The good people at Something Weird Video obviously don't watch any of the exploitative junk they distribute and simply put films together purely based on matching titles or something! "Toys are not for Children" sounds like an ideal companion for another movie called "The Toy Box", but if you've seen them both, you can immediately conclude these two movies differ enormously when it comes to atmospheres, filming styles, substance and intensity level. "The Toy Box" is totally lurid and nonsensical crap about sexist aliens, whereas "Toys are not for Children" is an aspirant-controversial and mildly perverted tale about a girl with an unhealthy desire for her father. This is not a particularly pleasant movie and definitely not the usual type of light-headed sleaze Something Weird brings forward but it's nevertheless a curious attempt at drama and adult themes. 19-year-old Jamie is obsessed with her daddy ever since her shrewish mother kicked him out for visiting prostitutes. He still sends her presents and she "plays" with them, all right, but let's just say the toy soldier didn't get any training for this type of field work
Jamie gets married but refuses to sexually satiate with her husband and still only wants to play with daddy's toys and recapture memories of her early childhood. She then flees to the big city and moves in with an elderly prostitute who introduces her to a lot of old perverts that just love to act like Jamie's daddy. You don't need a degree in quantum-physics to predict the film builds up towards an actual encounter between Jamie and her dad in a climax oozing with incestuous vibes, bizarre fetishism and abrupt acts of vengeance. The atmosphere and themes of "Toys
" may be extremely sordid and sleazy, but there's actually very little nudity or sexual content on screen. Writer/director Stanley Brassloff had copious opportunities to turn the movie into one gigantic sex feast (Jamie's husband picks up randy girls in bars, Pearl's pimp assaults women, etc
) but the sexual content largely remains suggestive and off-screen. Rather than to focus on all the luscious and willing women in the film, the story solely revolves on the frigid Jamie and her messed up sentiments. Like the other genius reviewer already stated, "Toys are not for Children" probably one of the sleaziest concepts ever thought up, but the actual content is rather sober. That's quite a remarkable accomplishment; especially for the early 70's. The production values are also fairly decent, with monotonous but relatively stylish photography and nice musical guidance. Definitely recommended for avid cult fanatics, but stay clear if you're just looking for rancid sleaze. In that case, you're better off watching the aforementioned "The Toy Box".
16 Reviews
Camp and the ultimate dysfunctional family
brinkus-224 April 2022
Warning: Spoilers
I thought the film did a wonderful job of being humorous and serious at the same time. The horrible chemistry between the parents made poor Jamie an emotional cripple and I really did feel bad for her. Most of the characters are exaggerated and there was humor to be found in all of them. Seeing Pearl expose her nipples was particularly funny and I laughed out loud at that.
I love movies where all the characters end up unhappy and this film certainly accomplished that.
I love movies where all the characters end up unhappy and this film certainly accomplished that.
Intriguing oddity
Leofwine_draca11 December 2020
Warning: Spoilers
TOYS ARE NOT FOR CHILDREN is one of those obscure, independent horror films shot in New York back in the day and originally released by Something Weird Video. This one dates from the early 1970s and is another story of abnormal psychology, weird incestuous relationships, and people who haven't grown up properly. Given the subject matter it offers a surprisingly serious approach to the material, avoiding sleaze and exploitation for the most part, although there's a smattering of nudity. The acting is better than expected and the characters quite interesting, although there's not enough story to sustain the running time.
Very unique sex movie
lazarillo8 May 2005
Warning: Spoilers
John Waters once said that he wanted to make a film that had no sex and no violence, but was rated "X" just for its theme and ideas. Well, this movie might be as close as anyone has ever come to that--it has no on-screen violence and very little sex but it is unbelievably sleazy, managing to touch on incest, pedophilia, fetishism, frigidity, prostitution and rape all in a scant running time. It is also surprisingly serious and well-made. It's not a film I'd want to watch again any time soon, but you have to respect the fact that it was made at all.
