Schlock Shelf – Hot Skin 3D
I would try to explain to you how 3D pornography blurs the line between awesome and horrific, as well as disgusting and hilarious, but I can’t. Suffice it to say, it isn’t arousing. It wasn’t arousing in the ’70s, and watching a movie from the ’70s in the 2010s STILL isn’t arousing. However, watching adult films with 100 other people in a large mainstream theater IS pretty awesome. (This isn’t the first 3D “blue movie” I’ve watched with a large crowd of people, sadly.)
I know Hot Skin is an adult film, but there truly IS a plot. Chick (yes, that’s his name) is a nightclub owner who can’t…uh…perform with a girl he likes. He can do everything else, but can’t seal the deal. He gets professional help from a few people. Chick’s ex-girlfriend still comes around the office with her creepy and sleazy boyfriend Harry. Anytime someone leaves the room, he whips it out. Harry is a wanted man, and the cops are trying to bring him down. Harry ends up…how can I put this delicately?…Harry ends up sodomizing a woman while simultaneously drowning her in a bowl of chicken soup. I didn’t say the plot makes sense, I just said there is one.
The humor in the film is pretty weak, but you’ll occasionally groan (seriously, from the jokes, not from anything else) (aside from the GIANT patches of unkempt fur you don’t usually see, since 1985). They keep repeating this annoying joke involving Harry’s name until it grates on your ears.
The legendary John Holmes is highlighted on the advertisements for this movie; however, he’s on the screen for like 30 seconds and only grunts. If he’s your selling point, you shouldn’t be buying. Also, Uschi Digard has a pretty major part in this film—you’ll know her from the Ilsa movies, a couple of Russ Meyer films, and a whole lot of adult films all through the ’70s and early ’80s. The best part about this film is watching it with a hundred drunken 18-50 year olds. People were laughing and cheering and mimicking the cat sounds coming from one of the ladies and mocking and commenting on the unkempt landscaping. This movie is great for that.+
You really have to TRY to like the 3D aspect of this. Basically, the 3D glasses given to you are just a hassle and actually detract from the film more than help it. Let’s just say they hadn’t quite mastered 3D in the 1970s. Not even close, in fact. However, they did have high aspirations for their placement of 3D-appropriate scenes. There’s a lot of bodily fluids headed at the camera lens. More so than in the other 3D adult film from the ’70s, Lollipop Girls in Hard Candy. Hard Candy had much better 3D scenes, but the plot was like Bruce Campbell had written it immediately after getting kicked in the head by a camel.
Go see this movie if they show it in a theater, but don’t run out and try to score a copy for your own “private” use. It isn’t worth it. However, telling your friends all about it, who DIDN’T go see it, will torture them for years!!!
(3 out of 5 fus)