Pink Angels (1971) User Reviews

I'm not easily shocked but...

[melloyellobiafra · 6/10 · 25 March 2009]

I'm not going to spoil this for you per se, but this review contains pieces that when combined may give you a good idea what happens at the end of the movie.

The ending for this flick is a real doozy. Even if I told you what it was, you would probably forget about it while watching the movie since there seems to be no way the movie would end the way it does.

But it does, the ending of this movie comes out of nowhere and sucker punches you. Which is not what you would normally expect from a movie that is a fairly harmless and enjoyable comedy.

Someone here has posted claiming to be a producer and has said that the director didn't shoot an ending to the movie. I'm not totally sure about that since the movie begins with a flash forward to an ending that is the sort of ending you'd expect from a comedy like this. In that the Pink Angels crash a fancy party, freak out high society and rumble with their macho rivals. Whatever the case may be, one should've told whomever was tasked with shooting the new ending that Pink Angels was not Easy Rider.

Whatever, see Pink Angels have some laughs then be shocked by a totally misguided ending.

Not Quite the Cross-Dressing Easy Rider

[NickStricharchuk · 5/10 · 13 April 2014]

The Pink Angels: A cross-dressing, homosexual motorcycle gang hits the road to go "down the coast," to get their star queen (the only black guy in the group) to a ball. Meanwhile, a stationary, conservative nut-job sits in his suburban compound obsessing over the "long-haired freaks" threatening good-old fashioned American values while listening to talk radio. Of course, the boys are harmless. They only appear tough, a look they achieve by butching themselves up with fake facial hair, gravelly voices, and swastikas. The film is mostly a silly, harmless lark that could read as a spoof of the motorcycle road movie if the viewer is generous enough to make the leap. The earnest, patriotic soundtrack is completely ludicrous, and oddly works in the film's favor. What doesn't are the final two minutes of the picture, wherein the narrative wildly shifts gears.

I was fascinated from the start

[BloomingtonAdam · 5/10 · 3 January 2016]

After having just watched Pink Angels, I went online to find some commentary on the movie. Most of what I have read seems to be the same. I think I can offer a slightly different take on this film.

From a cinematic standpoint, the movie makes little to no sense. We are introduced in an opening scene that seems to not be related to anything else, even though there is a point in the movie where you may, like I did, have an "a-ha" moment thinking that the movie has returned to the moment it opened. You couldn't be more wrong. There are clips interspersed throughout to introduce The General as well.

What fascinates me most about this movie is mostly the volumes that are spoken about our society and the writers through the film. On the surface, it's about a group of cross dressing bikers out to attend a gala in L.A. The movie seems to follow their journey while also introducing us to The General in a completely different setting. During their trip they encounter a hitchhiker, overbearing cops, and a gang of straight bikers.

If you watch the movie and observe the characters, a few interesting traits show up. Amongst themselves, the bikers act like absolute queens. When in public, they make a point of putting up a "butch" front to hide their presumed homosexuality. Given when this was made, that made sense. You didn't celebrate being gay, you hid it. I think someone involved in the film relied on a lot of arcane stereotypes when putting this together.

Like a lot of things in this film, even their sexual orientation can be questioned. In a scene in which hookers are brought out to party, they engage in a weird comical sexual romp with some of the girls along with the straight bikers. Some of them do, anyway. Was this intentional, or just a slip by the movie makers?

The combination of cross dressing and homosexuality struck me as particularly interesting because there is not necessarily a correlation between the two. You can enjoy dressing up in women's clothing (Ed Wood) and be perfectly straight.

So if you want to enjoy a nonsensical romp with one of the strangest endings in any movie, this is a great choice. If you have read other reviews, you've already read about the ending. When you watch this movie, there is no way you can see this coming. Random? Possibly. It's hard to tell if the ending was patched together at the last minute or planned. I do think there is a chance, given how the characters are portrayed in the film, that it's also meant as a statement about how they felt about the gay lifestyle, for lack of a better phrase.

