Behind Bedroom Doors

Behind Bedroom Doors is a straight-to-vid softcore sex film starring Brooke LaVelle.

If that means something to you, I'm really impressed with your depth of knowledge on this subject, because IMDb doesn't list this film or the star.

The IMDb does recognize some of the other stars. The second female lead is a woman named Nicole Sheridan, and she's been in many, many movies. In fact, she has made 36 movies in the past three years, but I don't suppose her movie career path has ever intersected that of Tom Hanks. Here are some of her credits:

I just noticed that Tom Hanks was in Stop! My Ass Is On Fire! 1-4, but his character died in number four, presumably of severe burns, so Nicole joined the series just a hair too late to have Mr. Hanks set her own personal ass on fire.

Hey, Tommy, heh, heh, just kidding, old man.

I can't really recommend this film to you, even if you are into softcore sex films. It is a weak one by that standard. The plot isn't all that bad, but I'm going to guess that you genre lovers don't rent these for the plot. Here are the reasons why it is not recommended:

1) Not a very crisp, sharp picture.

2) Almost no nudity other than breasts. Only very brief glances at pubes and buns. Julia Kruis is the only one of the four female stars who did a sexy frontal.

3) Passionless sex poorly performed.

NUDITY REPORT

Brooke LaVelle - breasts, brief looks at bum and pubes.
Julia Kruis - brief frontal, no buns
Monique Alexander - breasts and most of her bum.
Nicole Sheridan - breasts, and brief flashes of a shaved crotch and buns.

I picked up the DVD from Blockbuster as a rental.

4) The women appear naked for an amount of screen time inversely proportionate to their appeal. The unknown star, Brooke Lavelle, who is on screen constantly, is not especially pretty and does not have an especially good body. The second actress is the porn star, Miss Sheridan, she of the perfect store-bought boobs. The other two women, Julia Kruis and relative newcomer Monique Alexander are much sexier, but don't have much screen time.

The Critics Vote

no reviews online

The People Vote ...

no IMDb listing at this time

The meaning of the IMDb score: 7.5 usually indicates a level of excellence equivalent to about three and a half stars from the critics. 6.0 usually indicates lukewarm watchability, comparable to approximately two and a half stars from the critics. The fives are generally not worthwhile unless they are really your kind of material, equivalent to about a two star rating from the critics, or a C- from our system. Films rated below five are generally awful even if you like that kind of film - this score is roughly equivalent to one and a half stars from the critics or a D on our scale. (Possibly even less, depending on just how far below five the rating is.

My own guideline: A means the movie is so good it will appeal to you even if you hate the genre. B means the movie is not good enough to win you over if you hate the genre, but is good enough to do so if you have an open mind about this type of film. C means it will only appeal to genre addicts, and has no crossover appeal. (C+ means it has no crossover appeal, but will be considered excellent by genre fans, while C- indicates that it we found it to be a poor movie although genre addicts find it watchable). D means you'll hate it even if you like the genre. E means that you'll hate it even if you love the genre. F means that the film is not only unappealing across-the-board, but technically inept as well. Any film rated C- or better is recommended for fans of that type of film. Any film rated B- or better is recommended for just about anyone. We don't score films below C- that often, because we like movies and we think that most of them have at least a solid niche audience. Now that you know that, you should have serious reservations about any movie below C-.

Based on this description, this is a D. It's a softcore film, and is substandard by what genre fans should demand.