Candy Stripe Nurses

I was originally not planning to say much about this movie, pro or con, except to tell you what my only reason was for wanting to see it -- which I'll come back to later. My thinking was that it wouldn't be fair to pick on this movie for being merely a sophomoric sex comedy when it was never meant to be anything more. But there WAS an attempt to make it something more -- which succeeded only in making it something less. NURSES attempts to surgically graft two serious dramas onto the sex comedy, and IMHO, the graft didn't take. The end result doesn't even begin to qualify as serious drama, but has probably frustrated many folks who were looking for a sex comedy.

To be fair, I should mention that the DVD edition includes an interview with Roger Corman, who produced the movie, in which he says NURSES was an experiment, and admits it might not have the same appeal as a movie that stuck strictly to formula. So if it was meant to be an experiment, I still shouldn't pick on it, but I have to say the experiment was a failure.

Now, to get back to my reason for watching this movie, it seems there's a connection between NURSES and the controversial rape and revenge movie I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE (a.k.a. DAY OF THE WOMAN). That connection is actor Eron Tabor, who played one of the four rapists (Johnny, the service station worker) from GRAVE, and co-wrote the rock music for NURSES. (My source is the feature-length commentary on the Millennium Edition DVD of GRAVE.) Unfortunately, there's no way to tell how much of the music was written by Tabor, because the opening credits attribute the music simply to `Thompson & Tabor.' There are a few vocal numbers, and I'm wondering if it could be Mr. Tabor singing.

I actually expected this to be more of a sexploitation flick. It was comic in nature ( I imagined it would be that) but many parts were like a straight drama. You had 3 stories going on at once---switching from one to the other---involving dramas that were happening to 3 of the nurses (high school age girls). One out of the three was somewhat interesting. There were action things in the film, but despite this the film moved slow and felt long. There was the required nudity but it wasn't a big deal. The comedy was corny. Yet overall there was entertainment value. If somebody asked me, "Would you rather have watched this title or not watched it," I would reply in the negative.

Caught this on Drive-In channel (which I love) and it's actually pretty dang good.

• it's got a plot! - lots of beautiful women. Naked! (not nowaday silicone bimbos) - empowered women! For instance, there's a great line in the movie, one of the best I've ever heard, where a rape victim gets the upper hand and asks the slimeball, "what's wrong? All the romance gone out of it?" Love it!!! - lots of funny moments. I love the phil spector type famous music guy who they have to pull of one of the women and he's panting like a dog. Hilarious! - Did I mention the beautiful women? Incredible natural bodies and one gorgeous woman actually has short hair, which I didn't think would fly in one of these 70's drive-in flicks.

Man, these movies, which were probably considered to be bad, even dumb, back when they were made, are so much brainier and more fun and waaay less offensive than the crap Hollywood passes these days. Hollywood movies are offensive in much a more slimy, insidious way. Many are just plain disgusting. Even the "Go Girl!" movies that come out these days are so obviously written by men and highly offensive.

God, the 70's was easily the best time to go watch a movie.

/sigh

This movie--which is the fifth (and last) film in the "Nurse Series"--revolves around 3 young women who for various reasons volunteer to become candy stripers at their local hospital. While there they meet some interesting people and get deeply involved in the lives of some of the patients. Billed as a comedy this movie is really more of a low-budget exploitation film than anything else as the humor isn't that sharp. It might also be worth mentioning that during this particular period in time drive-ins were starving for just about anything they could get because the regular theaters were acquiring all of the mainstream films. So, this type of movie was a staple for outdoor theaters during this time. Unfortunately, the quality of these films was often lacking, and this movie is no exception. Even so all 3 of the young ladies were somewhat attractive with Candice Rialson (as "Sandy") standing out the most in my opinion. But none of them were able to bring this movie up to even an average rating.

This movie was yet another follow-up to the hit Roger Corman quickie The Student Nurses and went along similar lines, but had a completely different cast and no story carry-over. Instead of young professionals trying to succeed amid the temptations of the swinging early 70s, though, this time we have high school aged volunteers. The cast are all inexperienced unknowns (Candace Rialson went on to do a fair amount of TV work over the next few years), but the real problem is that while the advertising promises laughs, the script doesn't provide any. The box copy suggests a hospital romp along the lines of Carry On Doctor, but the movie just gives us 90 minutes of following the girls around in their silly peppermint striped uniforms, and then off to parties where they smoke dope, take off their tops and have sex. Tame sex. Nothing else of much interest happens. Unlike the first movie, where every major character had a proper character arc, there is little here in the way of character development. We just get a few familiar types (the rebel, the serious student who wants to be a doctor, the party girl) and some standard antagonists (insensitive sexist doctors, rigid administrators etc.) for them to conflict with. The result is more hospital soap than romp and not very interesting or entertaining. The girls are pretty hot, though, and this one isn't quite as insanely trashy as Private Duty Nurses, making it a little more watchable (or a little less watchable, depending on what you're looking for).