The movie is about a young girl with a shrewish, puritanical mother and an absent, whoring father. She becomes unnaturally attached to the toys her father gives her, even taking them to bed with her as a young adult, much to the consternation of her new husband with who she proves decidedly frigid. While her husband seeks solace from other women, the heroine comes upon a unique solution to her frigidity problem--she becomes a prostitute (!) catering exclusively to a strange breed of older men who call her "baby" and insist that she call them "daddy". All of which leads to a very predictable but nevertheless touchingly tragic encounter with her actual father.
This is one of strange breed of early 70's "roughies" that were marketed as sexploitation films, but had a surprisingly downbeat view of sex. Other films like this include "And When She Was Bad", "Swinger's Massacre", and "The Toy Box" (with which this has been paired on Something Weird's latest DVD release). But while many of these other films no doubt left their male audience with mixed feelings of being turned on and wanting to castrate themselves, this film definitely evokes the latter response. I know that doesn't sound like much of a recommendation, but this a rare film that despite its far-fletched plot realistically portrays sex as a potentially destructive force for both the repressed and the promiscuous (and without any preaching or moralizing). That's in many ways preferable to the usual "adult" fairy tales where everyone has a lot of sex with multiple partners and lives happily ever after.
The movie is about a young girl with a shrewish, puritanical mother and an absent, whoring father. She becomes unnaturally attached to the toys her father gives her, even taking them to bed with her as a young adult, much to the consternation of her new husband with who she proves decidedly frigid. While her husband seeks solace from other women, the heroine comes upon a unique solution to her frigidity problem--she becomes a prostitute (!) catering exclusively to a strange breed of older men who call her "baby" and insist that she call them "daddy". All of which leads to a very predictable but nevertheless touchingly tragic encounter with her actual father.
This is one of strange breed of early 70's "roughies" that were marketed as sexploitation films, but had a surprisingly downbeat view of sex. Other films like this include "And When She Was Bad", "Swinger's Massacre", and "The Toy Box" (with which this has been paired on Something Weird's latest DVD release). But while many of these other films no doubt left their male audience with mixed feelings of being turned on and wanting to castrate themselves, this film definitely evokes the latter response. I know that doesn't sound like much of a recommendation, but this a rare film that despite its far-fletched plot realistically portrays sex as a potentially destructive force for both the repressed and the promiscuous (and without any preaching or moralizing). That's in many ways preferable to the usual "adult" fairy tales where everyone has a lot of sex with multiple partners and lives happily ever after.
Bizarre To Say the Least
annablair-1919116 April 2022
A sexually repressed young woman with an unhealthy attachment to her father can't make a relationship work so she becomes a prostitute.
With a few tweaks here and there, Toys Are Not for Children could pass as an early John Waters movie with its strange themes, odd acting, and low budget filming style, but this one seems to want to be taken a little more seriously, which makes it a far more disturbing, if not somewhat amusing, viewing experience. This won't be one for everyone.
With a few tweaks here and there, Toys Are Not for Children could pass as an early John Waters movie with its strange themes, odd acting, and low budget filming style, but this one seems to want to be taken a little more seriously, which makes it a far more disturbing, if not somewhat amusing, viewing experience. This won't be one for everyone.
Shudder...
BandSAboutMovies7 November 2019
Warning: Spoilers
Man, I would have never survived the 1970's. It was too full of sin and sleaze, too many drugs, too many cults. I'm reminded of this every single time I watch a piece of cinematic insanity from that most bonkers of all decades.
Arrow Video has gifted me with one more reminder of why this was the most dangerous and demented of all eras with Toys Are Not for Children.
What can you say about a movie that starts with a young woman playing under the covers - yes, the dirty side of playing - with a doll that her father sent her for her birthday being interrupted by her mother?
Jamie Goddard is that young girl, emotionally stunted by the loss of her father and unable to embrace her sexuality unless it's within the world of prostitution and daddy/little girl play. She's played by Marcia Forbes, a one and done actress who was probably chased away by just how insane this entire film is.
