Apart from "10", the career of actress Bo Derek is essentially one terrible film after another...most of which seem to include her taking off her clothes. Among her infamous appearances, along with their current IMDB scores, are "Tarzan the Ape Man" (3.4), "Bolero" (3.0), "Ghosts Can't Do It" (2.2), "The Master of Disguise" (3.4), "Boom" (2.3), "Sunstorm" (3.5) and "Orca" (5.8). While possibly not the worst actress of all time, she certainly is in the running. Now the odd thing about all this is that in several films, very well respected actors appeared in these films...such as Anthony Quinn in "Ghosts Can't Do It", George Kennedy in "Bolero" and "Woman of Desire" with Robert Mitchum.
The story begins with a twist. There's a nude person lying on the beach (no surprise) but it's NOT Bo ( a BIG surprise). It happens to be the captain of a yacht who claims he was washed overboard. However, he's shocked to hear that the woman aboard the boat, Christina (Derek), claims he raped her and murdered her husband. The film is about the investigation and court hearing to determine exactly what really happened.
As I mention in the summary, Robert Mitchum is one of the stars in this film. Now considering how well respected an actor he was AND how bad Derek's reputation was, you wonder why he wanted to make the film in the first place. I can only assume it was all about the money. Thank goodness for small favors that at least he keeps his clothes on during the film considering he was 76 in 1994.
So, despite a lot of very gratuitous nudity, is this film watchable? Note that I am not saying is it good but is it watchable. Well, not really. While this film is supposed to be about rape and murder, throughout the course of the film you keep seeing flashback after flashback with Bo getting naked! It really cheapens the notion of rape...almost making it seem sexy...which is just disgusting. And, the acting and writing in between is not especially good. Frankly, why not just make a porno film and skip all the stupid dialog and plot? So what this means is that if you want a good story, look elsewhere. And, if you want good porn, you can probably find a lot better and a bit more explicit on the internet.
By the way, despite this being a bad film, Mitchum, despite badly choosing to be in the movie, is pretty good.
The story begins with a twist. There's a nude person lying on the beach (no surprise) but it's NOT Bo ( a BIG surprise). It happens to be the captain of a yacht who claims he was washed overboard. However, he's shocked to hear that the woman aboard the boat, Christina (Derek), claims he raped her and murdered her husband. The film is about the investigation and court hearing to determine exactly what really happened.
As I mention in the summary, Robert Mitchum is one of the stars in this film. Now considering how well respected an actor he was AND how bad Derek's reputation was, you wonder why he wanted to make the film in the first place. I can only assume it was all about the money. Thank goodness for small favors that at least he keeps his clothes on during the film considering he was 76 in 1994.
So, despite a lot of very gratuitous nudity, is this film watchable? Note that I am not saying is it good but is it watchable. Well, not really. While this film is supposed to be about rape and murder, throughout the course of the film you keep seeing flashback after flashback with Bo getting naked! It really cheapens the notion of rape...almost making it seem sexy...which is just disgusting. And, the acting and writing in between is not especially good. Frankly, why not just make a porno film and skip all the stupid dialog and plot? So what this means is that if you want a good story, look elsewhere. And, if you want good porn, you can probably find a lot better and a bit more explicit on the internet.
By the way, despite this being a bad film, Mitchum, despite badly choosing to be in the movie, is pretty good.