Criterion's erotic thriller collection enticed me to see Drew Barrymore have an affair with Tom Skerritt. Barrymore was 17 at the time of release, Skerritt 59. That's a 42 year difference.
To put this into perspective Skerritt was 46 in 1979 when Alien released, in 1979 Barrymore was 4.
I watched it. My fault. I chose to watch it. Thought it was crap. Criterion made me rethink my expectation. It's not necessarily crap. It's just not good. Always want to pay for a speech therapist for Drew after watching her movies. Too bad for Melissa Gilbert. I'm guessing 1990s Roseanne, during her Coke years, thought this would catapult Gilbert's movie career.
It's Lolita if Lolita was best friends with the daughter of Tucker Carlson, and Lolita turned into a murderer to usurp the role of her best friend's mother all in an effort to create a loving family.
All the same, it's kind of cool to see Drew back in her drug addled days.
It has qualities of an independent 1990s new noir additionally attempting an initial Heathers vibe, yet negating the dark humor Michael Lehman and Daniel Waters succeeded with, their mocking of the politics of high school popularity, with an allegedly true story scripted by Melissa Goddard and Katt Shea.
Makes me wonder why 20-30 year olds weren't cast like normal high school movies over Barrymore (17) and Melissa Gilbert (17).
Is it watchable? Like a pre-viagra Lifetime movie with heavy ick factor. I wish I can say it was so bad it's good, but little girls playing erotic toys in an erotic thriller; yikes.
Granted Drew and I are the same age, so if I saw this in 1992 I may have fuzzed out the tracking on a few scenes, alas, no displays of nudity, and the one sex scene wisely swapped in Cheryl Ladd and careful edits kept a clothed Drew from a naked Tom. So if you want to see Tom Skerritt naked, have at it if you're a Mr. Skin aficionado.
To put this into perspective Skerritt was 46 in 1979 when Alien released, in 1979 Barrymore was 4.
I watched it. My fault. I chose to watch it. Thought it was crap. Criterion made me rethink my expectation. It's not necessarily crap. It's just not good. Always want to pay for a speech therapist for Drew after watching her movies. Too bad for Melissa Gilbert. I'm guessing 1990s Roseanne, during her Coke years, thought this would catapult Gilbert's movie career.
It's Lolita if Lolita was best friends with the daughter of Tucker Carlson, and Lolita turned into a murderer to usurp the role of her best friend's mother all in an effort to create a loving family.
All the same, it's kind of cool to see Drew back in her drug addled days.
It has qualities of an independent 1990s new noir additionally attempting an initial Heathers vibe, yet negating the dark humor Michael Lehman and Daniel Waters succeeded with, their mocking of the politics of high school popularity, with an allegedly true story scripted by Melissa Goddard and Katt Shea.
Makes me wonder why 20-30 year olds weren't cast like normal high school movies over Barrymore (17) and Melissa Gilbert (17).
Is it watchable? Like a pre-viagra Lifetime movie with heavy ick factor. I wish I can say it was so bad it's good, but little girls playing erotic toys in an erotic thriller; yikes.
Granted Drew and I are the same age, so if I saw this in 1992 I may have fuzzed out the tracking on a few scenes, alas, no displays of nudity, and the one sex scene wisely swapped in Cheryl Ladd and careful edits kept a clothed Drew from a naked Tom. So if you want to see Tom Skerritt naked, have at it if you're a Mr. Skin aficionado.