Fran Warren, who plays the role of the mother, was a major recording star in the 40's and 50's. Perhaps you know her song "A Sunday Kind of Love" or saw her in "Abbott and Costello Meet Captain Kidd." She pretty much abuses her daughter, who only finds joy in the toys from daddy and the ones she sells at a toy store. Then she gets married to Charlie and can't consummate with him - the pull of daddy is too strong.
So she does what any of us would. She falls in with a lesbian prostitute and her pimp, starts making love to dirty old men and finally gets what she always wanted. The chance to be with - and yes, I mean with in the most perverted sense of the world - her father.
Director/writer Stanley H. Brassloff only would direct one other film, Two Girls for a Madman. After watching this, I need to chase down that movie, too.
Make no mistake, this is the kind of movie that is going to make you sick to your stomach. I kind of like that feeling. You may not. It would pair nicely with The Baby or Private Parts. If you're the kind of adventurous film watcher that I am, you're probably beyond excited to hunt this one down.
Arrow Video has gifted me with one more reminder of why this was the most dangerous and demented of all eras with Toys Are Not for Children.
What can you say about a movie that starts with a young woman playing under the covers - yes, the dirty side of playing - with a doll that her father sent her for her birthday being interrupted by her mother?
Jamie Goddard is that young girl, emotionally stunted by the loss of her father and unable to embrace her sexuality unless it's within the world of prostitution and daddy/little girl play. She's played by Marcia Forbes, a one and done actress who was probably chased away by just how insane this entire film is.
Fran Warren, who plays the role of the mother, was a major recording star in the 40's and 50's. Perhaps you know her song "A Sunday Kind of Love" or saw her in "Abbott and Costello Meet Captain Kidd." She pretty much abuses her daughter, who only finds joy in the toys from daddy and the ones she sells at a toy store. Then she gets married to Charlie and can't consummate with him - the pull of daddy is too strong.
So she does what any of us would. She falls in with a lesbian prostitute and her pimp, starts making love to dirty old men and finally gets what she always wanted. The chance to be with - and yes, I mean with in the most perverted sense of the world - her father.
Director/writer Stanley H. Brassloff only would direct one other film, Two Girls for a Madman. After watching this, I need to chase down that movie, too.
Make no mistake, this is the kind of movie that is going to make you sick to your stomach. I kind of like that feeling. You may not. It would pair nicely with The Baby or Private Parts. If you're the kind of adventurous film watcher that I am, you're probably beyond excited to hunt this one down.
Trash is not for cinema snobs.
mark.waltz13 May 2022
Warning: Spoilers
The deliberately bad, over-the-top acting for the John Waters films made during this time has stood the test of time because it has made them camp classics. However, other movies which tried to follow that mold but with more serious styles of acting did not become camp classics or well known because they are just genuinely bad, not deliciously bad. That describes this film, the story of a young woman with arrested development, played by Marcia Forbes, dealing with abandonment issues ever since her father left her shrew of a mother (Fran Warren) yes send her toys on a regular basis that Forbes has kept and still prays with. Warren is as bad of a mother as custom store close to Sandra Dee in "A Summer Place", obviously trying to instill her with a hatred of men but failing. Forbes there is a young man but does not consummate the marriage, then goes to live with her father's ex-girlfriend (the scary looking Evelyn Kingsley) who is now a prostitute, losing her virginity to the equally scary looking Luis Arroyo whose sideburns a character all their own.
The lowest of the low lives of society are not well developed characters, none of them really likeable, and Forbes too naive to be realistic considering the people she hangs out with. When she becomes a prostitute while living with Kingsley, it's like she's added a new toy to her collection, and it's just a disgusting element of the film. With Waters movies, you know he was making fun of these kind of people, even if they were based on friends of his, so it was fun to laugh at them. But outside of Forbes, all of these people are just hideous monsters in human form, and their performances are ridiculously trite with dialog that is bad, not fun bad. I can't believe that this actually had a motion picture theater release because it seems like something that someone made as a joke and showed along with their home movies at a party where everybody got high and extremely intoxicated. Watching it sober was not an enjoyable experience.
