User Reviews

This is "Adult Entertainment" so be careful, don't leave this video around or among other kid's videos. This X-rated movie was very trippy and weird. It would make author Lewis Carroll, really mad, in a happy way. I'll give the movie, some credit. It didn't bother, trying to put logic into it, like other film versions. Still, it does make you wonder; what were the producers, smoking when they thought to put Alice in Wonderland into a musical porno. Directed by Bud Townsend, this movie is loosely based on the novel, "Through the Looking Glass", Lewis Carroll's second book, in the Alice in Wonderland books. This movie shouldn't confused with the Disney's 1951 & 2010's Alice in Wonderland versions as it barely haves anything to do with them. In this version, Alice (Kristine De Bell), is an adult virgin librarian, who trying to find out, if she wants to put out or not, for her annoying hound-dog, boyfriend, William (Ron Nelson). Stress over, the issue, she falls into a wet-dream-like state, where she find herself, living sexual fantasies with the White rabbit (Larry Gelman), the Mad Hatter (Alan Novak) & other odd creatures. There are three versions of this film, an R Rated soft-core sex romp, an X-rated version, and the Triple X. In my opinion, the best one is the X-Rated version. There are a few skips here and there, due to editing, but this is a very clean, good-looking transfer, especially considering it was scrapped from less than optimal source materials. The surroundings really jump out, and flesh-tones during the nude scenes are stunningly precise. The Rated R version looks like it was cheaply copy off a VCR. You can clearly see, the tracking in certain scenes, and the colors was somewhat warped and blurry. The XXX version, on the other hand, is the worst. The hardcore scenes have been inserted from rather ugly, discolor print source with the wrong ratio, with little to no music, supporting the erotica. At least, the sex scenes weren't too degrading. For a porno movie, they treat the women who work in the film with a little more respect and understood, how far, they can take it, with the actresses. The sex scenes with Alice getting lick by cat people was somewhat artsy. The scene where Alice was masturbating near the waterfall was somewhat, beautiful. The background music during this scene really set the mood, right. Then the scene where she assist in making repairs to Humpty Dumpty (Bradford Armdexter), was funny and clever, but one of the most upsetting scenes in the film, was the couple, (Tony and Sue Tsengoles) that play, the twins, Tweedledee & Tweedledum. I really didn't the whole fake Twins incest sex scene. Watching two people that look like each other, do it, was just awful. I also didn't like, how slutty and dirty, every other woman in the film, looks in the film. Where did they get these women? The Queen of Hearts (Juliet Graham) looks like she came from BDSM crack house at Times Square. The nurses look like they did a line of heroin, before showing up for the film shoot. Not attractive. Not at all. At least, Alice looks presentable. She was very attractive, and had the charm to carry the film. Her singing and acting was alright, but the cheesy dialogue, they fed her, wasn't helping her film career. I just glad, they made Alice into adult, rather than trying to make her look younger. I don't wish, for the film to go the paedophilia route. The Mad Hatter and White Rabbit were pretty amusing, in a goofy sort of way. I like, how cheap, the White Rabbit looks. His ears looks more like a Russian winter fur hat with ear flaps, than rabbit ears. I just wish, they added more characters from the book, like the Blue Caterpillar and the Cheshire Cat. While, I don't approve of pornography, based off, children novels. The movie feel like it was trying to go, all feminist, 'sexual awakening' with its tone. While the movie isn't in the same level, as Sigmund Freud or Dr. Kinsey case report. The movie felt a character study of the psychosexual development, during female adolescences. The movie does tackle the sexual consciousness, stereotype of gender role and psychosexual orientations, meanwhile, living the gonzo '70s spirit of a porn-chic film with some wit and style. There are several songs and alright dance numbers. All of them, looks like, they were having fun. The musical numbers, including the funk/gospel "Each and Every Moment," the heroine's anthem "Busy Growing Up," and the ridiculous "What's a Nice Girl Like You Doing on a Knight Like This." My favorite has to be 'the Humpty Dumpty bring it up' song. All the music is extremely catchy, and supports by classical jazz hits, help the on-screen action perfectly. I love the New Orleans type feel music that would play during the title cards. The movie was surprising, very funny. It had tons of meta- humor, sexual innuendos, breaking the fourth wall jokes, and puns. It gets even, more, zappy, toward the end, while the movie stops being a movie, and just continues to run, with weird quick cuts. The film was produced by adult film mogul Bill Osco. Originally, Osco shot the film on the cheap with Adult Cinema intentions. But, after a warm reception at a Seattle Film Festival, he managed to sell a recut version of the film to 20th Century Fox. It was just that, the timing wasn't right for Osco. While he was able to have the prints ready, his movie was playing against 1977's Star Wars. It didn't do so well at the box office. Overall: This porno movie is pretty unique. A rare kind. A surreal must-watch, acid trip.

