3 reviews
- Woodyanders
- Nov 16, 2014
- Permalink
Peeping Tom (1973)
** (out of 4)
Here's another sleazy, Las Vegas based porno from cult director Ray Dennis Steckler. The "story" is pretty simple as a creepy man walks around the streets and spying on people having sex. We then see the various sex scenes including one couple who do nothing but fight, a foursome and a strange guy trying to have sex with a woman hoping the mother doesn't walk in.
PEEPING TOM is yet another bizarre movie from the cult director. Most people are probably familiar with his horror titles, which are all fairly bad but the director has managed to build up a cult following over the years. His porn titles are really, really strange and it's easy to see why he never really took credit for making them. They are all rather sleazy and weird to say the least and that certainly continues here.
It doesn't seem like Steckler was interested in making his porn film sexy but instead he just wanted to create weird scenes with typical looking people. Take the first story here for instance. The "performances" are actually fairly good as we get a couple who are fighting and then start to have sex but argue throughout the sexual act. The two throw insults back and forth at one another and I must say it was rather funny. The rest of the acts are pretty straight sex scenes that most "porn" fans probably won't enjoy. Steckler's movies are certainly for his fans only.
** (out of 4)
Here's another sleazy, Las Vegas based porno from cult director Ray Dennis Steckler. The "story" is pretty simple as a creepy man walks around the streets and spying on people having sex. We then see the various sex scenes including one couple who do nothing but fight, a foursome and a strange guy trying to have sex with a woman hoping the mother doesn't walk in.
PEEPING TOM is yet another bizarre movie from the cult director. Most people are probably familiar with his horror titles, which are all fairly bad but the director has managed to build up a cult following over the years. His porn titles are really, really strange and it's easy to see why he never really took credit for making them. They are all rather sleazy and weird to say the least and that certainly continues here.
It doesn't seem like Steckler was interested in making his porn film sexy but instead he just wanted to create weird scenes with typical looking people. Take the first story here for instance. The "performances" are actually fairly good as we get a couple who are fighting and then start to have sex but argue throughout the sexual act. The two throw insults back and forth at one another and I must say it was rather funny. The rest of the acts are pretty straight sex scenes that most "porn" fans probably won't enjoy. Steckler's movies are certainly for his fans only.
- Michael_Elliott
- Mar 26, 2016
- Permalink
Slotted as the lower half of the peeping tom double bill on Something Weird's Volume 24 of its Dragon Art Theatre series, THE CREEPER is merely generic porn footage posing as a motion picture.
Set in Las Vegas, it is several rungs below the grind-it-out work of favorite son Ray Dennis Steckler. Random sex scenes are shown with a shot of our hero peeping through a door slit to watch. The patter of the participants is inane, especially during a confrontational session between a repulsive john and his "who cares" attitude prostitute. Film ends arbitrarily in the middle of a sex scene.
Oddest feature is the inclusion of a couple of ballads sung over the action which might have been amateur-night originals for the film. They are poor excuses for music in any event. Technical credits are miserable -no one tried in the slightest to deliver an acceptable movie product here.
Set in Las Vegas, it is several rungs below the grind-it-out work of favorite son Ray Dennis Steckler. Random sex scenes are shown with a shot of our hero peeping through a door slit to watch. The patter of the participants is inane, especially during a confrontational session between a repulsive john and his "who cares" attitude prostitute. Film ends arbitrarily in the middle of a sex scene.
Oddest feature is the inclusion of a couple of ballads sung over the action which might have been amateur-night originals for the film. They are poor excuses for music in any event. Technical credits are miserable -no one tried in the slightest to deliver an acceptable movie product here.