Amyway, these frames have been cut so that we don't show a nipple, but they show a lot of breastitudem and are some pretty hot stuff. Which is good. It isn't tremendous, but it's a helluva lot better than I expected, and it will just make your mouth water for what must have been left on the cutting room floor. If the film was cut to achieve a PG-13, we may see the rest on DVD, but if it is true that it was cut for the Dunsts, then it is probably lost for good. See the additional Dunst story on the bottom of the page. Sigh. (1,2,3,4,5,6,)

Is there actually a person who is a perfect predictor of a bad film? 

• I often kid about John Saxon and Bryan Brown, but each of them has been in at least a couple of tolerable movies.
• Peter Cushing? Naw, he was in Star Wars, for heaven's sake.
• Jeff Fahey? Getting close. It depends on your opinion of Silverado, which is his top rated film at IMDb.One thing you can say for sure is that if the cast includes Fahey and the date is later than 1995, it's a pretty sure bummer. All his films after 1995: 

  Title	weighted IMDb score
  Revelation	5.8
  Johnny 2.0	5.1
  Extramarital	4.8
  Darkman III	4.6
  Operation Delta Force	4.6
  Lethal Tender	4.4
  Time Served	4.2

  But Revelation is rated reasonably high, so let's keep looking.

   

• Pauly Shore? Now you're cooking, but Pauly did something called Lost Angels in 1989, which is fairly well respected. if we can throw out that movie and his cartoon voices, his top live movie is rated below 5 at IMDb. It is reasonable to say that if Pauly is in the cast as a live person, you can bet the movie will suck. The really impressive thing about Pauly is how bad they suck. He's been in three movies rated below 4.0! 
• The two Coreys? No. they were together in The Lost Boys, a respectable movie, so we can't give them any special credit for Busted, Last Resort, and Dream a Little Dream 2. I will, however, mention that Feldman directed Busted, it is the only film he directed, and it is rated 1.8 at IMDb - the 39th worst movie of all time. Feldman is therefore in contention for the title of worst director, but even there he must battle the imposing specter of Hal Warren, whose only movie was Manos, the Hands of Fate, which is currently rated the worst of all time. 

Sorry, I haven't found the sure winner yet, but what do I know? I only look after the place while the master is away. And try to keep my knees from swelling.

Another topic - I asked the other day if Eric Roberts is still the King Bee. So far, my research says "yes". He has 35 IMDb credits from 1999-2001. Thirty five credits would be a solid career, let alone two and a half years work. He churns out a dozen projects every year, like clockwork. In comparison, Michael Madsen, Dennis Hopper,  and Ice-T only do about 6-7 per year, and some of those are theatrical releases. Is there anyone who works in more grade-b projects than Roberts?

You Can Count On Me. There is really no sense in reading my review. Everybody loves this movie, and I simply don't know why. I don't think it sucks, by any means. I thought it was OK, but I have no clue why it is in the top 250 of all time, and got 92% positive reviews, including four stars from Roger Ebert. Perhaps this movie requires the same brain cells that I would need to appreciate Luis Bunuel - the ones I smoked away in college. No nudity.

A letter from WhyScans

"It's been a while since I posted anything, must stop having a life and get back to life on line.

The clip I sent to you ages ago of Jennie Garth with her boob popping up has been splashed all over the net since and everyone seems to think it's a fake!!

Anyway her is the .mpg that the clip comes from. It's nearly 2 meg in size and you have to go frame by frame to see it, but hopefully once this gets around people won't doubt her boob did pop out on 90210. Feel free to post it on the site if you want. As always, keep up the good work."

Scoop's note: frankly, I can't imagine why anyone thought it was a fake. The faker guys don't create stuff this subtle. It is difficult to determine what one is actually seeing. Decide for yourself . Encyclopedia, volumeG, part 1, has the new Jenny Garth .mpg and, right beneath it, two single frames from the clip.

Encyclopedia, volume H, part 10 is updated

Blind Spot (1993) is an above average made for cable thriller, staring Ron Silver and Rebecca De Mornay as husband and wife, and Rutger Hauer as the bad guy. Silver and De Mornay are furniture manufacturers who are in Mexico to see about moving their factory there, and to celebrate her pregnancy. On the way home, they hit a Mexican cop who staggers in front of their car. They examine him, he is very dead, so they elect to get across the border without saying anything. They think they got away clean, although they feel guilty, when Hauer shows up at their door, and begins to blackmail them -- first into a job, then more and more.

Hauer takes their receptionist out, and his brand of sex sends her running for her life and covered with bruises. A final showdown is inevitable. Along the way, De Mornay shows most of one nipple several times in a hot tub scene, and shows her breasts as she undresses to get into the hot tub, and again while in the hot tub with Hauer.

Maltin's score is "Better Than Average," and IMDB readers say 5.5/10. The images are a little grainy, but there are some nice scenics in the beginning, and the acting was decent. Although Hauer's waistline was a little large to be believable as a ladies man, he gave a great subtle performance as the bad guy. The film was entertaining, even if it didn't cover any new ground. C+.

• Thumbnails
• Rebecca DeMornay (1, 2, 3, 4) 
• Tamara Clatterbuck (1,2,3,4,5,6)

The DVD of the controversial French flick "Baise-moi" finally arrived this week and as promised I'm sending in the not very sharp vidcaps from an unsharp movie.

