Review: Story of O: Untold Pleasures

O (Danielle Ciardi) is a photographer who wants to work on a book about the seamier side of sex. Her sleazy tennis coach boyfriend (Max Parrish) is accommodating to this interest, and introduces her to Sir Stephen (Neil Dickson), who will help her gain first-hand knowledge and experience in such matters…by becoming his slave. Light spanking ensues. Michelle Ruben plays an outrageously accented Russian model named Jacqueline, who occasionally poses for O, and would like to get her in the sack. Katherine Randolph, suspiciously sans fake Russian accent plays Ruben’s younger, nicer, more innocent sister...whom the film doesn’t give a fuck about.

 

Pretty much unrelated to the two previous films, this Americanised take on the ‘Pauline Reage’ story from 2002 is a bit better than the 1975 film and its 1984 semi-sequel. Directed by Phil Leirness (whose work has primarily been in shorts and docos) and co-written by Ron Norman (in his one and only credit), it is unfortunately torpedoed by shitty lighting and not particularly good acting. Lead actress Danielle Ciardi has only 6 acting credits to her name, and only two of them since this film. Although she has a truly incredible body (her arse is particularly edible- what? It’s that kind of film!), it’s easy to see why acting hasn’t entirely worked out for her if this film is any indication. Her line readings are a bit flat, but I wouldn’t call her porno actress-level bad at all. However, she has a seriously grumpy screen presence that just isn’t appealing at all. In fact, in this kind of film, it’s entirely counter-productive. It almost borders on “Goodbye Emmanuelle” levels of repellent. Also, Ms. Ciardi looks to be extremely uncomfortable on screen even before the really kinky stuff starts, which is either a wrong acting/directing choice, or just poor casting. How can I get into the ‘action’ when the main participant doesn’t look to be enjoying herself? I liked that the film gave her a legit reason to be exploring sexual boundaries with her book, but Ciardi just overdoes the discomfort.

 

Made at the tail-end of the softcore direct-to-video/DVD era of the 90s-early 00s, the sex scenes are mostly pretty terrible, and in this kind of film, that’s a real killer. In the first sex scene in particular the choreography is rather repetitive, and for the most part Ciardi’s head and body aren’t in the same shot, arousing suspicion that a nude double was used. Thing is, there’s a couple of frames where you can tell it’s really her, so it’s just incompetence to film it in such a confusing way. However, the main issue is the truly appallingly under-lit photography by Frank Suffert (who comes from a mostly documentary and short background). The image just looks really murky, muddy and dark, and I assume the budget didn’t afford great quality equipment, but Suffert definitely deserves much of the blame. There’s a pretty hot lesbian S&M scene, but Suffert manages to take some of the fun out of that by refusing to turn a fucking light on.

 

The mild best “Story of O” film I’ve seen, this one is ruined by terrible lighting and rather unpersuasive performances. Some of the sex is fairly hot, but when you can barely see it, who the hell cares? Jesus Franco would’ve known what to do with this material, but this film botches it.

 

Rating: C