Bizarre

[radzatg001 · 27 October 2004]

In the genre of cinema verite', I thought that the film was a pure attempt to make a movie and see if it could get distributed...I know that for sure as I am the one that produced the movie. It started out with the best of intentions and the money came and went...the best part was that we actually got it distributed and on the film circuit...The characters were picked from the USC school of film as were a couple of the women, one of which was an actual 'hooker' that just wanted to be in the film. It was a real effort to complete the film since the director was insane and had forgotten to film an ending - which we had to re-shoot after everything was wrapped...quite a story, eh?

regards, Gary Radzat

'Pink Angels' More Incompetent than Offensive

[ascheland · 3/10 · 1 June 2011]

The drive-in movies of the 1970s didn't concern themselves with political correctness, so there's really not much point getting worked up over the stereotypes on display in "Pink Angels." This movie isn't meant to appeal to gay men anyway, a point driven home by all the bare breasts. But you'd think there would've been some attempt to at least make this movie funny, it being a comedy and all. You would also think there would be some attempt to make this movie coherent, and the filmmakers don't bother with that, either. Instead, this gay biker movie — the concept is meant to be a punchline in and of itself — is like a bunch of random scenes haphazardly edited into a vague narrative about our heroes riding their ugly purple-gray bikes, complete with sidecars, to L.A. for a drag ball, because, as everyone knows, all gay men live to wear women's clothing. While our bikers are picking up clueless hitchhikers ("You're all a bunch of f-gs!"), having condiment fights ("Look! I'm a hot dog!"), buying soup (?), recoiling from a group of cackling hookers, tangling with a group of straight bikers, and dress shopping, there are scenes of a bumbling General (George T. Marshall) who spends most of his time barking at his big-haired secretary and pointing to a map. The two independent "storylines" (for lack of a better term) come together in the movie's climactic moments when our gay bikers, now in drag, are picked up by the "straight"—and evidently blind—bikers and taken to the General's mansion/headquarters for a shocking finale that would've offended me if I weren't so busy pondering questions like: Are we to assume the straight bikers were working for the General? Was the General hosting the drag ball? This ties in with the prologue how, exactly?

So, yeah, "Pink Angels" is a big, swishy mess, and I suspect director Larry G. Brown knew it given that his screen credit is several point sizes smaller than everyone else's. A Margaret McPherson is blamed for the script, though many of the scenes play like they were improvised. Not surprisingly, "Angels" marked the end of Brown's and McPherson's respective movie careers, at least according to their IMDb credits. Exploitation movie veteran John Alderman, as the leader of the gay bikers, manages to maintain his dignity for most of the movie (that is, until he dresses in drag), and Tom Basham, as the clumsiest of the gay bikers, has a few genuinely amusing moments in spite of the material. But ultimately this movie's only redeeming quality is a pre-"Grizzly Adams" Dan Haggerty as one of the straight bikers, looking his most f---able. He doesn't do much beyond ride a chopper and wrestle around with one of those hookers, but he makes a favorable impression all the same, especially if you're into muscle bears.

Fails to deliver on any level

[adrian_tripod · 1/10 · 17 December 2001]

If you've ever been curious about the idea of this film, do yourself a big favour and forget all about it. Just spend a few seconds thinking of possible scenarios for a quote, 'gay biker film', unquote, and if you came up with anything at all involving kinky sex and violence, ass-kickin' homo hells angels, or conflict of ANY kind whatsoever, you've already imagined more than this lame duck delivers in 80 painfully unfunny minutes. There are some obscure movies that really and truly deserve their obscurity, and I don't say that lightly - I love Andy Milligan's movies, OK? I've watched some tired excuses for cinema in my time but this is one to make you despair. If it was made by a gay or gay-friendly director I'd be shocked, so pathetic and wit-free is the result. And if it was made by some nitwit homophobe who thinks a guy in a dress is just the most hilarious thing ever, it's still not worth getting steamed up about - a lynching at the end of the pic might have been offensive if the film had the balls to make you feel anything, but anyway it's more likely some ultra-lame attempt to mimic the end of 'Easy Rider'. So to recap: biker fans, don't waste your time, there are no good fighting or screwing scenes, no 'stickin' it to authority figures' scenes, and no freaked out weird camera fish-eye lens 'trip' scenes.... and gay viewers, same as above plus there are no 'gay bikers kick the s*** out of rednecks/straights/squares' scenes, no laughs and no, repeat no 'sleazy bikers seduce drunken college jocks' scenes. End of public service announcement!

