit out of place, and making some of the more action heavy moments feel 'throwaway'. Arnie gurning and chuntering out one liners is fun! Dont get me wrong! But at times it feels very forced and undercuts some of the more intense moments of the production. I appreciate that someone will inevitably say 'Well! thats because its ACTUALLY all a dream! Arnies Psychosis is making him quip and be witty, because thats what he thinks a spy would do!!!' and I wont deny that thats a plausible answer…But it still doesnt make me think its good.

HOWEVER! Outside of those two points, we have a pretty clean sweep, the script is clever and funny, gives the audience enough evidence for both sides to be plausably considered, tonally while a little off kilter, its still rock solid for the most part, the dialogue is frankly endlessly quotable. the pacing, a little saggy in the middle, but rock solid otherwise.

On the direction front Verhoven knocks it out of the park. This is probably my second favourite thing he's directed to date. its crazy, over the top action packed silliness dashed with macabre bleakness throughout. And I loved it. I dont feel the mix is *quite* as potent as 'Robocop' But that doesnt mean I cant love it all the same.

The cine is rock solid as well, delivering some genuinely beautiful shots and surreal vivid imagery thats sure to stick in the old noggin long after the credits have rolled. The edit is rock solid as well, with some really nice transition pieces and great use of B-roll.

The performances are superb, with Arnold being a total miscast but somehow it works INCREDIBLY. Sharon Stone, Rachel Ticotin and Michael Ironside are all frankly incredible here. and the supporting cast blow clean past the brief delivering memorable character and scene, after memorable character and scene. Its casting that shouldnt work. But absolutely 100% does.

The soundtracks a bit mixed. i'd say 75% of the score is superb, perfectly matching the energy needed for whats happening on screen. But 25% just felt odd..Particularly the music and lighting used in 'The Last Resort'…Given Verhoven shot some absolutely incredible nightclub sequences for 'Robocop' the footage in the 'Last Resort' feels almost comical. as we have an evenly lit, warm white nightclub with very few colourful lights, blasting out music that wouldnt be out of place in a genesys era 'Sonic the hedgehog' game. Its a bizarre choice. and mercifully, one of only a very loose handful of incidents across this films runtime where I feel the paint chipped off a little bit.

But thats kind of by the by. 'Total Recall' is an absolutely brilliant piece of escapist Sci-fi fantasy. I would absolutely say its in my top 3 favourite Arnold Schwarzenegger movies . and definitely in my top 3 favourite Paul Verhoven films. Its slightly campy elements mix with dark and brooding action sci-fi to create a wonderful little movie, that I can wholeheartedly recommend. and encourage you to watch (or revisit!) at your next convenience. There are WAY worse ways to spent just shy of 2 hours…believe me.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/total-recall/

Another seemingly 'lost on film' Doris Wishman project that only exists as a S-VHS transfer courtesy of 'Something Weird Video'….The story goes that Doris Wishman, while on a holiday in Greece, purchased the US Distribution rights to two greek Sexploitation/kitchen sink dramas. And; that on returning back to the US, she accidentally lost the scripts that would have allowed her to dub the films into English. So. She Improvised…Its terrible.

Originally released as 'Fever' I dont know what the original plot was for this movie, and I was on the brink of passing out from how dull the Doris re-dub was to be completely honest. My understanding is its a plot about a man called Yakos, living it up in Greece and chasing a couple of Greek women with 'romantic intent'. But the scripts SO painfully dull, that it manages the near miraculous feat of being able to act almost like some kind of 'drone shield' that forces audiences to do anything OTHER than watch this thing.

It's dull, PAINFULLY dull, slow, plodding, drawn out nothingness, theres no tonal intent, the characters are as interesting as a bit of wood half dipped in emulsion. the performances are dire, the re-dub voices are awful, Doris even chips in in places to re-dub the film for gods sake.

The ONLY thing this film has going for it is a few choice shots on the cine front. And even thats marred by the majority of the film being painfully dull visually. And the ending, which suddenly takes a turn for the macabre. And both of those combined isnt enough to make the film in ANY way watchable or recommendable…it just saves it from me calling it an abject failure and colossal waste of my time.

Dont bother.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/passion-fever/

'My Brothers Wife' is another somewhat deeper cut into the filmography of Doris Wishman, and I feel we've once again hit the snag of Doris making a film where the premise would have made a great 20-30 minute short film, but instead we have a 71 minute long feature that stretches the very basic core concept WELL beyond any kind of meaningful end product.

