Immagini di un Convento

Images in a Convent (1994) from Tuna

Images in a Convent is a soft-core nunsploitation film from Joe D'Amato with a smattering of hard-core action. D'Amato explains that as a boy in Italy, he considered nuns erotic, hence his choice of topic.

A countess (Paola Senatore) is stuck in a convent per the last request of her dead father, who intended to keep her from the arms of her lusty uncle. She expresses her true feelings to her mother superior by wearing her habit with breasts exposed. The nunnery is a hot bed of lesbian activity, and while Senatore is having an erotic dream about her handsome uncle, Paola Maiolini exposes and fondles her. Then Maiolini is caught by Marina Frajese, who takes her to the cellar, strips and whips her, then eats her pussy.

Things heat up when an injured young man is given refuge at the convent. He bears a remarkable resemblance to an evil statue in the garden. Convinced that the devil has certainly possessed the convent, the mother superior soon sends Marina Frajese to fetch an exorcist. She is raped on the way. The exorcist finally shows up to a whole convent full of fornicating and masturbating nuns. The bit of hard-core content comes toward the end, first when there is clear oral sex in the rape scene, and later when one nun uses a wooden dildo on another.

D'Amato began his career as a photographer, and this background shows through in many scenes. Even with the drab color palette required by a convent setting, he was able to create visually interesting scenes. This is exploitation at its best: a reasonably coherent story as an excuse for good photography of nearly non-stop sex and nudity, with the added benefit of a sacrilegious attitude.

NUDITY REPORT

Paola Senatori, Paola Maiolini, and Marina Frajese do full-frontal nudity, as do various unidentified actresses in the convent.

The Critics Vote ...

No major reviews online.

The People Vote ...

IMDB summary. IMDb voters score it 5.6/10

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, it's a C+. It is at the summit of Eurotrash sexploitation films.