Review of Angel

Angel (1983)
4/10
Good idea, tasteless execution
4 September 2013
Warning: Spoilers
Watching this movie reminded me a lot of the 1960 British film Peeping Tom. Specifically, the negative reviews it was said to have received initially- "The sickest and filthiest film I remember seeing." Also about a serial killer- who before and during the opening credits kills a prostitute- Peeping Tom is actually a classic, a dark, naked look at a voyeuristic and violent society.

Angel, coming out in 1984, reverses that formula, telling the story from the point of view of a prostitute, in this case a 15-year-old girl who by day goes to a private school, innocent and an honours student. Social circumstances led her into prostitution, and she's unhappy about it, making her a potentially sympathetic character. Sounds like an intriguing film with lots of potential- Taxi Driver (1976) is a great film in which Jodie Foster plays an even younger hooker.

Alas, Angel is a better fit for the reviews Peeping Tom got. It has the look and feel of a cheap exploitation piece- featuring excruciating acting from people often looking much older than the part they're playing. (The nerd who asks Angel out, notably, looks suspiciously like a man in a wig and big glasses.) They awkwardly stumble over dialogue that ranges from good to mediocre to bad ("The law sucks!") The screenplay sports other holes- do they really not check suspects for weapons in police lineups? At one point, the cowboy character is shot and on his back, then he springs up to pump the bad guy full of lead, and walks away as if the injuries didn't really hurt him.

Yes, a cowboy. That's another thing about this movie, the cheap costumes that come close to funny (the man in drag is just bad). What saves this from being a three-star movie in my books is some good nudity- full frontal, with the most comfortably naked girls in a high school shower since Carrie (1976).
0 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed