Naked Betrayal (2002 Video) User Reviews

Amusing

[jimel98 · 5/10 · 23 August 2009]

I found the soft-core sex scenes to be a mixed bag. Some were actually a bit of a turn on, but some were actually amusing. It brought the full meaning of 'soft' to the surface. Yeah, I admit it; I slowed down the movie a couple of times to see if I really saw what I thought I saw. I got a kick out of seeing a woman bouncing up and down on a guy as if having the best sex of her life and CLEARLY seeing the guy was flaccid! As for plot, well, does anyone really watch these Skin-imax movies for plot? Really? The plots are almost always half assed and seriously, though there are a few of the soft core actors who can REALLY ACT and there's occasionally some intentionally funny stuff (that works), I don't expect much of a story and am rarely disappointed.

They ain't art films gang, nor are they intended to win an Oscar so they simply can't be judged like regular movies.

More is Less

[augustian · 1/10 · 24 November 2008]

It is sometimes said, in the art world, that less is more - reducing a work to its minimum encourages appreciation of what is there. However, the opposite can also be true and this movie surely proves the point. This movie is described as an erotic thriller but the abundance of nudity and sex scenes is to the detriment of the already lack-lustre plot.

A man returns to his home town because his younger brother is deeply in debt to a rather shady political figure. In order to rescue the situation, our hero must engage in a card game to win the money from a group of other players. This scenario could have put some flesh on the other players and led to a tense card game. Instead we learn nothing about them, who they are or how they came to be involved. Most of the plot time, of which there is little, is spent setting up the game. Quite why this politician thinks that a card game is a sure way of getting his hands on lots of money is never explained.

At various points within the movie we get to see different people in various soft core sex scenes. The sex cannot be described as erotic. There are seven scenes in all and they go on for far too long. They can best be described as hardcore without the hard. I fail to understand how anyone can find watching the back of a woman's head bobbing up and down in a man's lap for a couple of minutes any way exciting. Sometimes when watching erotic movies, the viewer will fast-forward through the plot to get to the sex scenes. I found myself fast-forwarding through the sex scenes to get to the plot!

I have given this movie only one star. If you want erotic thrillers then I suggest titles such as Secret Games, Animal Insincts and other titles from that era. If you want thrillers then there are thousands to choose from. If you want sex scenes then get hardcore.

15 minutes of film stretched to an hour

[Eagles409 · 1/10 · 10 August 2003]

This film was truly aweful. There is approximately 15 minutes of actual movie; the film constantly shows non-essential scenes or scenes that have previously been shown. All "flashbacks" are shown in black and white (this made them easier to forward through). The camera crew apparently thought they were really cool when they figured out how to run things in slow motion. This feature is used extensively to make this film longer. If you consider renting this film for its R rating, IT ISN'T WORTH IT!!!!

Worst Movie Ever?

[krazyjym · 2/10 · 8 October 2006]

I bought this movie on DVD without ever having seen it before. You could get 3 dvds for $10. I found two that I wanted and was just looking for anything to be the third movie. I found this and thought "Hey. It's gonna have boobies in it. How can I go wrong?" Well, I went wrong. Very, very wrong. The movie is 70 minutes long, but the first 10 minutes has absolutely no plot or even dialogue in it. It's just a soft-core sex scene (badly edited) and then a mind numbingly long credit sequence which shows clips from the movie you're about to watch.

I understand that this is a low-budget movie so I don't expect much. I've seen some wonderfully bad low-budget movies that were surprisingly good in spite of their low budget. This movie is so bad that I know for a fact that I could pick up a digital video camera and I could improvise a better movie.

I'd guess that there's less than a hundred lines of dialogue in this "movie" and most of those lines are replayed over and over again. I could tolerate that, but cutting to a guy shuffling cards over and over again just boggled my mind. And why strobe light effect? If MST3K was still around and they made fun of newer movies, this would be the first one they pick. Seriously, who writes this script and thinks "Yeah. This'll knock 'em dead." I give it two stars because I did laugh a lot at how painful it is to watch.