The first time I saw "Alice in Wonderland – an X-rated Musical Comedy", was in the early '80 in a Movie-Theater in N.Y. City with some friends. I remember we actually enjoyed it very much, although we were left wondering why all the "goodies" were covered by in various forms shaped colored patches and why the movie was suddenly jumping from one scene to the next one, leaving us guessing...what we just missed. Obviously it was the soft-core edited (chopped) version, which left me with the desire to watch it again soon, but in its original integral version. Well, more then 20 years went by, during which I forgot all about this movie and, only a few days ago, by sheer chance, I stumbled upon a heavily used VHS copy (which had seen better times: a bit washed-out colors, scratchy sound and a few flaws), but guess what? It's the original uncut version and, this time, I really had a ball! Humor, Musical and Porn may sound an awkward combination but, in this case, it really works and, unlikely the big majority of boring porn-flicks nowadays invading our screens, this is a really amusing and entertaining sex fantasy, which will not disappoint you. The direction is clever, the swift editing makes the movie fly like a bird, all the familiar characters are lovable or just plain funny, all the actors seem having a good time, the songs are catchy (worth mentioning the one about "growing up" sung by Alice at the beginning of the movie and the hilarious "What's a nice girl like you doing on a Knight like this"), the dance numbers are well choreographed and staged (amazingly energetic Terry Hall proves that she can "also" dance and dances enthusiastically her guts away...Don't worry, she also does what she was best known for...), the acting, the singing, the set, the costumes are of quality level and then...there is Kristine "Blue Eyes" DeBell, in the first starring role of her career and (oh boy!) she indeed has a few H.C. sequences! Personally I think they are absolutely not distasteful, on the contrary, they are spontaneous and quite arousing. She is young and (ohhh!) so very pretty; with the help of her new friends in Wonderland, she discovers her body and her sexuality so, she sings, she dances and...what do you expect? She is also experimenting sex! The closing sequence, when she finally makes love to her boy-friend, is exceptionally well photographed and directed and is the highlight of the movie. I think her "physique du role" (the innocent blue eyes and captivating smile) and her acting ability, make those explicit sequences more then acceptable and actually highly enjoyable. There is plenty of sex going on in (this) Wonderland and everybody seems eager to "get busy" with the first available boy(s) or girl(s), which means lot of hard-core action to be seen. On the other hand, some close-up shots, clearly "spliced in", just to make the "porn-hounds" really happy, are a bit redundant for my personal taste. In general, however, the sex-action is not offensive since handled with a great deal of humor and it blends almost seamlessly with the music, the dances and the comedy. If you think you and your partner can handle graphic sex, watch it together. Take my word, you will have an hour and a half of very good time (perhaps also an after-show extra action...) This is "Adult Entertainment" so be careful, don't leave this video around or among other kid's videos. If your 10 years old can put his hands on it, he might amuse himself, but you will be forced to provide embarrassing explanations about the reasons why "this" Alice behaves quite differently from the one he red about in Lewis Carroll novel or he watched on the Disney's video. I bet, you will not forget this "one-of-a-kind" very soon. It's a real shame that they don't mak'em like that anymore...! I give it a 9 out of 10.

I would probably not have bothered to comment on this film if I had not been disturbed by the constant references made to it here in North America as a porn film. Our obsession with what is, or should be, regarded as pornographic remains a relic of the 'guidance' provided to film makers by the Hayes committee many, many years ago and it is now really time that we relegate it to the past. So far we have not progressed far beyond establishing a somewhat arbitrary division between what we now term 'soft' and 'hard' porn, with both carrying the same pornography label. It is time for us all recognise that neither the R rated (soft porn?) release version of this film, nor the unrated version (hard porn?) available on DVD were in any way pornographic.