The plot? Follows two brothers 'Frankie' and 'Bob', Bob is married to 'Mary' a 23 year old woman who feels neglected in her marriage, and isolated from the rest of the world. When Bobs younger brother Frankie arrives on the scene, looking to stay for a few nights while on the way to somewhere else. He falls HARD for Mary, and after trying to initiate a 'moment' with Mary, he's rejected…But that then sows seeds in Marys mind about her feelings towards Bob and a surge of awakening passions for Frankie.

The twist? Frankie already has a couple of other relationships going, and he's been planning to give his 'main squeeze' 2 grand as part of a planned elopement. The problem? Mary reciprocates feelings for Frankie, and the pair plan to elope to Mexico, and get married themselves. With Mary telling Frankie that she has 2 grand in savings for them to do it. Leaving Frankie in the position of whether to cut his current relationship loose and run off with Mary, or whether to essentially rob Mary and Bob and flee to Mexico with his partner.

That plot sounds complicated, but in practice it really isnt…What this film is realistically is 25-35 minutes of plotting, intercut with 25-35 minutes of extended nudie sequences, softcore grinding, and our characters using their internal monologues to blatently recap the plot of the film we've just sat through. Much liked 'Indecent Desires' Theres a good core plot here, that gets violently lost in thick THICK dollops of padding and overexplanation.

Because of this, the scripts kind of unremarkable, the story is engaging and interesting, but the pacing really bogs it down, the tone is consistent, but really limited in what it wants to ACTUALLY do with the scenarios it puts the characters in.

The characters themselves are shown to have complexity. But really its only Mary who has any degree of serious character reflection or development, as Bob basically dissapears from the picture for the majority of the runtime, and Frankie gets a tiny bit of development up front, and then nothing really until the final 2-3 minutes.

All of this comes together to form a script that, had it been properly edited and truncated, could have probably been quite an engaging piece. But as it stands, feels bogged down, meandering and just kind of dull in places.

The direction and cine are pretty much on the level. Doris here isnt really doing anything to push her style of known tropes in new directions, it largely feels kind of like She's on autopilot for this one. Theres some interesting sequence ideas. But I dont feel like she's really pushing herself.

Same goes for the cine, theres some nice compositions here and there, but a lot of the sequence building is fairly bland for Wishmans repertoire. And while it isnt quite as rushed and laiden with errors as some of Wishmans films. It did have a few wobbly shots, some iffy compositions and some of the editing was a bit rough around the edges in terms of timing the cuts and b-roll usage.

The performances are also a bit of a mixed bag. June Roberts may get the meatiest chunk of the script, but her performance here is a bit lacklustre in my opinion. Shes flat, a bit monotone and her physical presence lands with a thud more often than not. A great model, and when she's posing for static shots in this film, she looks great. But a weak performance.

By contrast Sam Stewart as Frankie has the opposite problem, he has a lot of energy and a good physical presence. But he doesnt really get a lot to do script wise, so all that energy and physicality gets restricted to very limited uses…which is a real shame as I feel in a more campier production, he might have really found his feet. Bob Oran as 'Bob' is left totally out in the cold. He has a handful of scenes in the movie and he's actually not half bad when he does appear, playing an out of touch older brother/husband figure who doesnt realise quite what he's losing by being gruff…and he barely gets any screen time, despite really nailing the brief. its a real shame.

And, for the record, yes this was shot in Doris Wishmans apartment, and yes they do use library soundtrack scores for the entire movies run…and this time around they dont really match the energy of the film, so it all feels a bit mismatched, out of place and 'what we had lying around in terms of vibes…

All in all, this isnt the worst Doris Wishman film. But it is FAR from being a good one…and I dont even think i'd say it was 'Middle of the road'. This is an overly long, and technically questionable production with good bones that are overstretched and some good moments that would look great on a sizzle reel, but do little when placed in their original context. Not one i'd recommend to people looking to get into Wishmans works. Not one i'll likely rush to watch again. It 'okay'…and thats kind of the problem.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/my-brothers-wife/

Another Day, Another Doris Wishman movie, and we've arrived at 'Another Day, Another Man' an effort from 1966 thats billed as a 'Spiritual Successor' to 'Bad Girls Go To Hell'…and while I can kind of see the view for that, I wasnt quite as impressed with this one as i'd have liked to have been.