"Look boys, I'm a hot dog!"

[bensonmum2 · 2/10 · 1 January 2009]

I've got nothing against movies that are a bit offbeat, weird, or even bizarre – in fact, the obscure usually attracts me. And Pink Angels is certainly one offbeat, weird, and even bizarre movie. The plot (or what there is of it) involves a group of gay bikers headed to Los Angeles who run afoul of a band of Hell's Angels types and a straight-laced military type. Unfortunately, Pink Angels is also one incredibly bad movie. Just because something is different doesn't make it good. Nothing about this movie is least bit entertaining. It's supposed to be a comedy, but I didn't so much as smile – let alone laugh. Some might say it's a product of it's time, but I can't imagine anyone with a pulse in any decade finding this stinker worth watching. The over-the-top gay stereotypes aren't funny. For example, there's a whole sequence involving candelabras and champagne at a picnic with grubby bikers. Funny? Not at all. And the subplot involving the General is just plain old stupid. Weak production values, bad acting, and one pointless scene after the next only add to the misery. I've given Pink Angels an extra point for curiosity value, but that's the only reason. My recommendation – don't waste your time.

Hilarious... until the end

[nickispro · 7/10 · 5 May 2009]

So much of this movie is great comedic material. It spoofs (perhaps unintentionally) exploitation movie genres - biker films, gaysploitation, sexploitation, etc. The characters are outlandish and the casting is rather odd (for example, the over-the-hill prostitute who's considered to be more desirable than the younger, attractive ones). It makes me wonder if some of the cast was selected as personal favors or nepotism. Major plot points seems hard to believe, but may make the audience chuckle. Supporting characters generally believe that the Angels are a rough-and-tumble biker gang, even though they obviously talk and move like sissies. People can't seem to notice the obvious 5 o'clock shadows of the transvestites and mistake them for women. It's not clear if so much of this movie is intentional (an in-joke shared between the movie makers and the audience) or unintentional (just really poorly made). Either way, I laughed from the beginning to (almost) the end. The shocking ending of the movie hits you unexpectedly. If the creators of this movie had gone with a more upbeat ending, I would have given this an '8'. In fact, I would love to see this movie remade with modern comedians and a feel-good ending.

Who is this for?

[BandSAboutMovies · 4/10 · 24 July 2018]

I have no idea who this movie is for. I would imagine that gay folks would either find it camp or be offended by its horrible stereotypes. Then, I think that bikers would also be upset by the fact that it sends up their culture and points out the homoeroticism at its core. And then, I think that anyone looking for a comedy will be put off by the ending. Even worse, anyone who loves good filmmaking will wonder why they've suffered through the endless takes and torturous plot.

But it does have a great trailer. It has everything good about this movie, including some quotable lines. That's what a great grindhouse or drive-in trailer is all about: action, baby!

Director Larry G. Brown only created two other films: An Eye from an Eye, a 1973 movie where a children's television show host stalks and murders abusive parents, and 1986's Silent but Deadly, which has a poster of a dog farting.

Producer Gary Razdat even posted this on IMDB about the film: "In the genre of cinema verite', I thought that the film was a pure attempt to make a movie and see if it could get distributed...I know that for sure as I am the one that produced the movie. It started out with the best of intentions and the money came and went...the best part was that we actually got it distributed and on the film circuit...The characters were picked from the USC school of film as were a couple of the women, one of which was an actual 'hooker' that just wanted to be in the film. It was a real effort to complete the film since the director was insane and had forgotten to film an ending - which we had to re-shoot after everything was wrapped...quite a story, eh?"