In legal terms pornography is defined by its capacity to deprave or corrupt. Many classic books such as Lady Chatterley's lover, Fanny Hill, Women in Love, The Story of 'O' or Moll Flanders have been prosecuted for pornographic content, tried by jury and cleared on the basis of this definition, but in practice most ordinary citizens are not interested in what they regard as legal equivocation, and apply a simpler test that is rather too stringent when applied to books or films which are very close to the line, but serves to quickly clear most others from any taint of pornography. Although the Hayes code would have rated AIW as unacceptable both for nudity and for its depictions of sexual activities, in practice most people today accept that where the basic message of a book or film is clearly designed to encourage the development of long term stable family relationships in which the participants find real fulfillment, it cannot be regarded as pornographic (this does not mean that works depicting unsatisfactory or unstable relationships should be recognised as pornographic, only that these may need a more sophisticated assessment). In AIW, we have a film about a young female librarian who has had a rather sheltered upbringing, and keeps her suitor at arms length because of a feeling that this is what morality requires her to do. After he gets too frustrated by this and threatens to leave her, she falls asleep and dreams she is transported to a Wonderland (closely based on that of Lewis Carrol) where everyone she meets is totally uninhibited about their sexual needs. She is shocked, but is a kind person who takes things as she finds them, so before long she finds her own prejudices gradually melting away. She wakes up when her boyfriend returns to break off their affair, but her attitude to him has changed so completely that their relationship is fully restored, and the film ends with them living 'happily ever after' with their children in a home with a white picket fence and a family dog - an ending clearly directed to those romantics who remain very young at heart.

Pornographic? - Hardly!.

Suitable viewing for children? - Well probably not quite, unless they have very progressive parents.

R rating? - PG would be more appropriate today.

Entertaining for viewers in most age groups ? - Yes, but the film has its faults - these are discussed in many of the comments here on IMDb, however most commentators clearly appreciated and enjoyed it.

I believe the only pornography associated with this film was the reported claim by an anti-pornography activist of "scientific proof" that a magazine picture of Kristin deBell was a photographic montage of images of the face of a ten year old with various body parts of adult models. These and other comments seriously damaged the career of a very promising young actress, but today the film appears to be on its way to becoming a cult classic, Several home video productions have been released in both VHS and DVD format; the last was a DVD containing both the R rated and unrated versions of the film, released by Subversive Cinema in 2007. Copies of this were readily available until a few months ago, now they are almost exhausted and the mail order vendors who still have copies in stock are selling them at many times their original price - a situation which usually quickly results in a new DVD release appearing. This continuing interest nearly 35 years after the original film was released points to near classic status.

Commentators on this database are expected to provide fellow viewers with useful guidance on whether a film is worth watching or even collecting - my comments here were intended to stress the ongoing damage to the industry that still results from pressure on major studios to respect self-censorship recommendations originating with the Hayes Committee. On this database such general comments are very quickly marked by readers as 'not helpful' and I seldom make them; but fortunately I still have space to add that in my opinion this film is quite unusual and is well worth watching or even buying. It is flawed, but Kristine deBell gives a great performance and the film provides a fairly unique and rewarding viewing experience. Overall I would rate it at 7 stars and will be buying a copy of the next DVD edition if and when it appears. If Ms deBell is still alive today I would love to hear her comments both on the attempts to suppress this film and on the late recognition that it has gradually achieved.

On a par with Santa Claus Conquers The Martians; it's that bad, but in that so-bad-it's-good sense. But it's charming, unlike, well, pretty much everything else in it's genre (that would be porn). Oddly enough, I think most of the cult that has grown around it take it pretty much at face value, though my enjoyment of the film was strictly that of witnessing a really mind-bending train wreck.

Like most screen adaptations of Alice In Wonderland, this is actually an adaptation of "Through The Looking Glass", Lewis Carroll's second book, only, in this case, punctuated with (a) crappy tunes and (b) pretty hot sex scenes with (c) crudely inserted hardcore clips. Whether these clips are welcome or unwelcome is entirely up to the viewer, though, strangely enough, and this really is damned odd, considering the usual demands of fans of the genre, many of the fans of this movie prefer it without the hardcore clips (This is because AIW is a "couples" porn film, and has found a unique cult audience, who like their porn on the softcore side).