The films unusually more of a kitchen sink drama combined with Sexploitation elements than Doris' usual fodder as we follow 'Ann' and 'Tess'. Two roomates living very different lives, on the verge of a forking point.

Ann is an office worker who's engaged to a lovely, caring man named Steve. The film opens with Steve telling Ann that he requested a raise recently, and his boss has approved it! and better still theres a really good chance he could be full on promoted into an even better position, meaning even MORE money. He's essentially set for life and wants to take Ann with him on the journey, so he asks her to marry him.

Doing this unfortunately means that Ann would have to quit her job, and it means she'd be moving in with Steve, meaning her and Tess wouldnt be roomates anymore…But she's more than happy to do that to marry the man she loves, take up a steady life of House-wivery, and enjoy the pleasures of financial security.

Tess by contrast is in a bit of a bad way, she has an 'on/off' relationship with a crime kingpin called Bert, and Berts more interested in what Tess can earn for HIM, than on what HE can do for her…Berts trade is in the worlds oldest profession. He's essentially a pimp. and Tess is one of his 'best girls'…But she isnt as keen on the 'scene' anymore and on seeing how happy Ann is with Steve, she begins to consider settling down.

Things however take a turn for the worst, when Steve falls ill, and is required to stay in bed on a strict medication ritual for 5-6 months. Unable to work, Ann finds herself trapped in the situation, as she is unable to get her old job back, and needs to really be present during the days to keep Steves medications and care on track.

Eventually, Ann winds up at Berts door, and he pairs her up with Tess to help show Ann 'the ropes'…But things start to get overly complicated for Tess, as the dark underbelly of sex work, and the increasing realisation that, not only has she found herself trapped in a life that doesnt have a happy ending, but she may have pulled Ann into it as well, becomes all too much to bear…

And I will say, I quite enjoyed this one, much like the other 'roughies' Wishman was releasing around this time, I cant say im overly smitten with it, but I do think this is probably one of her more grounded pieces, as the script really pulls the audience through the dark and seedy world of organised sex trafficking, and how desperation can ruin and destroy peoples lives.

Once again, we have a script that moves at a good clip, has a decent, solid three act structure, has decently written characters that I actually care about and am invested in, who get a really solid turn of character development across the runtime, really helping bring the scenario to life. The dialogue in this is very nicely handled, the tone overall is grimey, seedy and very engaging in terms of keeping thge audience where it needs to be. I dont think I quite 'vibed' with this one, but that isnt to say its a bad script, I just found it maybe floundered a little bit in places, and maybe didnt quite go far enough in its conclusions…But otherwise this was a perfectly fine piece.

The direction here is largely solid, Wishman has a clear vision for how she wanted this film to play out and theres definitely some moments within the sequence and world building, that I would say rank amongst some of her best ideations…

But there is a noticeable number of, what im assuming is, bad cuts, film 'ends' and weird outtakes for lack of a better descriptive. there are a handful of directoral choices here where the camera will cut to a shot of the actress in a 'mid head shot' and the camera will then just crash into her boobs…this is while the characters are talking, and theres no real reason or justification for why the shot does that…its almost like the camera just. Fell forward, into their boobs…and they left it in the final cut.

Theres also lingering shots of just the actresses legs, which would be fine during dialogue scenes…but they arnt framed right. Its like someone left the camera on a chair, on a wonk, while it was still running, and then when it came to the final edit…again, they just somehow left the shot in. Additionally; the final 5 minutes have multiple moments where it seems like the camera ran out of film mid shot as it flashes to white, or jumpcuts to an outtake of the cam op walking with the camera towards the next shot setup…again, theres no intention in that happening…the film just…does that. for some reason…

Outside of those instances though the cine itself is relatively solid, giving a rough and ready handheld approach that I feel suits the requirements for something quite as bleak and grimy as the subject of this film. Its imperfect, but does have its moments.

Performance wise, I feel Barbara Kemp and Mary O'Hara as Ann and Tess are solid leading ladies, they both give performances that swing wildly between over the top campy fun, and actually quite considered introspective performances that actually do pull the audience into their troubles, and really give the audience something to chew over. I really liked them in this.

Credit must also be given to Sam Stewart as Bert, who manages to give a wonderfully cruel performance as the head of the crime organisation, and an unpleasant partner to Tess. He doesnt get as much screentime as I personally would have liked, but I very much enjoyed what I saw, his physical performance didnt inherently scream 'hardened criminal' to me, but his line deliveries combined with his 'look' really pay off.

