Passion Crimes (2001) from Tuna and Johnny Web (Uncle Scoopy; Greg Wroblewski)
Two thumbs way down

Tuna's comments in yellow:

Passion Crimes (video 2001) is, according to IMDB, a 74 minute crime/thriller. The title and running time alone should be enough to tell most people that it is an erotic thriller, not to mention cast members like:

  • Susan Featherly
    • Andromina: The Pleasure Planet
    • Carnal Desire
    • Virtual Voyeur
  • Lauren Montgomery
    • Blowjob Adventures of Dr. Fellatio 10
    • Deep Throat the Quest 5: Slick Willy Rides Again
    • The Ultimate Glamour Blowjob
  • Venus
    • Nasty Girls 23
    • Black Cravings 7
    • Deviant Obsession
  • April Flowers
    • Oral Adventures of Craven Morehead 13
    • Fast Times at Deep Crack High
    • Cumback Pussy 28: Baby's On Fire
    • Little White Chicks and Big Black Monster Dicks 6
    • Young Dumb & Full of Cum 4
    • Blowjob Adventures of Dr. Fellatio 20

Where to start ... with the plot I guess, since there is so little of it. Featherly breaks up with her boss/boyfriend, because he won't commit to her. Flowers disappears, and foul play is suspected, when the lawmen find a bloody knife which is registered to her husband.

  • TIME OUT. We register vehicles, voters, guns, trademarks and sexual deviants in California, not knives.

At any rate, the police arrest the husband

  • TIME OUT. Arrest him for what? No crime has yet been committed.

Featherly, a business law expert, is assigned to defend him. Meanwhile, she catches her boss/boyfriend in bed with her best friend, Lauren Montgomery. Naturally, she rushes into a sexual relationship with the husband, even though he is married, he is her client and she catches him screwing the maid, Venus.

So Featherly does a three way with the husband and Venus. The maid, after the three way, confides that she heard the husband talking on the phone about killing his wife. She claimed she kept quiet because she was afraid, and didn't want to screw up her chances of becoming a citizen. Of course, she is lily white, with no accent, and has had an ongoing sexual relationship with the husband. When Featherly suggests that she stay with friends, she says she has plenty of family she can stay with.

After the threeway, Featherly suspects that the husband is guilty after all. Guilty of what? Nobody says. Then we find out that Flowers was kidnapped.

"So, whodunit?"

The evil sister, of course.

"Huh? What evil sister?"

The one we haven't heard a word about through the entire film, of course. So, the husband is jailed for conspiracy because it seems he screwed the evil sister years before, and had the original kidnap idea. See, we knew he was a perpetrator in search of a crime, the evil sister is put into a mental hospital, and Featherly, her boss/boyfriend, and Montgomery have a threesome.

You might well ask, with so thin a plot, how did they fill up 74 minutes? By expanding the sex scenes, of course. So this is good news, right? No, they expanded the sex scenes by running them all in slow motion. Let me repeat that, so it sinks in. All of the sex scenes, which comprise the bulk of the running time, are in slow motion, with a bad music sound track, and no dialogue. The last bit, the part about no dialogue, is a blessing, considering the level of the dialogue. Probably the best flub is when Featherly refers to the wife, Raquel, as Rachel. I also like the part where the father of the kidnapped girl has admitted to wiring ransom money to the Bahamas. The cop then asks, "When is the next drop?" All of the dialogue seemed like it was improvised.

The film is also a technical disaster. The film is entirely full of video noise, and there is no focus puller listed in the credits, which might explain all of the focus problems.

NUDITY REPORT

The following women got naked (mostly breasts and brief frontals):

  • Jen Dike, aka Susan Featherly (several times, plus one clear frontal, and one clear butt shot)
  • Venus (twice) - breasts and buns
  • Lauren Montgomery, breasts and buns
  • Diana Espen, aka April Flowers, breasts and buns

DVD info from Amazon

  • no widescreen

  • no features

Scoop's comments in white:

Listless softcore entry:

  • the sex scenes are all played back with a cheesy faux-jazz score, ala 1950's exploitation films
  • there is almost no frontal nudity
  • the photography is half-hearted about proper lighting and focus
  • the plot is virtually non-existent

The Critics Vote

 

The People Vote ...

  • IMDB summary. IMDb voters score it 3.0/10, with four of the 21 voters giving it a perfect 10, and six awarding 1, the lowest possible score.
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, Scoop says, "this film is a D. Not enough plot or acting to be a real movie. Not enough flesh to be a softcore." Tuna says, "This is one of the easiest scores of the 1,967 films I have reviewed. F."

Return to the Movie House home page