Kiss of Fire (1998) from Tuna
Kiss of Fire (1998), which IMDB calls Claudine's Return, stars Christina Applegate, so you know right away there will be no nudity. In addition,
everyone who has reviewed it says about 4/10. It was made for $2.0m, and I can't figure out how they spent that much money making it.
An Italian arrives on a Georgia island and becomes a handyman at the same motel that Christina has a day job handling light chores such as laundry and mail. They start a relationship. She also works nights as a stripper, but, even though we see most of her act, we still don't see any interesting parts of her. 

NUDITY REPORT
see the main text
There is a lot of cleavage and some poke through in this tepid romance. There is a topless anonymous stripper earlier in the strip club. Christina and the Italian become an item, but Christina has a few minor problems. She is bisexual, a former drug addict, a compulsive thief, and is alienated from her wealthy family.  

The film gets very muddled about the time she becomes pregnant and goes to visit her family, but is run off by the caretaker of their estate. I had watched this film a long time ago, and passed on images due to the lack of exposure, but had a request for it from a Funhouse member. Considering that Christina never shows us anything, these images are probably worth while. This film was supposed to be a steamy love affair. I never sensed any passion at all. 
 For those who hesitate to suggest projects because I often trash films, don't hesitate. I appreciate every suggestion, and many have said that they enjoy my negative reviews more than my raves. This is another example of great suggestion, good project, terrible film

The Critics Vote

  • Apollo 44/100.

The People Vote ...

  • With their votes ... IMDB summary: IMDb voters score it 4.0, Apollo users 46/100.
IMDb guideline: 7.5 usually indicates a level of excellence, about like three and a half stars from the critics. 6.0 usually indicates lukewarm watchability, about like two and a half stars from the critics. The fives are generally not worthwhile unless they are really your kind of material, about like two stars from the critics. Films under five are generally awful even if you like that kind of film, equivalent to about one and a half stars from the critics or 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. 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.

Based on this description, this film is a D.

Return to the Movie House home page