The lowest of the low lives of society are not well developed characters, none of them really likeable, and Forbes too naive to be realistic considering the people she hangs out with. When she becomes a prostitute while living with Kingsley, it's like she's added a new toy to her collection, and it's just a disgusting element of the film. With Waters movies, you know he was making fun of these kind of people, even if they were based on friends of his, so it was fun to laugh at them. But outside of Forbes, all of these people are just hideous monsters in human form, and their performances are ridiculously trite with dialog that is bad, not fun bad. I can't believe that this actually had a motion picture theater release because it seems like something that someone made as a joke and showed along with their home movies at a party where everybody got high and extremely intoxicated. Watching it sober was not an enjoyable experience.
Incredibly Bizarre Psychodrama
jamesmorgan-041143 August 2019
Toys Are Not For Children and this movie isn't for everyone. Aesthetically, it looks like it was scrapped together with a child's leftover lunch money, but the story, while sleazy, seems to have higher aspirations than low budget sleaze.
A young woman has an unhealthy obsession with her father whom she never sees since her mother separated from him due to his various infidelities. She lives in a stunted kind of existence, still playing with toys he bought her. This infuriates her husband whose upset that she doesn't want to have sex with him. Unhappy with her life, she runs away and ends up befriending a middle aged high class prostitute who gets her into the world's oldest profession where she meets men who are old enough to be her father and...well...let's just leave it at that.
If one were to read this script, I'm sure it would practically ooze sleaze, but the film itself feels more like a slightly more edgy after school special with precious little actual nudity or sexual content. Performances are spirited in that grand old low budget film way and one could almost believe they were brought over from the John Waters or Andy Milligan flick filming a few states away.
Toys Are Not For Children does a great job of balancing true drama and sleaze.
A young woman has an unhealthy obsession with her father whom she never sees since her mother separated from him due to his various infidelities. She lives in a stunted kind of existence, still playing with toys he bought her. This infuriates her husband whose upset that she doesn't want to have sex with him. Unhappy with her life, she runs away and ends up befriending a middle aged high class prostitute who gets her into the world's oldest profession where she meets men who are old enough to be her father and...well...let's just leave it at that.
If one were to read this script, I'm sure it would practically ooze sleaze, but the film itself feels more like a slightly more edgy after school special with precious little actual nudity or sexual content. Performances are spirited in that grand old low budget film way and one could almost believe they were brought over from the John Waters or Andy Milligan flick filming a few states away.
Toys Are Not For Children does a great job of balancing true drama and sleaze.
No worth the time!
Australian120 October 2019
a mind&%#$ of a film, i liked it
movieman_kev9 November 2003
Jamie is a mentally stunted adult obsessed with the father whom her mom kicked out when she was a young girl. This movie is insane. it did keep my interest throughout. Those who go into this film, thinking it'll be another 70's-era skin flick are in for a surprise. Nudity is kept to a minimum. This is more of a psychological mind&*%$ If you stick with it, it's a pretty good, creepy b-movie. This movie is coupled with "The Toy Box" on the Something Weird DVD.
My Grade:B
DVD Extras: Art Gallery;2 short subjects ( the Toy Telephone Truck, & the Christmas Eves); Trailers for Toys are not for Children, the Toybox, The Exquisite Cadaver, Tales of the Bizarre, The Single Girls, Ann and Eve, The Depraved, Sextet, The Naked Countess, and Labyrinth of Sex
My Grade:B
DVD Extras: Art Gallery;2 short subjects ( the Toy Telephone Truck, & the Christmas Eves); Trailers for Toys are not for Children, the Toybox, The Exquisite Cadaver, Tales of the Bizarre, The Single Girls, Ann and Eve, The Depraved, Sextet, The Naked Countess, and Labyrinth of Sex
Her only joy is a cuddly toy.
