More in-depth film festival coverage than any other website!
Home Reviews  Articles  Release Dates Coming Soon  DVD  Top 20s Criticwatch  Search
Public Forums  Festival Coverage  Contests About 

Overall Rating

Awesome: 16.67%
Worth A Look: 25%
Average: 0%
Pretty Bad: 8.33%
Total Crap50%

1 review, 6 user ratings

Latest Reviews

Everybody Knows by Jay Seaver

Alita: Battle Angel by Peter Sobczynski

Integrity by Jay Seaver

Happy Death Day 2U by Peter Sobczynski

Arctic by Jay Seaver

Punk Samurai Slash Down by Jay Seaver

Man Who Killed Hitler and Then The Bigfoot, The by Rob Gonsalves

High Flying Bird by Peter Sobczynski

Tito and the Birds by Peter Sobczynski

Lego Movie 2, The by Peter Sobczynski

subscribe to this feed

Lollipop Girls in Hard Candy, The
[] Buy posters from this movie
by Greg Muskewitz

"Not enough sex to be porn. A terrible idea, an even worse result."
1 stars

Of the two revival porns currently travelling around on the circuit, I thought "The Lollipop Girls in Hard Candy" had the better, cooler title. If there was any sense of anticipation between the two, I would have to say that I was more looking forward to this one. I got the chance to talk to Bill Margold, who appeared in both of the retro-porns, and according to him, "Lollipop Girls" was started five years before "Disco Dolls," but was finished only months before the three-month production time of "Dolls." And in those late-Seventies, pornography was illegal; a possible explanation for something I will bring up shortly.

"The Lollipop Girls in Hard Candy" surely begins a lot more jovial than "The Disco Dolls," but any attempt at a linear story from that line of comparison on, is most evidently absent. Three militants rise from the sea accoutered in similar, but far cheaper livery to "Gladiator." Although this is set amongst then modern times, they are looking for Ancient Troy. They find a chick jumping on a trampoline, dress one of the soldiers up in a pink bunny suit, and bounce him over the separating wall.

Elsewhere, but not very far away, a scheming man and woman team is attempting to take over some sort of business. Currently itís producing candy, but they want to produce pesticide. Unless the scientist can come up with some kick-ass invention, pesticides it will be. So just to make sure, the "evil man" hi-jacks the lollipops that are being made (a breath-freshener, deodorant and aftershave, all in one), but not without first having some other chemical spilled on it. He takes these lollipops and randomly drops them out of a plane to disperse them and rid of the evidence, and sends the scientist and his Minnie Mouse-voiced assistant to the far end of the island Ėnude.

The chemical spilled on the lollipops was some sort of aphrodisiac; anyone who licks it is overcome with lust and orgasmic desire. I think that Judith Roberts, the latent second-grade writer of "Simply Irresistible," got her idea from this.

You would expect a lot more sex from "Lollipop Girls," or at least just having watched "Disco Dolls" 15-minutes before, I was expecting a lot more sex. But there was almost none. I canít say that I really wanted to see sex, but everything going on was so dull, that at least sex might have livened it up a little bit. Speculation has led me to believe though, that because porn was illegal during the five years that production stretched on this, it was a lot harder to get the locations to use. The ability to actually film all of this was probably more difficult, hence leading to the deficiency of carnal sex.

Instead, what we get is ridiculous episodes where characters show up in Big Bird-like suits, chicken suits, etc. There was no point to anything that was going on screen, and nothing tempting about it. It was all one giant cornball fest. The cheese factor was in the red zone. (There were lines like: "Itís so boring around here. I wish someone would drop in." No sooner does a man fall out of the sky, and she jumps in her pool after him, wet t-shirt and all or "Theyíre suckers for lollipops.") It reminded me a lot of "Dude, Whereís My Car?" in the sense that it was completely composed of non-linear and aimless actions and developments. In other words, itís extremely boring and dim.

One of the discussions my friend and I had after these two movies, was how it really neglects or obliterates what sex is about, and how itís predominantly for males. Sex is supposed to be an intimate, private thing. Some of the images are shocking, because when in the act of copulation, you donít see the things the way you do when the camera is just about as deep into it without actually being the penis or dildo. It isnít attractive, itís gross. And as far as the proclivity of pornography for men over women, itís summed up by the images of oral sex each way: for the men, the fellatio is achieved by the woman simply rubbing and licking and sucking, while the cunnilingus is only partially roused by his tongue action, notwithstanding the fact that she still must stimulate her clitoris to consummate maximum potential.

"The Lollipop Girls in Hard Candy" lacked all of the elements that made "The Disco Dolls in Hard Candy" a novelty experience. That cheesy, goofy, "Iím not enjoying this, but Iím not disliking this" type of experience from "Disco Dolls" is wholly absent from this. This one is more affected by not having the proper 3-D glasses. All the criticisms on the tech side of "Disco Dolls" is equally, and yet still more relevant here. We walked out of this one after 75-minutes of pure boredom and senselessness.

Final Verdict: F.

link directly to this review at
originally posted: 12/18/00 13:49:22
[printer] printer-friendly format  

User Comments

12/23/05 Ryan Weird movie, but fun. Even better if your drunk or high... that sucks your high wore off. 4 stars
6/21/05 Movie Fan Once my high wore out in the theator, I too walked out - This is weird, would watch again. 4 stars
7/06/04 Coach If you are drinking while watching it, the movie is a lot better. 2 stars
12/28/01 kolae it's taste good 4 stars
9/01/01 Sean Moriarty "They're suckers for lollipops" - Porno never had script-writing so good! 5 stars
8/31/01 Eric manfield none 5 stars
Note: Duplicate, 'planted,' or other obviously improper comments
will be deleted at our discretion. So don't bother posting 'em. Thanks!
Your Name:
Your Comments:
Your Location: (state/province/country)
Your Rating:

Discuss this movie in our forum




Directed by
  Norm de Plumť
  Stephen Gibson

Written by
  Mark Thunderbuns
  Ann Onymous

  Uschi Digard
  John Holmes
  Bill Margold

Home Reviews  Articles  Release Dates Coming Soon  DVD  Top 20s Criticwatch  Search
Public Forums  Festival Coverage  Contests About Australia's Largest Movie Review Database.
Privacy Policy | HBS Inc. | |   

All data and site design copyright 1997-2017, HBS Entertainment, Inc.
Search for
reviews features movie title writer/director/cast