I rented this DVD because the auteur of crap, Larry Buchanan ("Zontar: Thing From Venus" and "Mars Needs Women") made part of the film. Originally, Buchanan started a project named "Swamp Rose" but ran out of money. And another bad movie maker incorporated this into his film "Common Law Wife".
"Common Law Wife" is a super-low budget film--made with a minuscule budget, no-name actors and lots of strippers--strippers that show practically nothing. It's a lot of tease and no please--the sort of crap-fest that was relatively common in sleazy drive-ins in the 1960s.
The film begins with a nasty old rich guy telling his live-in girlfriend to get lost. According to this old rogue, she's seen better days and he intends to bring his very sexy stripper niece to move in with him. Wow...an old pervert looking for a good 'ol case of incest! Talk about your family-friendly plots! However, the old girlfriend (who looks a LOT like Rose Marie from "The Dick Van Dyke Show") is not about to just wander off and die. She consults a lawyer who informs her that according to the rules of that state, she is actually the old goat's common-law wife, as they've been posing as a married couple for five years. So, when the nymphet niece shows up, the slighted girlfriend announces to both of them that she's NOT leaving. And, since the niece is a total gold-digger who wants the uncle's fortune, you know sparks are going to fly. What happens next you'll need to see for yourself...if you even care!
While the plot is sleazy, it could have actually worked. However, the film has a lot working against it. Crappy acting, of course. But much of the film looks like aimless filler--with dancing and swimming and stripping scenes which are obvious filler. Another problem is that the two films seem to have nothing in common. And none of it fits together seamlessly. For example, in one irrelevant scene, a sexy lady is cavorting in the pool with her boyfriend. She then runs inside and her hair is instantly dry. Why? Because it's NOT the same lady nor the same boyfriend--they are from the other film! And, I loved how some of the film stock looked very different from previous reels! How did they handle this? Well, they sloppily inserted voice-overs to try to hide that which was impossible to hide! Duh. But, since the film is a low-budget trash-fest, the filmmakers didn't seem to care in the least. And, considering the audience of the time wasn't made up of film connoisseurs, I assume they didn't care very much either. I just appreciated how the whole thing was a textbook example of incompetence on every level--the sort of film Ed Wood or Al Adamson would be proud to have made!
So is it worth seeing?! After all, I gave this one a very well-deserved 1. Well, no...not if you are sane. But, if you occasionally like a bad movie for a laugh, then this film is for you! Plus, the ending is pretty cool. Just don't let your mother catch you watching it!
By the way, I loved how the sheriff in one film has grey hair and the other it's jet-black!