Alice, in this version of the story, is a grown woman (she'd better be!), who, after spurning her grease-monkey boyfriend's advances, is confronted by The Rabbit (of "down the rabbit hole" fame), a chubby dude in one of the worst make-up jobs in the history of cinema, something that probably wouldn't cut it in a small-town little theater group. It consists of a bizarre rig on his head, which I'm pretty sure is supposed to be his ears, but it looks like some kind of medical neck brace or something. The actor's portrayal of the rabbit is bizarre, to say the least: he represents his character by making the "thumbs up" gesture for the entire duration of the film. How this says "rabbit" is beyond me. Which is to say, I've yet to be strolling around in a field or a wooded area somewhere and see a rabbit doing a Roger Ebert impersonation. At any rate, in a goofy confusion of both of Lewis Carroll's books, the March Hare leads Alice through the looking glass (!) into Wonderland, and lo-budget weirdness ensues, much of it so surreal to be almost beyond description.

I'll admit I'm no fan of show tunes, but even by my standards, these songs are painful, particularly the one sung during the Humpty Dumpty sequence. Yecch! I'm still trying to get that one out of my head! Other than the actual songs, we have a recurring musical motif which sounds suspiciously like the theme of The Gong Show, which was a top-rated cult phenomenon at the time of Alice's release. That one's pretty catchy.

On the plus side, Alice is adorable and utterly appealing, and pretty much makes you want to like the movie in spite of all this. It is to her that this crazy film owes its entire reputation. Also, the Mad Hatter is pretty amusing, in a goofy sort of way, and the whole thing certainly has a "Hey, kid, let's put on a show" quality that one can't help but be charmed by. It's that Ed Wood factor, again.

There are a couple of hot sex scenes, and the girls are gorgeous, especially for 70's porn, for which the standards were exceedingly low. And thank god that 70's-era ghoul John Holmes never rears his huge and hideous head. Then, charm would have gone right out the window.

Kristine DeBell is Alice Liddell in this sex-oriented production with music and lyrics by Bucky Searles. By the time of its release, 1976, I suppose people were becoming blasé about hard-core porno and it was time to try something new, as in, "Let's put on a show!" I saw the R-rated version in a drive-in and thought it was pretty hot stuff. Kristine DeBell looks so fragile, so dumb. Her voice -- that is, her undubbed speaking voice -- is a cross between Barbara Nichols and Candace Bergen. I know it's hard to imagine such a thing. Maybe it's easier if you start with Bergen's voice and then subtract the class.

The rest of the cast is up to soft-core standards, except that I kind of liked Bucky Searles, the composer, lyricist, writer, and actor in his many make ups. He has a haimische New York accent that keeps things from getting too rarefied. If there still were vaudeville or burlesque skits around, he'd find a solid niche. And the dancers too, uncoordinated as they may be. At least they've had training. I've studied dance just enough to know how hard it is to get your body to move the way you want it to, and I can only envy those with the skills to do it.

Searles' songs are backed by a full orchestra, which must have added to the expense. None are memorable. They all sound like they belong in a musical -- not necessarily a bad musical -- that no one ever heard of because it didn't make it to MGM, like "The Duchess of Washoe." The theme -- "Where Are You Going, Girl?" -- is sung by a Johnny Mathis clone. But the lyrics, like the dialog, sometimes have a certain sly wit, aside from the many double entendres. Alice doesn't want to have sex before marriage. "I want to remain pure, unblemished, spotless." King: "Spotless? I don't want to put any spots on you. I like you just the way you are." However -- and how I hate to use this word -- it's kind of "dated." It may have been surprisingly hot in 1976 but it's not anymore. There are a handful of XXX-rated inserts in the updated version but they add little zest to the story because so many of them are faceless closeups of acts now familiar to many of us from internet sites. Really, the inserts could be from some anatomy textbook. And when you watch the Washington Monument plunging in and out of the Lincoln Tunnel, all you're aware of is that this is being done by actors who are paid to do it. Well, let me amend that. The men, at least, have had to muster a certain enthusiasm for the money shots.

It's not really good enough to be a musical, and the sex is taken a little too lightly to be erotic. It's a good-natured, diverting, ambitious, forgettable historical curiosity.

When I was engaged, my fiance and I would frequent the adult bookstores. He would look for his favorite mags, and on occasion a video that caught the eye. As much as I enjoyed the one-on-one with him that the media caused, there was never a video that I really enjoyed. I had seen only one other movie way back when there was a satellite channel called XXX (it dealt with a private eye unraveling a case) that actually had a proper plot and was enjoyable. All the others were grunting and puffing and blowing and whatnot. There's only so many times you can watch a blonde bimbo faking 'it'.