And…it wouldnt be a Doris Wishman film without the obligatory mention that a significant chunk of this film was shot in Doris's apartment (I feel I know the floor plan off by heart at this point), that the soundtrack is largely library tracks (Syd Dales back again, much to my delight) and that…whether intentional or not, I feel it cant be missed that randomly in the middle of this film, via flashback, we get a cameo from Gigi Darlene, who played the lead character 'Meg' in 'Bad Girls Go To Hell'. appearing (apparently via archive footage) AS Meg. With the flashback indicating that, at some point in her journey…whether its part of her 'main film' fever dream, or something that happened post credits, she ends up on the run again, ends up at Berts place, where she's put out as a sex worker, and eventually flee's Berts world to try and find a new start…I assume this was because 'Bad Girls' did well, and Wishman wanted to capitalise on it…But its still surreal that the film detours into that…just because it can…Appreciated, but an odd turn.

All in all? I enjoyed 'Another Day, Another Man'. its a fine enough kitchen sink piece about crimes seedy seedy underbelly. But; while theres a lot of really good and solid things about this film. Theres enough here to hold it back from really truly being exceptional, and that combined with the fact that I just didnt truly out and out LOVE it. means that I can absolutely appreciate it, i'll very likely revisit it some day. But I cant say its my favourite Wishman piece. I'll recommend it as another 'Upper-middle of the pack' Doris Wishman film. But broadly speaking, its not worth actively hunting down.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/another-day-another-man/

Continuing through 'Doris Wishman: The Moonlight Years' we have 'A Taste of Flesh', a film *presumably* lost to time, as its presented on AGFA/Something Weirds lovely Bluray boxset as an (admittedly high quality) S-VHS rip.

The plot opens with Hannah and Bobi, Bobi is a European traveller who Hannah met a couple of years ago while backpacking (they're in a lesbian relationship essentially, though the film never out and out says it) Bobi has come to the states for work, and Hannah has kindly invited her to stay at her apartment for a few days while Bobi's in town. Things were heading into 'hot and steamy' terratory when things are interrupted by Carol. Hannahs roomate, who gets the lowdown on their new house guest and things start to settle in.

However; it isnt long before things take a sour turn, as two men claiming to be plumbers stage a home invasion and take the ladies hostage. It turns out that Bobi's 'Work' is in fact following and monitoring the prime minister of her country. and the gents who've broken in are determined to find out what time the PM will be checking into his hotel, in order to stage an assassination attempt. And conveniently, the PM's hotel is within eyeshot of the ladies apartment. Leading to a tense race against the clock to see if our three leads can take out the criminals before they achieve their nefarious goal!…And because this is a Doris Wishman film, smut peddlers need'nt fear, theres plenty of nudity, dry humping and 'Roughie' stuff to keep things turning over.

While not exactly my personal idea of a 'thrill ride' I did enjoy 'A Taste of Flesh' and at 71 minutes long I think you could do far worse…especially when it comes to the films of Doris Wishman.

The plot steadily builds up across the runtime, keeping a consistent rising tension, tone and pace that does feel pretty satisfying by the time of the payoff, theres a clean 3 act structure, we have a smaller cast than usual, which means we get a lot more time giving these characters, depth, interesting character arcs, ACTUAL development that feels like it pays off in the end. Its probably the best structured Doris Wishman film i've seen to date if nothing else!

While I will say the plotting does maybe bulge a little in the 2nd act, there wasnt anything egregious here that made me baulk. Its just a pretty solid, kind of fun, okayish story, thats consistent, but not exactly earth shattering.

The direction, is a bit of a mixed bag, with the majority of the film taking place solely in Doris Wishmans apartment, it quickly becomes apparent that theres only so many ways you can film 3 rooms, all of which have the same coloured walls, carpets and decor. While I will say there is some very pleasent cine and planned direction here (a dream sequence featuring Hannah and Bobi is a definite highlight) for the most part this feels a little uninspired.

Combined with some mixed ability cine, the sharp and dramatic compositions have instead been exchanged for more handheld shots, that dont quite feel as thought through as some of the other films in these box sets. While it is nice to still see (some) attention to detail on the lighting front, it feels a lot more slapdash and not quite as satisfying as 'Bad Girls Go To Hell' or 'Indecent Desires'.