Hey - is that Michael Pataki and Dan Haggarty as bikers? Yep. Sure is. They're straight bikers who the Pink Angels ply with prostitutes. Yet when they wake up, they've been made up with hair accessories and makeup by our heroes. Oh, you guys. This scene probably only exists so we can get some female nudity and moviegoers could feel a bit more manly after seeing so much man lust. It's also when one of the better scenes happens, as the future Grizzly Adams jumps on the black prostitute, who proclaims, "Black is not only beautiful, it's good."

There's also a general who is trying to capture the Pink Angels for some reason. And he gets them in the end, as the film jump cuts to an ending with our heroes, the folks we laughed, love and fought with for over 80 minutes or so lynched in the front yard. I guess after Easy Rider every biker movie had to end on a downer note. That said, this is a real downer.

My advice? Just watch the trailer. You'll be better off.

I'm a sidehacker, and I'm okay!

[JohnSeal · 6/10 · 11 January 2011]

For starters, I'm pretty sure this film wasn't originally released as Pink Angels, as the font used for the title is completely different than that used for the rest of the credits. Be that as it may, no matter what it's called, this is a most unusual film! Pink Angels begins in terrific fashion, with some impressive desert location footage, some absolutely massive segments of pipe, a great Notorious Byrd Brothers-style credit sequence song, and a restaurant scene that reminded me of Five Easy Pieces. Then we find out that the biker gang protagonists are gay and on their way to a drag ball in L.A.! Some of the bikers are stereotypical, others aren't, and the film gleefully plays with and subverts all sorts of gender role conventions. Considering the very low-budget nature of Pink Angels, Prism's VHS release looks surprisingly good, and the film is never boring. All in all, and notwithstanding several cheap and cheerful no-frills DVD reissues, it's the sort of thing that cries out for a deluxe digital make-over from an outfit such as Scorpion or Code Red.

So the point was..................

[bkoganbing · 3/10 · 24 May 2019]

Pink Angels concerns itself with the road trip of a group of bikers. Some very special bikers they be. They're gay and they're cross dressers and they're on the way to an all male ball where these guys will get to strut their stuff in the latest fashions.

There's no real plot to this film, I'm not sure what it was trying to say other than there are a lot of folks out there not accepting of the bikers.

It's a truly bizarre film.

An amusingly silly tongue-in-cheek gay biker romp

[Woodyanders · 8/10 · 23 October 2008]

This flick sure ain't your run of the mill biker exploitation item. The biker gang in this highly peculiar picture are a bunch of openly swishy and flamboyant homosexuals who encounter various forms of harassment and prejudice while embarking on a road trip to a Los Angeles drag convention. During their merry trek our endearingly campy protagonists get hassled by the cops, have a run-in with a hostile rival heterosexual biker club, eat a fancy lunch on the side of the road, engage in a food fight at a roadside hot dog stand, and try on dresses at a clothing store. Director Larry Brown and screenwriter Margaret McPherson treat this gleefully lowbrow nonsense with an appropriately lighthearted touch, maintain a zippy pace throughout, and keep things way too inane for this movie to ever seem even remotely offensive. Sure, the titular bunch are depicted as broad limp-wristed queenie stereotypes, but they're also the most affable and appealing characters in the entire feature. Moreover, the actors who portray this jolly group play their parts with delicious eye-rolling gusto: John Alderman as tough, scruffy leader Michael, Tom Basham as the effeminate David, Bruce Kimball as temperamental hulk Arnold, Henry Olek as dandyish Brit-accented aspiring poet Edward, Maurice Warfield as the mincing Ronnie, and Robert Biheller as the equally epicene Henry. Plus familiar B-movie regulars Michael Pataki and Dan Haggerty appear as belligerent straight bikers. The soundtrack of insanely groovy songs hits the funky spot. Michael Weyman's sunny cinematography likewise does the trick. The totally unexpected surprise downbeat ending packs a pretty strong and lingering punch. A real nutty one-of-a-kind vintage 70's grindhouse hoot.