The movie, based on the book with the same title by co-director Virginie Despentes, deals with two women from a destitute neighborhood, Nadine (Karen Lancaume/Bach) and Manu (Raffaëla Anderson). Nadine is a prostitute and Manu... well it's never specified what she is. And that is exactly what's wrong with this film, it's never specified what exactly someone or something is or why the people in it behave like they do. 

The story goes roughly as follows. One day Nadine and Manu get raped and from that point on they go on a rampage of murder, violence and sex. Why Manu also does so is unclear because she was quite obviously not disturbed by the rape at all, only Nadine had severe problems with it. Anyway, that's how the script wanted it I guess, and so the actresses act accordingly. Some reviews said that they took revenge on men for the horrible act but that doesn't make much sense since they also kill women. They clearly have a serious grudge against the whole society. It seems to me that there isn't much of a story in this film. The girls just drive around a bit in France killing people and having sex on their way. The road movie theme is also never completely elaborated. After a meager 75 minutes, 3 of which go to the end credits, the film ends with Manu being shot by a garage owner she tried to rob and Nadine getting arrested by the cops. I found this film very poor. The script and the actions of the protagonists never make much sense, on the technical side the images seem shot with a hand held camcorder, they're grainy and especially the indoor scenes are unsharp and too dark. Quite surprisingly the acting by pornstars Karen Lancaume/Bach and Raffaëla Anderson is more than acceptable in this movie where nobody is nice.

So why did this flick get an X-rating in France where there's apparently only one cinema left that shows X-rated pictures ? The answer looks simple : the film shows people having real sex, so an X-rating seems appropriate. In Belgium we don't have an X-rating, we only have two categories : children admitted and children not admitted. This movie was obviously children not admitted and it played here for a couple of weeks without controversy except for what we heard from France, and probably attracted more spectators than in France. It looks to me that all the fuzz in France was about more than the sex and the violence in this movie. After all a similar film without nudity and sex, namely "Ma 6-T va crack-er", was also pulled out of the cinema's because officials said it was inciting people to violence. I've seen that movie and it simply depicts, a bit like "Baise-moi", the living conditions in France's slum suburbs where rape, violence and other crimes have become part of everyday life and where the police don't even go in anymore, except in massive force when things really get out of hand. It looks more like some French politicians are in denial here. And isn't it much simpler to ban a movie than to restore order in their slums ? But they better watch out : letting these things happen could be interpreted by some as committing crimes against humanity and before they know it, they'll have to stand trial in Belgium, thanks to that stupid law of ours. It's raining complaints for crimes against humanity over here now. Kurds, Armenians, Chechens, Native Americans, etc... take your chance, Belgium, model state and the new conscience of the world, will come to the rescue :-) Anyway I'm diverting but I really didn't know that a badly made bad movie could lead to this. By the way, I read somewhere that more than 200,000 copies of the book were sold in France. I really hope it's better than the movie.

Along with the collages of Karen Lancaume and Raffaëla Anderson I'm sending along nine raw caps from the film, seven from a sex club where the girls shoot everyone. Look how they execute the last survivor in the club. The last two come from the end of the movie. As usual leave out anything that you don't consider fit for the Fun House, you know I don't mind. My copy of Baise-moi (purchased online in Italy at www.dvdonline.it was 75 minutes, although the IMDb says the film is 77 min. Looks like some scenes might be missing. They also had a superb 105 min. copy of Malèna which I bought whereas the upcoming Region 1 DVD only has 92 min. I hope they didn't leave Monica Bellucci's best parts out in the US.  

• Raffaela Anderson (1,2,3)
• Karen Lancaume (1,2,3,4)
• in the sex club (1,2,3,4,5,6,7)
• the ending (1,2)

Graphic Response

• Hilary Swank
• Chloe Sevigny

Blackshine

• Barbara Schoeneberger (1,2,3,4)

From TV Guide online...

Has Kirsten Dunst revealed too much? At 18, her shapely form has clearly filled out in all the right places. But now, the actress confesses that she's had second thoughts about serving up the evidence with provocative photo spreads in mags like Details and Maxim - not to mention the daring duds she donned at the MTV Movie Awards.

"It's weird," she says, "because I'm at this place where I'm very comfortable with my own body, but I have this role model thing. I know that some kids do look up to me. Recently, I've been wondering, 'Have I been too sexy?' I think sometimes it's sexier not to show too much, and I think that's where I'm headed now.

"I'm not into showing everything in a magazine anymore," Dunst sums up. "It's like, 'What's the point?' It's not that interesting to reveal all of yourself."

While she's still willing to employ her sexuality when necessary for her art, Dunst reportedly nixed the original cut of a prolonged nude scene in crazy/beautiful. And interestingly, her portrayal of a drug-addicted, suicidal misfit puts her back on the dark side she explored in The Virgin Suicides. "I loved the role," Dunst shrugs, "because I felt I could show people that I'm more than the sweet, cute little cheerleader girl I played in Bring It On. I don't want to get stuck in that 'She only plays the cute
girl' category. That's why I didn't care how I looked. I let them chop off my hair and I said, 'Just make me look bad.'

How will Dunst look in the much anticipated Spider-Man? "I get to wear a red wig," she reveals, "and I get to do a lot of action stuff. I spent almost every day on the set in some sort of harness for a stunt scene. It was great."  -- Jeanne Wolf