Touches You

So much average

Absolutely the worst movie.

Tells a fascinating and unsettling true story, and does so well, without pretending to have all the answers.

If there ever was a movie that should have never been thought of, written, shared, cast, rehearsed, shot, edited nor released, this is it.

Where do you even begin with this? Porn-quality acting, basically no plot, shoddy camera-work, etc. However, there is a sly sense of humor running through it, particularly in Rena Riffel's character Penny. She has some of the funniest dialogue in the movie, although the movie is rather painful to sit through. Some scenes just go on for too long, and the conversations are pretty ridiculous and go nowhere. And the sex scenes/nudity are even less erotic/sexy than they were in the original Showgirls (which is referenced several times). Ultimately, it is worth at least one viewing, but preferably with other people so you can collectively laugh at how bad it is.

In this God awful movie that nobody, and I mean NOBODY asked for, we continue the story where Showgirls left off in 1995...or do we? No, in fact, this is an entirely different movie then Showgirls. Were lacking most of the cast of the original, although there are a few returning faces from the first film. Glenn Plummer makes his second attempt here, as well as Rena herself, who wrote and starred in this piece of rubbish. I mean, do we dare even call this a movie? If it is, we are certainly dealing with a budget so low, that we can't even afford to get a production crew in here that knew what they were doing. Too much lighting, bad acting, poor directing, annoying choppy fade in and out scenes. Bad accents. Bad script. TOO LONG OF A MOVIE! I can't think of anything good to say about this. That's why I'm giving it such a low rating. Lacks humor, lacks emotional and character depth. I could go on and on, but you get the point, let's move on to our story: Penny wants to pursue her dream of becoming a stripper/ dancer, and will stop at nothing to make sure her dreams come true. That's pretty much it. The rest of this film is pure filler, which include a girl on girl action scene in the pool, a fake pillow fight, and bad cat fights. Very uninteresting film. And it's not so much that we are making a bad sequel here, but what I really cannot understand is why we are making sequels to movies that bombed, not to mention sixteen years after it bombed. Well, I suppose there is a few good things I can say about it, at least we avoided the dreaded NC-17 rating on this one, as it has about 99 percent less nudity then Paul Verhoevens version of Showgirls. ( He directed better films...Robocop, Starship Troopers, and Spetters) Maybe they thought with this movie, less nudity, and more crap would make a better film. Sorry, team, but it didn't. And to think this was released in theatres? It should have been Direct to Video. Actually, it was so bad, it should have just gone direct to toilet.

I really don't think we needed a sequel to the awful Showgirls almost 20 years after the fact. Imagine Showgirls horrible acting and nonsense plot only even worse, along with a home camcorder and no budget for effects or proper editing. The video is horrible, the sound is horrible, it doesn't even have the hint of sensuality that Showgirls 1 failed to ultimately deliver. The only redeeming feature of this film is Rena Riffel looks just as good as she did back then, possibly even better. If this had been a little campier it could have gone into cult status. As such its just a really bad amateur film the world never needed. If you need a T&A fix there's better movies, not the least of which is the unrated Showgirls.