No Screenwriter

[saint_brett · 1/10 · 27 September 2022]

'Pink Angels' are a mob of questionable characters who stray too far from San Francisco and venture into LA.

Don't know what the opening scene by the poolside was all about as nobody hardly talked.

Second scene don't make much sense either as no one said anything.

Third scene is the same as the screenwriter failed to show up for this project.

Cut to the credits.

What a start to a movie. No one's explaining anything. The writer's gone AWOL.

It's like a movie designed for mime clowns only.

No one's saying anything!

It's plainly obvious whoever was responsible suffered from a major case of writer's block as all they're doing is playing lame hippy music over the actor's actions to substitute for a lack of creativity.

The head biker even gesticulates with an index finger motion to take out the hitchhiker they just picked up but nobody acts on this command.

The movie's so inept they just filmed some random bystanders, who were gawking at proceedings, and included that in the movie. It's 'Manos: The Hands of Fate' stuff.

They have no lines for the actors to perform so they fall back on a childish food fight scene. This is 7th grader stuff. "Who threw chocolate on me?" Probably Jeffrey Dahmer.

It's like someone's home video all sliced up with these horrible songs thrown in to compensate for the screenwriter's inaction.

Is it a tale of how The Village People were formed and came to be?

Why do I even own this DVD?

There's no plot to report of as they lost me at the start with their silent movie theatrics.

Is it trying to be a comedy?

If anyone took credit as a writer for this movie, they need to stand trial.

There's an unfunny shopping scene that serves no purpose or direction. (I'm actually rewinding this shopping scene to see if what I saw the first time is to be believed.) In this shopping scene they actually conduct a survey, with some random real-life customer, who's asked silly voice-over questions.

A subplot, from an entirely different movie, sees a Dennis Leary lookalike acting maniacal and dressed in military attire. His assistant receptionist, Miss Ellen, looks like she stuck wire in an outlet and got zapped then had her hair vacuumed by a hoover with bonus super glue run through her hair.

There's a scene where they're all making love... with their clothes on!

An opposing motorcycle gang show up, led by Clarence Boddicker, and the Pink Angels give them makeovers which irks them into revenge.

The tortured hair receptionist keeps bobbing up and she has to be hooked up to a sparkplug and drip-fed lacquer to slick back her bangs like that. You could springboard into a pool off her plane wing hair.

This movie escaped from a closet in a mental institution.

The receptionist, with the exploded grenade hair, looks like it's stringed in the fashion of a marionette. It's worse than bed hair!

I don't know in what category you'd file this movie under?

I had to rewind the ending a second time as my eyes seem to be playing tricks on me again. Did that really just happen?

The Pink Angels wind-up on the wrong end of a noose and hang from a great big half dead tree by the neck till they're all dead.

If you have annoying people who come over to your house uninvited, then just pop this movie on and you watch those cowards run from that propellent. I bet orangutans would find this movie funny, I didn't.

Really bizarre....

[Wizard-8 · 6 March 2001]

This is one of the strangest movies I've ever seen. Not necessarily because of its subject material - a gay motorcycle gang - but for the way it was made. There's a surreal feel to it; much of the movie seems to be improvised. Certainly, there's hardly any plot at all - you not only wonder what the point is supposed to be, but what audience it was intended for. It seems to be a comedy, a satire of biker films, but then why does the movie have such a grotesque ending.

Nice soundtrack, though.

Comedy if you have to the patience and are not too uptight.

[WmCT111 · 5/10 · 26 January 2015]

5 out of 10 for the story concept itself. Over all Oscar consideration, none. Over all film considerations, this is the sort of film I would call a concept film now, where we look at something and then set about fixing it.

In Reply to Bizarre, OK, well, if what you have said is true, then the ending makes perfect sense. There were a number of moments in the film where we get to see some interesting contrasts in culture in America for the relative time period for which the film is taking place, with the contrast in cultures from Hippies to the Bikers average "square" and the general/military complex. The ending makes a lot of sense in respect to where and when the ending takes place. I think it makes an excellent shock to the viewer. Films not for everyone and compared to similar style films involving drag queens, this was certain low budget, extremely low budget. Looking back in on culture, the shock at the end fits with culture.

