Galactic Gigolo

Let's pull no punches. Galactic Gigolo (1988) is one of the worst films I have ever seen.

It opens with a game show on a far away world populated by intelligent vegetables. The carrot is the Groucho-like host, and a broccoli (in one of the worst costumes imaginable) is the winning contestant.

So tell him what he won, Don Pardo.

Thank you, carrot, right carrot. He's won a two week stay in the horny woman capital of the universe, Providence Connecticut.

The broccoli is on Earth disguised as a sleazy porn director or something, and his goal is to sleep with every woman in town the during the two weeks. He attracts some unwanted attention in his silver jump-suit, so he holds a press conference. From that point on, he is accompanied by a nerd photographer and a female reporter who wants to write a book about his vacation. They are being chased by a family of Jewish redneck shit-shovelers, and a stupid Mafia gang who want him to use his shape-shifting ability to rob banks. Much of the film's running time consists of is endless chases through the woods.

We do see the breasts of three 80s scream queens. Ruth Collins plays Dr. Ruth Pepper (get it? Dr. Pepper. How hilarious). Karen Nielsen and Lisa Patruno enjoy a post-coital hot tub and interview.

DVD info from Amazon

IMDb readers have this at 2.8 of 10, and I can't imagine why it is not much lower.

The Critics Vote ...

Bad Movies did one of their excellent and comprehensive write-ups

The People Vote ...

IMDB summary. IMDb voters score it 2.8/10

The meaning of the IMDb score: 7.5 usually indicates a level of excellence equivalent to about three and a half stars from the critics. 6.0 usually indicates lukewarm watchability, comparable to approximately two and a half stars from the critics. The fives are generally not worthwhile unless they are really your kind of material, equivalent to about a two star rating from the critics, or a C- from our system. Films rated below five are generally awful even if you like that kind of film - this score is roughly equivalent to one and a half stars from the critics or a D on our scale. (Possibly even less, depending on just how far below five the rating is.

My own guideline: A means the movie is so good it will appeal to you even if you hate the genre. B means the movie is not good enough to win you over if you hate the genre, but is good enough to do so if you have an open mind about this type of film. C means it will only appeal to genre addicts, and has no crossover appeal. (C+ means it has no crossover appeal, but will be considered excellent by genre fans, while C- indicates that it we found it to be a poor movie although genre addicts find it watchable). D means you'll hate it even if you like the genre. E means that you'll hate it even if you love the genre. F means that the film is not only unappealing across-the-board, but technically inept as well. Any film rated C- or better is recommended for fans of that type of film. Any film rated B- or better is recommended for just about anyone. We don't score films below C- that often, because we like movies and we think that most of them have at least a solid niche audience. Now that you know that, you should have serious reservations about any movie below C-.

Based on this description, this is an F. An atrocity.