THE WITCHES OF BREASTWICK

One day, Hollywood will realise that producing films, that blatantly rip-off superior works' titles, will no longer be seen as a "homage", but as a total bastardisation of everything that makes cinema good! Ever since someone thought that simply adding two capital letter "I's" after a film, to denote a sequel, does not make a film better or more viewer-friendly. More often than not, it's a warning: a warning to all audiences, that boldly says "Let's con you, into thinking we've made a really great film, based on the original you loved so much, but instead, is our way of screwing you all over, just to make a quick buck!"

It's the same kind of thing, in the world of Porn. Instead of coming-up with original titles for films, they just make stupid, childish, smutty remakes of sensible films. Thus you get "Shaving Ryan's Privates", "Tit-tanic", "The Porno Witch Project", and this shitty little disc, "The Witches Of Breastwick"!

Now, I am fully aware that Porn is an acquired taste. I also know, that with the porn markets being so flooded with titles, that movie-makers have to try to make their film standout from all the others, but is shamelessly ripping-off proper titles, really the way to go about it? More to the point, is that the thing to do, when the film you are ripping off, has nothing at all to do with the original?

And so we come to "The Witches Of Breastwick": a film so unrelated to "The Witches Of Eastwick", that the director may as well have called it something else just as irrelevant.

It's the same old story: a man suffers from erotic nightmares that cause him concern, so he heads to a quiet retreat somewhere to try and exorcise whatever it is that is troubling him, only to meet-up with real-life versions of his nightmares, who proceed to do exactly what he's been having nightmares of. Well, whoop-de-fucking-do! That's never been done before, has it?!

In essence, what we have here is yet another lame-assed horror-tinged, soft porn movie, with plenty of softcore material in it, but one that has buggery to do with the horror genre. What makes this movie so laughable, in my eyes, is that the proper George Miller-directed original, "The Witches Of Eastwick", from 1987, was actually far sexier and more erotic, than this porno rip-off is, and was also a bloody good film to boot!

In the original, we had Susan Sarandon, Cher and Michelle Pfeiffer all looking stunningly sexy and sultry as the three witches. Jack Nicholson starred as the devil himself, and was superb! Here, though, it's just a nobody male porn star, with three silicone-filled blondes, who aren't that attractive, and who can't act, or read lines from a script, nor can they act sexy, hamming it up trying to be shockingly sultry. I'm sorry, but this is about as erotic as Ken Dodd trying to poledance!

Maybe it's me?! Maybe I'm just the wrong person to be reviewing porn films? I know every guy has their own niche, that they find sexy and erotic. For some, it's girl-on-girl action. For others, it's certain fetish material. And then there are those, who prefer something even stranger and more daring! That's fine! I understand that. But if a porn film made in 2005 leaves the viewer stone cold, and he (or she) gets more aroused reading the lingerie section of the Freeman's catalogue, then - to me - that says this movie's in deep do-do, right from the start!

Porn needs to be arousing! If the sight of naked flesh in a movie doesn't get you to pay attention for even a second, then there's a serious problem with that film, and the writer and/or director. But then, should I expect anything less from some talentless wannabe who goes by the nom-de-plume "H.R. Blueberry"?!

The film is dire and vacuous - probably like most of its cast, I should imagine! The picture and sound are adequate, and whilst the audio commentary from the director and one of the lead actresses is an unusual addition for a porn movie, when even they get bored by their own work, it spells a complete and unmitigated disaster! (Just one question though: who the hell is going to want to listen to an audio commentary on a porno?)

Putting the film aside, the extras aren't much better. I've already mentioned the audio commentary, which doesn't amplify much at all, other than where the film was made, one or two behind-the-scenes affairs, and a bit of chit-chat. The bonus feature is a short, VHS-duped movie which depicts a rather unglamorous women, with very suspiciously large, and plastic filled breasts, pleasuring herself with a washing machine. It's grainy as hell, badly photographed, with lift-muzak for a soundtrack. And for the entire 15 minutes, that's all you get! It's just her in a laundry-room basement, on fast-spin! To top things off, there are about 30 trailers, of varying qualities, and a Retro-Seduction Cinema featurette showcasing an old black-and-white porno clip, but that's no better or more interesting than anything else on this DVD.

All-in-all Seduction Cinema has produced another porn title, that might sell well to those who don't know or don't care about the content, but for serious viewers of adult entertainment, this is going to disappoint in huge volumes. Even "Babecast" is more entrancing than this! Best avoided, unless you are in dire need of some wrist-action!

Review by "Pooch".