Quite simply the worst movie ever made

[rlippman-2 · 1/10 · 22 July 2009]

I hope when I am on my death bed I do not remember the 81 minutes I spent watching this utter disaster of a movie. I didn't laugh once. If you want to see a movie about over the top gays and laugh at societies' reaction to them, I suppose Bruno might be a better option. This film just isn't funny, or sexy, or intelligent. I could go on (apparently I have to in order to leave a comment on IMDb!) O.k., the acting is atrocious. The biker costumes are awful. The military costumes aren't. They are sorta green hunting jackets from a sporting goods store. The soldier in the film has bushy side burns (apparently he didn't think the script was worth shaving for). He calls his general when he sees the bikers...by opening a mail box (with the house number clearly visible) to grab a white phone and start talking (prop department? What prop department?) Oh, and the music is beyond amateurish and doesn't even fit the scenes. If you think a cow "mooo" sound effect is funny when a woman's breasts are shown, by all means, see this movie. Then shoot yourself and do your part to advance the human gene pool.

Unfunny biker spoof

[Leofwine_draca · 3/10 · 6 May 2018]

PINK ANGELS is something of a dumb and cheap biker movie, or rather a spoof of that particular genre. The twist is that these bikers are gay, so there's plenty of mincing and humour at their expense. I'm afraid I didn't find it very funny at all; a typical 'comedy' scene involves the bikers being involved in a bar-room brawl but instead indulging in a food fight. It's way too over the top and silly to work properly, and the rest is bogged down with overacting and heavy-handed scripting.

endearing

[christopher-underwood · 8/10 · 18 January 2012]

I liked this a lot. I've looked at other reviewers' comments on site and agree with most. I can't agree with comments like, 'worst movie ever made' but somehow can take both, 'hilarious' and 'not funny'. Certainly I didn't sit laughing, indeed can't think of anything I found particularly funny, but it was amusing and more importantly, endearing. I think that as with some of the 70s Warhol product, particularly, Women in Revolt, I am attracted and absorbed not because of any narrative or genre attraction but simply by the utterly convincing way the parts are grabbed by the scruff of the neck and enjoyed by those we are watching on screen. So, yes it is virtually plot-less and not hilarious but still most watchable. Even if I can't properly explain why, I would happily sit down and watch it again any time. Weird eh? Me and the film then, I reckon.

Don't be put off by first impressions -- it's better than it seems!

[wulf_slash2 · 2 February 2003]

I've seen quite a few low-grade biker movies in my time too, and this is better than most! There are some genuinely funny bits in it, and nothing really squirm-inducing! Yes, it lacks any apparent plot, but so does "Easy Rider", of which it is a kind of pastiche. I'll admit it doesn't feature the kind of sex, violence or psychedelia that usually enliven this sort of movie, but it does have the young and sexy Dan Haggerty riding bare-chested through it, and that's good enough for me!

Entertaining, Hidden Gem

[IcyRoses · 10/10 · 2 March 2010]

The Pink Angels is a very strange movie. I'm guessing that the filmmakers of this movie probably wanted to make some sort of satire based off of Easy Rider.

But, The Pink Angels is completely original, and very strange. The story revolves around six bikers who are on their way to Los Angles. We don't know why they are going, but we do know they are a typical biker gang. Soon, they have a food fight, and we learn that they are...gay, and they are on their way to a drag ball in LA.

The Pink Angels works as a comedy. It is funny, and the more dramatic parts (like the ending) work fine on their own, but like I said earlier, I think the producers wanted to make some parody movie of Easy Rider, because in a way, it's just like it.

But, there are a lot of good things about the movie. The acting is top, the production values are surprisingly good, and the folk music that plays sounds like Don McLean's less talented little brother, but it still fits in fine with the atmosphere for the movie. I like that Pink Angels, took a risk and did something different, showing a group of gay bikers and how the "man" is coming down on them.