As for the edit? its fine, theres a couple of effects shots that are nicely handled, cuts are largely consistent, I didnt notice anything to awful. the sequences hang together fine and theres some half decent attempts at creative transitions… Its not BAD particularly…her 70s work struggled a LOT more on that front. But its just not to the standard I know Doris CAN do.

Performance wise, for me? Its all on Peggy Steffans and Buck Starr as Hannah and the home invader 'Franky' respectively. While the supporting cast do give a decent range and solid enough performance Peggy and Buck both go above and beyond tantilisingly dancing into Campy terratory, but just pulling back enough to stop it from being farsical and annoying. I think they both get a great range to play with, have some of the best line deliveries of the feature, have great physical presence and just…really plumb their all into this, they were very satisfying to catch here.

And the soundtracks mostly library tracks again, but the selection very much matches the tone of the film, and it was nice to see some Syd Dale thrown into the mix! (one of the unexpected plusses of enjoying Muzak and library intrumentals!)

All in all? This is definitely one of the better Doris Wishman offerings. I enjoyed it, I thought it was light enough to enjoy both with full attention, or as a background movie. I cant say its a lifechanging movie, nor can I say its 'Must See' but if you are curious about the works of Doris Wishman, and dont want to have her filmography ruined by seeing her absolute best works up front. Then this is probably one of the best starting points I could recommend for an idea of the kind of thing Doris does best. I absolutely do recommend this for people looking to learn more about the films of Doris Wishman, and for folks working through her films who havent caught this one yet. For people looking for decent 'roughie' films…you almost certainly can do better.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/a-taste-of-flesh/

Another day, another feature from Doris Wishmans 'Moonlight Years' collection, and a film that has a pretty okay premise that gets stretched WELL beyond its elasticity.

'Indecent Desires' plot is interesting, but astonishingly brief. A chap call 'Zeb' finds a doll in a trash can while walking in the park, and decides to take it home. On the way home he meets Ann, a woman who…in Zebs opinion shares a striking resemblance to the doll.

On getting the doll home, Zeb begins to caress it, and it turns out that Ann and the doll have some kind of possessive link, as Zebs caresses begin to transfer onto Ann. Ann is of course deeply confused and distraught about this, and has NO idea why she feels the way shes feeling. After closing herself off to people when this eventually ends up happening a few times, Zeb by chance realises that the doll seems to be having some sort of effect on Ann, and decides to act out all kinds of heinous stuff on the doll to…Im guessing drive Ann insane, so that she cuts off all her friends and might actually 'get' with Zeb? Its kind of hard to really say what the point of this film was honestly…

What we have here is a plotline that realistically should have been a 20-30 minute short film, extended out to 71 minutes with repetition that tests the patience and strength of even the most ardent cinephile. And erotic sequences that are 'soft' and drag for signficantly longer than they should do too.

Theres almost no dialogue for the full runtime barring very brief conversational exchanges, most of what happens on screen is visual only. The characters arnt well defined, dont really go through much development and we dont really learn much about them as the film goes on. Instead we get a fleeting snapshot into 'just some folk' for an hour, before being dumped back out in reality.

And the combination of all of these elements results in a film that feels abhorrently over long, border painful to actually sit through, with very little going on and every possible opportunity to drag ass is thoroughly exhausted.

Had this been a 20-30 minute short; this could have been a really interesting weird little movie that I probably would have given a signficantly higher score to. Indeed, the direction and cine are a little spotty, but at least Wishman vaguely knew how to shoot in black and white, how to light for it, compositions that work within the sequence and how to make people look good in greyscale…

Instead its a film that flounders between being a surreal pseudo comedy, a sexploitation flick and briefly dips into being a 'Roughie' in the 3rd act. It doesnt really know what it wants to be, what it wants to say or how it wants to say it, and it drags itself out to painful lengths to no real 'enlightenment' on that front.

While visually its a relatively solid picture, with okay editing and a good jazzy soundtrack to help keep at least SOME sense of energy up. The characters dont really get much time to really bring their bast act to the camera, and the whole thing ends up feeling very thin on the ground and without much substance.

If it were truncated, I wouldnt hesitate to recommend it. As it stands? its a good idea, mishandled into a painful watch, I likely wont revisit it again, I cant recommend it. and I can confidently say, there's better Wishman out there than this.

source https://letterboxd.com/tytdreviews/film/indecent-desires/