BA_Harrison20 January 2021
Nineteen going on twenty, Jamie Godard (Marcia Forbes) has issues. When she was a little girl, her father doted on her, but his liking for prostitutes saw him thrown out of the house, leaving Jamie longing for dear daddy while her bitter mother told her that all men are worthless. Jamie's love for her father leads to an unhealthy obsession with the toys that he sends her, and a curiosity about the women of the night with whom daddy associates.
When Jamie strikes up a friendship with working girl Pearl (Evelyn Kingsley), her mother throws her out, and so she goes and gets hitched to her toy-store co-worker Charlie Belmond (Harlan Cary Poe), who is keen to get his tasty young bride in the sack. Unfortunately for Charlie, Jamie has no interest in him sexually, preferring the company of her toys in bed. Understandably frustrated, Charlie hits the local night spots to pick up women who will take care of his needs. Eventually, Jamie moves in with Pearl and her pimp Eddie (a wonderfully slimy performance from Luis Arroyo), changes her look and decides to sell her body, just like the ladies that daddy loves so much - a career choice that indulges her incestuous fantasies, but ultimately leads to tragedy.
Wow! This is one of those totally messed up '70s gems that makes being a fan of obscure cult cinematic oddities such fun. Oozing perversity without being excessively sleazy (nudity is kept to a minimum), it trundles along its increasingly twisted path, benefitting from a winning central performance from the delectable Miss Forbes in her one and only movie role. Writer/director Stanley H. Brassloff's restraint only goes to make the shocking final act all the more impactful.
For those who like their movies to explore taboo themes and possess an emotional wallop, this is highly recommended viewing, and would make a terrific double bill with the equally perverse Love Me Deadly (1972), which deals with the uncomfortable subject of necrophilia.
When Jamie strikes up a friendship with working girl Pearl (Evelyn Kingsley), her mother throws her out, and so she goes and gets hitched to her toy-store co-worker Charlie Belmond (Harlan Cary Poe), who is keen to get his tasty young bride in the sack. Unfortunately for Charlie, Jamie has no interest in him sexually, preferring the company of her toys in bed. Understandably frustrated, Charlie hits the local night spots to pick up women who will take care of his needs. Eventually, Jamie moves in with Pearl and her pimp Eddie (a wonderfully slimy performance from Luis Arroyo), changes her look and decides to sell her body, just like the ladies that daddy loves so much - a career choice that indulges her incestuous fantasies, but ultimately leads to tragedy.
Wow! This is one of those totally messed up '70s gems that makes being a fan of obscure cult cinematic oddities such fun. Oozing perversity without being excessively sleazy (nudity is kept to a minimum), it trundles along its increasingly twisted path, benefitting from a winning central performance from the delectable Miss Forbes in her one and only movie role. Writer/director Stanley H. Brassloff's restraint only goes to make the shocking final act all the more impactful.
For those who like their movies to explore taboo themes and possess an emotional wallop, this is highly recommended viewing, and would make a terrific double bill with the equally perverse Love Me Deadly (1972), which deals with the uncomfortable subject of necrophilia.
Extremely bleak and depressing, yet still fascinating exploitation oddity
Woodyanders21 April 2014
Warning: Spoilers
Emotionally stunted child woman Jamie Godard (a solid and touching performance by adorable brunette Marcia Forbes) not only suffers from an unhealthy fixation on her whoring no-count long absent father Philip (well played by Peter Lightstone), but also has an obsession with all the toys her wayward pop gave her as a kid. After getting a job at a toy store, Jamie decides to marry co-worker Charlie Belmond (a sturdy and likable portrayal by Harlan Cary Poe). When the marriage doesn't work out, Jamie runs away to New York City and becomes a prostitute who specializes in servicing perverted old men who like to play daddy with her.
