(1983)

User Reviews

Review this title
3 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
9/10
As Time Goes By...And Opinions Change !
Nodriesrespect17 August 2007
Something of a test case as to what you consider most important in adult movies, hot sex or a mainstream-resembling production, the late Chuck Vincent's IN LOVE still stands as one of the finest so-called "crossover films" of the '80s, a time of great change in the porno field as theaters were closing their doors as the VCR made its irreversible entrance into most households. Perhaps in a reflection of cinemas trying to compete with television during the '50s, the always ambitious Vincent responded by making a movie bigger and more lavish than the genre had ever seen, a sweeping romantic saga spanning two decades in the lives of its star-crossed lovers. Like with the previous year's critically acclaimed and multi-award-winning ROOMMATES, the idea was to release the material in both R and XXX versions, thereby being playable in a much wider arena than the average adult feature so as to recoup its considerable investments. Very much unlike ROOMMATES however, IN LOVE went on to lose money on its initial run though its popularity has been growing among the couples crowd as is proved by frequent Playboy Channel airings and the high prices fetched by its increasingly rare VHS incarnation.

Budding businessman Andy (Jerry Butler) and flighty Florida gal Jill (Kelly Nichols) meet and fall in love one fateful weekend in 1962 yet are forced to part ways for the next twenty years. He heads back to his New York marketing job, marries the boss's daughter (Veronica Hart) but screws up by sleeping around with wealthy customer Samantha Fox. She moves to California, joins a cult led by guru Michael Bruce, picking grapes and dropping acid, landing her in jail only to come out with enough material to make it as a bestselling author. They never seem to get over one another and several near meetings occur over time.

Sex most definitely takes a back seat to the drama and period recreation here, so this ain't the kind of flick you'll wanna spank your monkey to. If that's the kind of porn you're going to purvey, you'd better make sure the plot, production and acting are up to snuff. Fortunately, Vincent assembled some of the finest people the industry had to offer on both sides of the camera, assuring the type of adult film that is both adult and still very much a film as well. Nichols and Butler acquit themselves well in the lead roles, never letting the latter's alleged claims of absent chemistry (in his once scandalous autobiography "Raw Talent") rise to the surface.

The huge cast list reads like a virtual who's who of then adult alumni. Special mention must be made of the too frequently undervalued Sue Nero as a sad-eyed hooker and a youthful Rachel Ashley and Dan Stephens (from Roberta Findlay's PRIVATE SCHOOL GIRLS) as an opportunistic couple putting on a show for lonely Andy at his lowest ebb. Jill's best friend who takes care of her when she's just out of prison is indeed mainstream and TV actress Beth Broderick, who would temporarily change her name to "Norris O'Neal" shortly after and took several more (non-sex, so don't get your knickers in a twist) roles in Vincent projects including the nominal lead in his uneven BORDELLO.

Vincent's close companion and regular cinematographer Larry Revene makes the whole show look as glossy as anything cable has managed to cough up since. Hell, there's even a slushy theme song to accompany the exhaustive credit sequences, making it abundantly clear that Chuck was doing his darnedest to give dirty movies a good name. Yet I guess I'm not the only one to feel that, no matter how noble the attempt, he was ultimately fighting a losing battle as there's not much call for porno that fails to make your pee-pee stand up to attention. Pretty basic as opinions go, I know, but it's mine so deal with it !
10 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Porn that is .... Beautiful
FaithFallen24 July 2007
I remember seeing this movie back in the mid 80's on VHS and although I can't remember how I got this movie (as I was still under 18), I remember this movie as being one of the most touching movie I had ever seen.

This movie was one of the first porn movies I had ever seen, and I recollect how it made me realize a porn movie could be just as, if not more intriguing, than a "Hollywood" feature.

Unfortunately, porn took a very bad turn in the 80's in my opinion, and became what it was stigmatized to be by the conservative parties at that time. That is, a "dirty thing".

It's like a child that is told, he/she is no good over and over again. You can bet that that child WILL grow up to be no good. And that is what American porn (and to a slightly lesser degree, European porn) has become. A dirty thing.

It's so sad to think that porn COULD have taken a completely different route to growing up. And become the swan, instead of a rotting eel in a pond.

On the other hand, movies today are becoming more explicit without the upheaval we saw back in the 70's, so perhaps progress is being made.

If you want to see what porn should have been, and NOT what it is today, I urge you to seek out this movie and view it. I hope it will change your attitude towards porn.
4 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Vincent delivers a compelling film
russbgrant11 September 2021
This one examines the long term ramifications of a perfect weekend fling. Chuck Vincent does a great job presenting the melodrama and the film is packed with the smooth polish and professionalism that is usually so lacking in adult. Jerry Butler and Kelly Nichols put in some career best performances as the star-crossed lovers who find their separate lives incomplete without each other after that weekend. If there's any problem with this one is that it's a bit lacking in the heat department for an adult feature. Vincent clearly had other things in mind, and largely succeeds in delivering a compelling, adult hardcore narrative. Those looking for more physical stimulation may find it lacking.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed