User reviews

Well,well,well. More late Seventies softcore. As one might expect, some very amateurish acting, directing, and an odd plot. At least it has a plot. Very sad and depressing, about a girl who suffers rape and (if that's not enough) even more personal tragedy, who later becomes a reluctant streetwalker to survive. Most of the male actors are terrible. The title role, played by Lynn Theel, (give her credit) was less bad than most. And in a small role, kudos to Donna Wilkes, who was lovely and believable. Basically everything in this was bad. It probably got made to put some nude scenes out there, including a couple of A-cup girls (not that there's anything wrong with that!)(Really!) The filmmakers probably did so to imply that the girls were underage, whether they, or the actresses who played them, were or not. Just highlights the sleaziness of the situation. I'd have to say give this one a pass.

This is the bizarre tale of a small-town virgin (Linda Theel)who gets gang-raped while on a date AND loses her entire family in a tragic car accident soon after. "Eight years later" according to the titles (why it has to be eight years later, I don't know), she's become a prostitute in big, bad LA, where she's menaced by both brutal pimps and greedy madams, and gets hooked up with a hot-headed, violence-prone boyfriend (Tom Baker).

I like to dig up obscure movies from the 70's. Sometimes I find a lost gem, but a lot of times I find a fossilized turd (although even these at least don't smell as bad as some of the freshly-laid turds you might find watching newly released movies). This is definitely a fossilized turd, but it's kind of fascinating nevertheless. I always wonder how films like this, so far out of the accepted cinematic universe, manage to ever get made at all.

This one certainly has an interesting cast. Popular 70,s character actor Alan Garfield plays an amoral street criminal called "the Preacher" because he often cons people with a false preacher routine. Tom Baker (not to be confused with the more famous British thesp.) was a one-time Warhol actor and drinking buddy of Jim Morrison (Michael Madsen's character in "The Doors" was loosely based on him). Perhaps the strangest appearance though is by Donna Wilkes in a long topless dancing and coke-fueled lesbian scene/cameo. Not only had she just appeared in the innocuous TV sitcom "Hello, Larry", but in 1978 she had a pretty important part in the mega-blockbuster "Jaws 2" (as the tempting cutie who almost gets Chief Brody's son eaten by a shark after she persuades him to go sailing). If this movie was really made AFTER "Jaws 2" as the IMDb info. says, she must have had the worst agent in the world. (And, of course, she would also go on to play a memorable hooker herself a few years later in the New World semi-cult classic "Angel").

I can't in good conscious recommend this, but if you're fascinated by fossilized turds from the 70's . . .

I came across this one and really wished it was never made. The story was awful, the acting was awful, the clothes were awful, but it did get to promote a few seconds of hot "disco music and disco dancing." I don't want the 70's remembered for this mess.

I am under the impression that being these actors were teens as I was in the 70's that's how it "was" for us. Not really. This is about a young teen girl who gets raped by two other guys, while she's out with her boyfriend. Then, to put more on her frail shoulders, her family dies while laughing in the car and not paying attention to the road. Then, we jump to 8 years later where she's in Los Angeles as a hooker! Okay, very interesting. I've seen better 70's films address this. I got the impression the lead actress was hired because she fit the "average white girl" image of that time. In looking at her, I got traces of every actress who was ever on an "ABC movie of the Week" or "Police Woman" -- same look, same shape, same face. You'd never know there was any other kinda actress back then. Then the guy who raped her looked like a cheaper version of Dennis Weaver in "McCloud", the other guys were cookie cutter versions of Greg Evigan, Burt Reynolds or "fat-pig-slob-guy."

I had a problem with a few women playing prostitutes, I was wondering if they were over 18 because back then in the 70's, ya never know and that made me real uncomfortable about this film as well. Even for the 70's this film was bad. It had no rhyme or reason, the only thing is looking at the guy who played "The Pick Pocket" and thanking your stars that he met up with Martin Scorsese instead of Chuck Trainor.

God awful film any way you look at it.

I can imagine the few drive-in and grindhouse patrons who saw this when it first came out were both baffled and bored. It's deadly serious for the most part, with not that much material that could be called exploitive. Not only that, it's extremely slow-moving; it could probably be edited down to a half hour without losing anything important to the plot... the little there is. There is a strong feeling of improvisation to the entire thing, which seems to explain (among other things) why the ending really doesn't feel like a proper ending.

It's strange that MGM decided to pick up the distribution rights to it not long ago (for cable), though since they need all the money they can get these days, maybe it's understandable. The only thing that may be of interest is that the movie shows a few sides of Los Angeles that we don't usually see in movies of this period.

Non-widely released film famous for playing on cable in the early days of Showtime has Lynn Theel as a small town girl who gets raped, her parents died of a car crash, so she moves to Los Angeles and becomes a hooker in this film that runs more like a Festival type film that the sex film it advertised it to be. Several disjointed plot, and too many people knowing each other doesn't help the credibility of some the plot. But good performance by Theel, top character actor Garfield, and the late Tom Baker helps the film. Suprised scene is TV's HELLO LARRY's Donna Wilkes in a long nude dance scene, which is really not needed in the plot, but there is very little nudity in the film so it might be the reason why it was in this film.