Although the seamy premise sounds like ideal grindhouse fodder, director Stanley H. Brasloff and writer Macs McAree surprisingly deliver very little nudity and no simulated soft-core sex. Instead they tackle such dark and disturbing themes as incest, pedophilia, sexual repression, childhood trauma, kinky fetishism, and arrested adolescent syndrome gone tragically wrong in an unflinchingly stark and head-on confrontational manner. Naturally, this makes for decidedly grim and uncomfortable viewing, but the sordidly engrossing story and alarming array of almost universally miserable, messed-up, and unsympathetic characters give this picture a certain bitterly potent sting (the uncompromising bummer ending in particular packs a devastating downbeat punch). Moreover, the fine acting from the capable cast holds the movie together, with especially praiseworthy contributions from Evelyn Kingsley as brash and worn-out hooker Pearl Valdi, Luis Arroyo as scuzzy pimp Eddie, Fran Warren as Jamie's shrewish mother Edna, Tiberia Mitri as the frail and vulnerable little girl incarnation of Jamie, and N.J. Osrag as jolly toy store owner Max Geunther. Rolph Laube's competent cinematography and the brooding score by Cathy Lynn and Jacques Urbont are both up to par. Beautifully haunting theme song, too. An unusual and interesting little curio.
Although the seamy premise sounds like ideal grindhouse fodder, director Stanley H. Brasloff and writer Macs McAree surprisingly deliver very little nudity and no simulated soft-core sex. Instead they tackle such dark and disturbing themes as incest, pedophilia, sexual repression, childhood trauma, kinky fetishism, and arrested adolescent syndrome gone tragically wrong in an unflinchingly stark and head-on confrontational manner. Naturally, this makes for decidedly grim and uncomfortable viewing, but the sordidly engrossing story and alarming array of almost universally miserable, messed-up, and unsympathetic characters give this picture a certain bitterly potent sting (the uncompromising bummer ending in particular packs a devastating downbeat punch). Moreover, the fine acting from the capable cast holds the movie together, with especially praiseworthy contributions from Evelyn Kingsley as brash and worn-out hooker Pearl Valdi, Luis Arroyo as scuzzy pimp Eddie, Fran Warren as Jamie's shrewish mother Edna, Tiberia Mitri as the frail and vulnerable little girl incarnation of Jamie, and N.J. Osrag as jolly toy store owner Max Geunther. Rolph Laube's competent cinematography and the brooding score by Cathy Lynn and Jacques Urbont are both up to par. Beautifully haunting theme song, too. An unusual and interesting little curio.
Better Than You'd Expect
Michael_Elliott28 March 2017
Toys Are Not for Children (1972)
*** (out of 4)
Jamie (Marcia Forbes) is a mentally unstable young woman who is still suffering various daddy issues. She eventually marries Eddie (Luis Arroyo) but is too afraid to sleep with him, which leads to her relationship with Pearl (Evelyn Kingsley), a known prostitute. Pretty soon Jamie's daddy issues lead her into prostitution and soon she runs into her real father who left her years earlier.
If you're a fan of Something Weird Video then you know they've released all sorts of strange sex pictures. If you're expecting a sex picture out of TOYS ARE NOT FOR CHILDREN then you will either be shocked or disappointed because that's not what this movie is. Instead of cheap sex and nudity, this movie instead goes for a more psychological approach and it actually works in delivering a very surreal and dark tale of mental illness.
What shocked me the most is the fact that this film is rather ambitious and tries to be more like Bergman than the various trashy film that were playing 42nd Street. Of course, this isn't anywhere near the level of Bergman but I really do respect director Stanley H. Brassloff for trying to do something deeper. I really liked how the story jumped around from various times in Jamie's life and I thought this added a nice flow to the material. Another major plus is the fact that the director manages to hold your attention throughout even though he was obviously working with a very small budget.
Another plus are the performances, which for the most part were very good. Forbes is wonderful in the role of the woman who is still very much like a child due to her daddy leaving. I really thought she nailed this character and made for a very good character study. The actress was believable no matter what the role was calling for. Harlan Cary Poe was also very good in the role of the abusive pimp. Both Kinglsey and Arroyo were good as well.