...maneaters on motorbikes....

[EyeAskance · 11 March 2004]

Cockeyed(ahem)comedy about six leather-and-denim-clad bikers of the gay persuasion riding up the California coast en route to a drag queen convention. They have various misadventures along the way, namely an unfriendly encounter with a not-so-gay biker gang(among them, future "Grizzly Adams" star Dan Haggerty) who awaken the following morning wearing heavy make-up and bows in their hair...the revenge of the fairy leather boys! These juvenile hijinks come to an astringent, unexpected shocker of a conclusion...a completely "out of left field" head-slapper which must be seen to be believed.

All in all, this is a criminally stupid, poorly made Z-grade novelty of very little distinction(though the gay community may value it somewhat as a historical document of sorts)

An endurance test sorely lacking in the zippy witticisms one would expect from a renegade transvestite biker opus. 3.5/10

Gang of transvestite bikers go on a road trip.

[icelandknight · 9/10 · 5 December 2002]

I own and love this movie. I feel it's a must-have next to "Easy Rider" and "Roadside Prophets". It is an 'independent' film, and that comes through quite clearly. Personally, I'm a biker who doesn't take himself too seriously, as well as being a Monty Python fan. I find this movie to be very similar in humor as early Python. It's not to everyone's taste, but the juxtaposition of opposites as well as a cool soundtrack is what make this movie 'special'.

One has come to associate biker gangs with stereotypical cold, mean, macho attitude. So the viewer is left more or less like the cops that stop the gang en route, and are baffled when they don't conform with the typical badass biker attitude they expect to find.

For sure there are some signs of this film easily being classified as a 'video nasty' by some, for example the General, who is supposed to be something like the Nazi Party representative in the "Blues Brothers", becomes somewhat tiresome at length, but there are lots of scenes from their road trips and interaction with others to make up for that. Perhaps a thirst for MORE biker movies excuses this movie's shortcomings, but there aren't that many biker movies to choose from, let alone biker movies that are humorous without just being an obvious parody of the biker stereotype (like "Masters of Menace"). I watch this movie once every two years and afterwards I find myself singing the theme song about going out and looking for America. Sounds like I'll have to go watch it again now, I've forgotten the words to the song! Time for a reviewing!

Droll counter-culture comedy from another era

[lor_ · 25 June 2023]

This biker movie presents counter-culture point-of-view emblematic of its time, not merely in the wake of ""Easy Rider" but also countless road movies and biker epic of the '60s and early '70s. Watching it today is fascinating since the low-brow celebration of diversity is once again, unfortunately, needed as the right-wing attitudes of the '60s have descended upon America 60 years later with a vengeance.

Who could have expected nutty crusades agains Gays and Drag Queens so many years after society had opened up to alternate life styles so long ago! And the movie's gender-bending and genre-bending approach seems out of step even now, when fans seem mesmerized by slasher movies and other rigidly defined types of movies, intolerant of "let it all hang out" oddities like this one. I'm talking about a generation that adores Robert Downey Junior as a Marvel superstar, and has never seen a Robett Downey Senior movie.

I suspect the attitude and acceptance of a "let's all go to the drive-in" way of wat ching movies can not be replicated for today's hipster movie fans, just as getting anyone under a certain age interested in Silent Era films is nearly impossible now.

Gay Bikers

[ichocolat · 16 July 2009]

This film is about a group of bikers who planned to go to Los Angeles for a ball. The trip is their journey. And to tell the truth, this film is bizarre, weird, and unusual.

Not being usual can sometimes be a bad thing. Being bizarre, weird, unusual would not necessarily means that the film is good.

The film is not funny (it is supposed to be a comedy), and the ending is very unexpected, unrelated to the parts of the film.

One commenter, who claimed to be in the in the making of the film said that the ending was done that way because of the budget constraint. Not knowing whether to believe, I still think it is logical.

Anyhow, watch this film only if you do not have any other film to watch. Else, do other things like sleep or jog around the park instead.