IS this just another 90 minute lesbian flick? A spoof it is (Gladiator) but another b-movie / porn it is not. Two wonderful use of physical, slap stick, and goff ball comedy keeps the audience interested in the "sex less" scenes. A decent story with decent (porn like) acting, the two female leads, Caine and Mundae are the real reasons why we keep watching. Better than all the rest, Gladiator Eroticus is a "Campy" Keeper.
5 Reviews
from Fringe Video Fanzine Issue #002
fringevideo3 June 2001
Erotic spoof of the Ridley Scott blockbuster from EI / Seduction Cinema. Darian Caine stars as a lesbian warrior who is taken prisoner, enslaved and later becomes the most feared and least clothed female gladiator performing in the Roman games. The video contains slapstick comedy similar to Howard Ziehm's late night cult movie Flesh Gordon (1974), Bob Clark's Porky's (1982) or Fred Olen Ray's Bad Girls From Mars (1990). It looks like the crew had a lot of fun during filming, unfortunately the humor too often gets in the way of the erotic action. Still there is lots of nipple licking and lesbian sex to keep you entertained. The all girl action makes it impossible to watch with the wife, and the high-school locker room comedy scenes keep it far from being a f**k-film, but the hot, horny and naked women complete the visit. A strange movie that mixes off beat comedy, and erotic lesbian desires.
Silly, but fun.
Caligula-1112 June 2001
Actually a very good spoof of Gladiator. Lots of tried-and-true fake Roman names, plastic swords and armor, and cheesey jokes. If you are looking for Soft-Core lesbian sex, or just a T&A movie, you could do far worse than Gladiator Eroticus. Good looking girls, funny story, and has fun with a great film. A good bit of dialogue is dubbed, and poorly at that, giving it a Italian Hercules movie feel. I think Orgasmus (Jade Duboir) is dubbed with a man's voice.
Sublime Silliness
gotis-6508025 April 2018
Set in ancient Rome, this parody features lots of soft-core lesbian sex, an absurd plot, inept dialog, hysterically bad acting, and lots of soft-core lesbian sex. Or did I say that already? Its cheerful amateurishness cannot fail to charm. As just one example, when Eroticus interrupts a picnic to have soft-core lesbian sex with a Germanic princess (or whatever she is, it's not clear), next to them on the blanket we spy a plate of bagels. Even if you buy it just for the soft-core lesbian sex, don't fast-forward through the non-sex scenes, because they're delightfully goofy. Darian Caine, as Eroticus, is a true pro, by which I mean that she was able to shoot this film without collapsing in laughter. If you're a connoisseur of intentionally bad films and a fan of soft-core lesbian sex, this is the movie for you.
The other reviewers are far too kind
powerplay16 October 2004
Why do we watch skin-flick movies ? I would have thought that the obvious answer was to see women having sex, but the other IMDb reviewers for this movie seem more interested in the plot, the parody and the puns.
This is an AWFUL pile of manure. For a start, if you bought this hoping to see Misty Mundae in action, then consider yourself royally rogered and ripped off. She only makes brief (but charming) appearances until the very end of the film. Finally, finally she joins in the fun when the movie has well and truly run out of steam.
She's the only performer with the slightest clue how to act properly, and her lack of screen time is an indictment on the producers.
Going back to my original question of why we watch this type of thing, in addition to what we WANT to see, I can firmly state what we DON'T want to see. Here's a list I prepared earlier !
1. Close-ups of an ugly old man with bad teeth giving long monologues
2. Dozens of ugly men (presumably they are meant to be ugly) given lots of screen time.
3. And the worst of all - sudden, gratuitous and graphic vomiting sessions.
Additionally, the audio on this movie is terrible. My brand new VHS tape had bad audio like it was 20 years old and played a thousand times. This movie may have some originality and a couple of clever moments, but there's no way underpowered audio could be deliberate, and that's a sure sign it was done by amateurs.
The editing is strange, but I'm not enough of an expert to work out whether it was deliberately uneven and quirky or whether they just gave the job to the lowest bidder.
Being a tame soft-core movie, there are no naked men, and there are no special close ups of the "gladiators" that one might normally expect in an "adult" movie.
So who might this appeal to ? Horny 12 year old boys would be my best guess - they might appreciate the juvenile humour and overlook the amateur production values. They would also be more forgiving of the fake breasts and flabby thighs on some of the actresses. The only other possibility would be Misty Mundae fans who simply must own everything she appears in. She DOES look gorgeous in the Roman clothing.
Normal people looking for sexy entertainment, however, should avoid this like the black death.
This is an AWFUL pile of manure. For a start, if you bought this hoping to see Misty Mundae in action, then consider yourself royally rogered and ripped off. She only makes brief (but charming) appearances until the very end of the film. Finally, finally she joins in the fun when the movie has well and truly run out of steam.
She's the only performer with the slightest clue how to act properly, and her lack of screen time is an indictment on the producers.
Going back to my original question of why we watch this type of thing, in addition to what we WANT to see, I can firmly state what we DON'T want to see. Here's a list I prepared earlier !
1. Close-ups of an ugly old man with bad teeth giving long monologues
2. Dozens of ugly men (presumably they are meant to be ugly) given lots of screen time.
3. And the worst of all - sudden, gratuitous and graphic vomiting sessions.
Additionally, the audio on this movie is terrible. My brand new VHS tape had bad audio like it was 20 years old and played a thousand times. This movie may have some originality and a couple of clever moments, but there's no way underpowered audio could be deliberate, and that's a sure sign it was done by amateurs.
The editing is strange, but I'm not enough of an expert to work out whether it was deliberately uneven and quirky or whether they just gave the job to the lowest bidder.
Being a tame soft-core movie, there are no naked men, and there are no special close ups of the "gladiators" that one might normally expect in an "adult" movie.
So who might this appeal to ? Horny 12 year old boys would be my best guess - they might appreciate the juvenile humour and overlook the amateur production values. They would also be more forgiving of the fake breasts and flabby thighs on some of the actresses. The only other possibility would be Misty Mundae fans who simply must own everything she appears in. She DOES look gorgeous in the Roman clothing.
Normal people looking for sexy entertainment, however, should avoid this like the black death.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
