User Reviews

Review this title
3 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
5/10
Rock the Casbah !
Nodriesrespect1 February 2007
As the only all male adult film the King (i.e. the late John Curtis Holmes, he of the 14 inch or thereabouts appendage) ever made, this has a certain amount of historical importance. One just wishes it were a much better movie, in just about every respect ! Rumors abound about this flick, including elaborate assumptions as to why Holmes made it in the first place, blackmail being one possibility. Though he had done a couple of solo loops for Falcon and a strictly soft-core short with another guy (not to mention his well-known availability to both sexes on an escort basis), he had never penetrated a member of the same gender on screen. If that's all you're looking for, then this should satisfy, even if the star looks like he would rather be anywhere else but here. The indiscriminate size queen will have a field day, of course, but romantics hoping for even the merest glimmer of affection between performers – completely absent even in the non-Holmes scenes – would be better off watching another video. Credited to "J.J. English" (who contributed the very minor gay genre classic THE PORTRAIT OF DORIAN GAY), though its slapdash approach suggests little directorial interference whatsoever, this is ultimately a rather sorry affair, played out amidst chintzy, vaguely Middle Eastern sets, scored with tone-deaf synthesizer (the instrument du jour) with glaring lighting – which serves to make already pale performers look positively pasty – and ugly cinematography to match.

Holmes "plays" a sultan and if I hadn't seen him in movies like the classic ERUPTION or Jack Remy's enjoyable GIRLS ON FIRE I'd swear the guy was the worst actor bar none ever to appear in front of the cameras. The rest of the cast is simply paraded in front of him to fulfill his every desire, his lack of enthusiasm suggesting he barely has any. Take note of the bearded boy who "assists" John in most of his sex scenes. That's actually the quite female Sharon Kane (her face never clearly visible to uphold the illusion) who does her darnedest to keep the star at least semi-aroused. Best of the King's boy/boy encounters is probably the one with the very accommodating Chris Burns (of Bill Higgins' THESE BASES ARE LOADED fame) who ignores his partner's verbal and mild physical abuse and rides him for all he's worth. Fred Halsted's longtime lover Joey Yale (with whom he appeared in his classic L.A. PLAYS ITSELF) is the insatiable wild-eyed blonde (courtesy of the white powder ?) in the first Holmes homo hardcore number. The bearded temple dancer is a somewhat sad character by contrast but his penultimate scene with Holmes does supply the most graphic penetration shots this flick has to offer so you decide whether this constitutes a highlight of sorts. Johnny Dawes, to whom I once referred as "the Richie Cunningham of gay porn" and who really does look like a very young Ron Howard, has a barely more animated threesome on the sidelines. Sad to think this shining star of Arch Bressan's sublime PLEASURE BEACH and Tom De Simone's marvelous SKIN DEEP got stuck in such a dispiriting low rent stinker. Much has been made of Holmes, Dawes, Burns and Yale subsequently all dying of AIDS-related illnesses. If this pathetic movie was somehow instrumental in their contracting the disease, this would make their untimely passing all the more heartbreaking.
12 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Bad, but still notable!
flickoldnoir28 July 2012
Granted this is not the best gay porn film made, but you have to admit it is noteworthy in that it features the great John Holmes in his only, to my knowledge gay film. For the most part, it is evident Holmes is not enthused with this project. I'm not sure why he made it. It could be money, etc. Lackluster performances aside, it does boast some raw sex scenes. While it's been said by some Holmes should not have made it, this also makes it more unique and somewhat campy. Some may want to view it for it's novelty as both a John Holmes gay flick or an example of really bad gay cinema. Most of the primary performers eventually succumbed to AIDS. That being Chris Burns, Joey Yale, etc. I'm sure a lot of gay men have fantasized about desirable straight men interacting sexually with other men, albeit with a little more exuberance. Yes, a bad film, but still worth a look.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Not Great John Holmes, not Even Good Gay Porn
unkle_weaser27 November 2006
I saw this piece of cinematic feces when it first came out. I read John was "challenged" in performing the gay sex scenes.

"Challenged" is a very nice word for it. Holmes has trouble maintaining an erection longer than five minutes. He engages in unprotected anal sex -- not very well at that -- four or five times. He appears to have trouble even showing any enthusiasm for the movie. He didn't need to do this one; John had over 350 porn classics to his name by the time he'd passed on, this was unneeded.

Despite the necessities of the script, Holmes is wearing a sultan's outfit. This was shot on an off day, awful, awful, awful.

Forget the "spoiler" warnings, there isn't anything to spoil.
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed