 |  | Didn't quite meet the reduced standards I had for it |  |
I thought I had an idea what to expect from this film. Even putting aside the fact that Netflix has inappropriately listed this film as a Horror movie, I knew it would be cheap and schlocky and amateurish and puerile. I was okay with that. Nobody watches/rents/buys these films without the purpose of seeing beautiful women naked and frisky with each other. No other production values matter in this regard. Yet, this movie still disappoints. I didn't care that the acting fell somewhere between poor and none. I didn't mind that they seemed to be shooting this film without a script or any sort of rehearsing ahead of time... or any sort of preparation for that matter.
What makes this movie most disappointing is that it would have only taken a few minor changes to make BIG improvements. The biggest problem is the completely pointless and inveterately irritating presence of Lenny Juliano: a fat, dopey, whiney, douchebag who brings absolutely nothing worthwhile or useful to this film. He isn't at all funny, and this worthless sack of lint threatens to interfere with the only merit this film has otherwise, which is gratuitous nudity and physical interaction between the female principles. Get rid of him, and the difference is significant. The biggest source of humor in this film was the highly improbable premise that the women were in a sorority, or that they were even college-aged for that matter.
But even the amorous interaction between the "actresses" really came off more as a multi-dancer routine from a strip club (a lot of tease-touching and uninspired slow-grinding). Given that these are women who have done some fairly unambiguous/explicit work in other films does give one pause to wonder why this one was so tame and lethargic, especially since the film had nothing else going for it. Forget the dialogue and acting and plot (assuming there was any to begin with). Just concentrate on the one and only reason anyone would want to watch this film.
Unfortunately, this film just wasn't very good, even by the remarkably meager standards it was measured by. So why 2 stars instead of just one? The nudity was Great!
April 4, 2007I am a huge fan of Julie K. Smith, a main character from the original as well as the hottest woman on the planet. So why is she not in the sequel? Bare Wench 2: Book of Babes is an okay movie: it's got lots of bare breasts, great if you're into just any old rack. For us B-movie fans used to quality boobage however, it's not the quantity, it's the quality. So while julie k. smith does make an electrifying cameo during the hilarious introduction, the rest of the more numerous cast doesn't pick up the slack. Nikki Fritz is the only exception. She is a good leader for the girls as she was in the original, which brings me to another point: the girls of "Book of Babes" are not as good at improvisation as the original cast. Boo-hoo. The original was a good movie because all the girls, even Lunk, made it entertaining when they spoke with their tops on or off. Unfortunately, the second cast is not able to fill their cups.
February 14, 2003I really enjoyed Bare Wench 2, even more than the classic original. There could really be an oscar for best screenplay and script as well as a best actor for Dick Bigdickian. A definite purchase.
June 19, 2002If you have found this on Amazon, then it IS exactly what you are looking for. T & A beginning to end, lots of nudity, some relatively poor acting as would be expected. The women are beautiful, and take their clothes off (what little they are ever wearing) for what seems like almost no reason. Some lesbian action, but mostly just excellent tease nudity. Definitely what you would be looking for in this type of movie. On the SV spank-o-meter this film gets 9 out of 10.
June 18, 2002 | | Book of Babes - Bare Wench 2 | |
The movie is good for watching gorgeous ladies and seeing son skin. Has a good plot. Only problem was the guy in it was sort of a nerd but the dvd was clear and worth a look at. A definite rental at least!
April 21, 2002More reviews at Amazon.com ...
Daily Birthdays
