david rob
let me first say, i watched this movie around midnight, and usually there only is trash around this hour, but this movie broke the recordfirst of all the main character is an old non attractive creepy guy, yet he gets to f*ck all girls that come on his path for example he goes to a shop, talks to a girl and then you see them f*cksecondly there are loads of sex scenes, and in many of them there is no nudity at all, i would not have been surprised if one of the characters in the movie would say: fast put your clothes on so we can f*ck!thirdly this movie should show what a sexual addiction can do to a man or a family, this movie only shows soft bad acted erotica it makes me wonder why those actors agreed to play in such trash
Gonzalo Melendez (gonz30)
People never cease to amaze me. There are 29 quasi-unanimously negative comments about this movie. Many all-time masterpieces have only 3 to 5 comments posted on this site. If this is such a forgettable trashy TV movie (which it may be to many), why waste so much time criticizing mediocrity? Why bother after wasting almost 2 hours of your life? Why watch the movie at all? I saw it recently because it was the best option on late night Cable TV (HBO or Cinemax). When I read the synopsis which the channel superimposes on the TV image, I knew I was in for a B, no C or D movie. I was however surprised that Nastassja Kinski was in it. Sadly, she also had nothing better to do at the time. Well, at least she got paid for the experience.And as for me, I got what I expected: a 5 over 10 rated movie.I dis-considered the title and exploitative subject matter in this rating. I mean, who of these 29 bored "users" expected CITIZEN KANE or the ultimate crusade film against sex addiction? A campy old Joan Collins-style flick is what came to mind, and that's what I got.Actually, it's entertaining, and it does make a statement for the problem of sex addiction, although it is really so low grade, it's hard to take the film seriously, and not as a funny parody with tongue in cheek humor. But for a late night flick, it's not bad, it's easy to follow .... it's entertainment.Actually, I think I may change my vote to a 7. Considering the genre, it's above average. Besides Joan Collins dramas, trashy classics like SHOWGIRLS came to mind as I was watching this. Sin in suburbia - the whole idea is boring and banal. How can a movie or book make this material a timeless classic? Wake up people! Are IMDb users really so terminally bored?
bball1dad
I always watch this movie on late night cable should I come across it channel surfing. Having been involved in all sorts of addictive behavior, it reinforces for me the old saw- "But for the Grace of God, go I." I have never seen anyone portray addictive behavior better than the lead actor. It makes Keaton in "Clean and Sober" and Lemmon in "Days of Wine and Roses" seem tame. Watching this guy slowly "bottom" is enlightening. As a result, despite all of the movie's flaws, highlighted by other posters, I find this film compelling and absorbing. I give it a 9 out of 10.
LeeinLA
This film shook me to the bone; it's not at all the prurient softcore porn fest that some bottom-feeding videohounds would expect. But an intense and realistic portrait of a man who risks his life, marriage and sanity as be struggles to deal with the painful consequences of his ever-increasing sexual appetite. This was shot on digital video rather than film, which gives it a chilling, voyeuristic realism. Like the main character, the audience is also seduced and then taken for an ugly ride. Addiction, whether it's drugs, gambling, or compulsive sex, may be exciting for an adrenaline-rush, but the aftermath is ultimately bleak and desperate. And this film really takes you there. An excellent performance by Michael des Barres.
AD