TOYS ARE NOT FOR CHILDREN isn't a movie that's going to appeal to everyone. The low-budget look of the picture does make it appear more raw and overall I was surprised to see how captivating the film was.
*** (out of 4)
Jamie (Marcia Forbes) is a mentally unstable young woman who is still suffering various daddy issues. She eventually marries Eddie (Luis Arroyo) but is too afraid to sleep with him, which leads to her relationship with Pearl (Evelyn Kingsley), a known prostitute. Pretty soon Jamie's daddy issues lead her into prostitution and soon she runs into her real father who left her years earlier.
If you're a fan of Something Weird Video then you know they've released all sorts of strange sex pictures. If you're expecting a sex picture out of TOYS ARE NOT FOR CHILDREN then you will either be shocked or disappointed because that's not what this movie is. Instead of cheap sex and nudity, this movie instead goes for a more psychological approach and it actually works in delivering a very surreal and dark tale of mental illness.
What shocked me the most is the fact that this film is rather ambitious and tries to be more like Bergman than the various trashy film that were playing 42nd Street. Of course, this isn't anywhere near the level of Bergman but I really do respect director Stanley H. Brassloff for trying to do something deeper. I really liked how the story jumped around from various times in Jamie's life and I thought this added a nice flow to the material. Another major plus is the fact that the director manages to hold your attention throughout even though he was obviously working with a very small budget.
Another plus are the performances, which for the most part were very good. Forbes is wonderful in the role of the woman who is still very much like a child due to her daddy leaving. I really thought she nailed this character and made for a very good character study. The actress was believable no matter what the role was calling for. Harlan Cary Poe was also very good in the role of the abusive pimp. Both Kinglsey and Arroyo were good as well.
TOYS ARE NOT FOR CHILDREN isn't a movie that's going to appeal to everyone. The low-budget look of the picture does make it appear more raw and overall I was surprised to see how captivating the film was.
'This bracingly adult film is certainly not for childish minds!'
Weirdling_Wolf1 March 2021
Infrequently lauded, boundary-blasting Grindhouse impresario, Stanley H. 'Two Girls' Brasloff reaches his onanistic apogee in his anti-Sirkian, wonderfully wrong-headed, sadistically squirrelly, promiscuously incestuous, preternaturally potty pot-boiler 'Toys are not for Children' (1972) which arguably remains one of the most sinisterly outrageous grope operas ever conceived to boggle previously thought as 'un-boggle-able' B-Movie minds!
Taking a deliciously degenerated, John Waters approach to sweaty-palmed, morally napalmed family values, Brasloff paints a fascinatingly lurid, stink-fingered portrait of the sin suppurating, salaciously-skewed Godard family. We savour the flavoursome interlude of lusciously ripe young, Jamie Godard (Marcia Forbes) squirming avidly upon the bed suggestively appropriating her childhood plush toy for intimate tasks, perhaps, entirely extra to its original design! Hamming it up with scummy aplomb, the majestically malevolent matriarch Godard (Fran Warren) strides into the bedroom incensed by the sight of daughter, Jamie's breathy exhortations over her absentee father!
This heady 'opening' sordidly telegraphs the transgressive, manifestly strange milieu of gamine, infantile Jamie's troubled, rigorously unconsummated marriage to peachy-keen, handsomely lean Toy Shop co-worker, Charlie (Harlan Cary Poe), and Jamie's singularly misguided quest to locate her long absconded, highly suspect, serially abusive father. Our ingenuous heroine having to endure the profoundly unpleasant, morally repugnant undertakings of her truly venal pimp, Eddie (Luis Arroyo), and suffering additional ignominy at the insensitive hands of her dysfunctional mother/guardian/abuser, Pearl (Evelyn Kingsley).
The technical aspects of Brasloff's twisted drama are quite exemplary, being of a much higher standard than the outre subject matter might suggest. Especially notable is the refined quality of acting, which gives this exquisitely dark and fetishistic tale of starkly forbidden familial love some remarkably heartfelt pathos, demonstratively absent from similarly illicit 42nd Street fare of the period. Fondly recalled, and deservedly so, the evocative opening theme 'Lonely Am I' is an ear-wormingly diggable ditty that belies the film's queasy examination of child abuse and its deleterious effects upon the wholly corrupted lives of all those involved. 'This bracingly adult film is certainly NOT for childish minds!'
Taking a deliciously degenerated, John Waters approach to sweaty-palmed, morally napalmed family values, Brasloff paints a fascinatingly lurid, stink-fingered portrait of the sin suppurating, salaciously-skewed Godard family. We savour the flavoursome interlude of lusciously ripe young, Jamie Godard (Marcia Forbes) squirming avidly upon the bed suggestively appropriating her childhood plush toy for intimate tasks, perhaps, entirely extra to its original design! Hamming it up with scummy aplomb, the majestically malevolent matriarch Godard (Fran Warren) strides into the bedroom incensed by the sight of daughter, Jamie's breathy exhortations over her absentee father!
This heady 'opening' sordidly telegraphs the transgressive, manifestly strange milieu of gamine, infantile Jamie's troubled, rigorously unconsummated marriage to peachy-keen, handsomely lean Toy Shop co-worker, Charlie (Harlan Cary Poe), and Jamie's singularly misguided quest to locate her long absconded, highly suspect, serially abusive father. Our ingenuous heroine having to endure the profoundly unpleasant, morally repugnant undertakings of her truly venal pimp, Eddie (Luis Arroyo), and suffering additional ignominy at the insensitive hands of her dysfunctional mother/guardian/abuser, Pearl (Evelyn Kingsley).
The technical aspects of Brasloff's twisted drama are quite exemplary, being of a much higher standard than the outre subject matter might suggest. Especially notable is the refined quality of acting, which gives this exquisitely dark and fetishistic tale of starkly forbidden familial love some remarkably heartfelt pathos, demonstratively absent from similarly illicit 42nd Street fare of the period. Fondly recalled, and deservedly so, the evocative opening theme 'Lonely Am I' is an ear-wormingly diggable ditty that belies the film's queasy examination of child abuse and its deleterious effects upon the wholly corrupted lives of all those involved. 'This bracingly adult film is certainly NOT for childish minds!'
I DECLARE THIS A NEW CULT CLASSIC.
JayDeadieEagle21 November 2023
Warning: Spoilers
Wow, it's incredible this movie isn't talked about more! This is an extremely thought-provoking film. It draws on an all too common reality in our society; Messed up parents make broken people. It feels like a fully believable story in this way
Jamie (the main character) embodies what happens to us when we have parents that you can never be good enough for. With two parents, and other caring individuals around her constantly wanting more, expecting her to be someone, she gets lost in the noise and simply walks down the path that seems the simplest. Doing so is aligning herself towards the one person that seemed to care about her; Her father. Jamie ignores all other "noise" created by these authoritative individuals, as one would do if they had awful parents.
Really well-thought-out writing by late Macs McAree and late Stanley H. Brassloff. What a shame they never made other stories. Just goes to show, no matter how hard you try, people may just never see your vision. I'll try my part of keeping this story alive in the cult following world. As I strongly believe that this film is a unsung masterclass on dramatic storytelling.
I guess ya just got to have a open mind to things.
Jamie (the main character) embodies what happens to us when we have parents that you can never be good enough for. With two parents, and other caring individuals around her constantly wanting more, expecting her to be someone, she gets lost in the noise and simply walks down the path that seems the simplest. Doing so is aligning herself towards the one person that seemed to care about her; Her father. Jamie ignores all other "noise" created by these authoritative individuals, as one would do if they had awful parents.
Really well-thought-out writing by late Macs McAree and late Stanley H. Brassloff. What a shame they never made other stories. Just goes to show, no matter how hard you try, people may just never see your vision. I'll try my part of keeping this story alive in the cult following world. As I strongly believe that this film is a unsung masterclass on dramatic storytelling.
I guess ya just got to have a open mind to things.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