This movie caught my eye, and I migrated to it, allowing him to wander the shop. He noticed (how hard was it not too? grins. I was actually interested in something, lol(!) in the video section!) and came over, buying the slightly used copy for me. We took it home and I loved it. Here was a "Porno" with a plot. I wasn't sure it even classified as porno, but I use the word loosely.

The librarian was a character I could identify with. Alice rejected her boyfriend's advances. She was not comfortable with her own sexuality and prudish in her comments. Bill went away, and she continued to check in books. The White Rabbit ran through the library (one book, if you notice closely, I believe (it's been ten years since I saw the movie) was by Lewis C.) and Alice, for that same reason that propels teenagers to run into the woods when a chainsaw wielding maniac is behind them rather than towards populated areas, follows. It's the best way to get the plot forward. Alice finds herself in Wonderland.

I barely recall all the details, but I do remember clearly the swim in the lake, and how she was "dried" off. I liked how they got Humpty Dumpty Up again, the Mad Hatter's size of member being on his hat to wear it proudly, and the brother sister team of Dum and Dee (which did disturb me slightly--then again, they could have been husband wife, but I never could tell no matter how many times I watched it). The woman on the knight who told Alice go away and find your own Knight (What's a A Nice Girl Like You Doing on a Knight Like This?).

The part that really caught my attention when I watched it about a year or so later was one of the cards (3 of hearts, I think) who resembled my ex's current wife exactly! We couldn't help but tease her about being in the movie! The King of Hearts was interesting, and the Queen was even more so. Due to the openness of the forum, I can't go into details, just say it was "orgy" based and we'll leave it at that!

When we split up, I was allowed to take the video--he knew I liked it--but in the time since it's been lost in borrowing. Someday I'll find another copy.

Btw, if anyone could tell me offlist what scene was cut from the Amazon version, I'd really appreciate it.

I heartily recommend this movie for the over 18 crowd. It was soft, sweet, and really 70's, but I liked it immensely.

***** out of 5. D.

Alice in Wonderland: An X Rated Musical Fantasy (1976): Dir: Bud Townsend / Cast: Kristine DeBell, Alan Novak, Terry Spelman, Juliet Graham, Bradford Armdexter: Pornographic retelling of the classic Disney film. This one regards one's transformation from virgin innocence to sexual curiosity. Alice works at a library where she turns down the sexual advances of her boyfriend. After falling asleep while reading the classic book Alice in Wonderland she is visited by the White Rabbit. She follows him through a magical portal into the sexually charged version of Wonderland. This is a warped version of the fairy tale but director Bud Townsend handles the flimsy production more professionally than the material deserves. This is largely due to Kristine DeBell, who plays Alice being far more talented than the film might first suggest. She brings in an innocence and vulnerability that is about the best aspect of the film. Alan Novak plays the Mad Hatter whose first encounter with Alice regards a blow job. Terry Spelman plays Mr. Rabbit who is constantly off to nowhere in particular. Juliet Graham plays the menacing Queen who has sexual plans for Alice. Bradford Armdexter plays Humpy Dumpty who falls off the wall and cannot get "it" up. This is all very crass and explicit and an excuse for pornographic encounters but thankfully DeBell found a new portal to more rewarding film projects. Score: 4 / 10

Now, I don't usually watch an adult film but when I do, it's normally bad and distasteful! However this film didn't give me my usual disgust look, it more likely gave me an interested look while looking at it. It is different and I won't say it's the best adaption I've ever seen. The costumes were so tacky and looked to be used a lot. Especially the White Rabbit or the Mad Hatter, their outfits looked absolutely stupid and disgusting!

Kristine DeBell was the only one who looked sexy and gorgeous as Alice! I know she had outfits that were see through but seriously, it is meant to be all part of being in an adult film. I'm surprised that she isn't a porn star, normally ordinary actresses don't usually play in an adult films. I wonder did this effect her getting into big acting roles? It might depend on the people working for those big films! Ah well she was young and wanted to star in this I suppose!

This wouldn't be my cup of tea in all fairness, I would have rather seen the costumes more modern regardless if this was in the 70's. The music was very good including the choreography. The acting was OK and the sex scene's were OK since it is an adult movie after all.

I suggest for people who would be upset in watching this film should avoid it at all costs. I also suggest to not show this to your kids as it does contain too much sex scene's. In all fairness, Disneys version of Alice in Wonderland is way better than this at the end of the day....