Much is promised in NET SKIRTS RELEASE 1.0, an attempt by Girlfriends Films to make their romantic (and often nostalgic) lesbian features more "au courant". The cover photo of 14 beautiful actresses is a terrific come-on, but the video inside the DVD package is of decidedly variable quality.
No credits as usual (director, screenwriter, etc.) reflects the often improvisational nature of the vignettes. Worst example, which drags down the whole enterprise, is a summit meeting of genuine superstars Julia Ann and Shyla Jennings. Sure, they are hot together in the sack -so what else could one expect? But the lengthy, laborious set-up to create their characters and relationship is beyond inept -it brought back memories of incompetent 1-day porn wonders made 40 years before. Poor Julia Ann stumbles frequently -at one point Shyla has to prompt her with a response to an improvised remark she's just made (reminded me of a similar situation in which Veronica Hart jumped in to handle both sides of a backseat conversation while driving with a stoned Seka circa 1982) and later Julia is completely at a loss for words, creating dead air in the already bloated 3-hour running time.
Premise of the series is a website named Net Skirts, used by the women of the small town of Thornhill to expand the marketing reach of their small businesses, as discussed in a well-staged weekly meeting of the Thornhill Leadership Committee, led by Samantha Ryan (here a brunette). But it quickly becomes clear that Net Skirts is actually a useful vehicle for women to hook-up with simpatico other women: result: hot lesbian sex.
If that sounds familiar, Girlfriends' cash cow is the WOMEN SEEKING WOMEN series in which the same result is achieved not by modern technology but by hook or by crook. The label issues a new WSW title every month, and I just watched the excellent newest edition #118.
Fo the opening vignette here, Girlfriends turns to the #1 lesbian actress, Magdalene St. Michaels, who connects online with the beautiful young Brooke Lee Adams (named after the great young actress of the '70s and '80s perhaps with middle name added??). Brooke had gone on Net Skirts with her problem, dumped by her fiancé and left hanging with shower gifts received already and no marriage in the offing. Maggie gives her advice, they have a meet-up, and Maggie shows her a thing or two about Sapphic lovemaking. Adams' career was mostly in boy/girl scenes.
Second segment is Shyla vs. Julia, completely ridiculous. Shyla visits the mansion of successful businesswoman Julia and tells her at great length a sob story of being an impoverished student with no family, etc., etc. She wants to take a scuba diving course Julia runs (huh?) and can't afford it, but has her life goals dedicated on "saving marine life". This nonsense goes on interminably until a hop in the sack unites the two women.
Two contrasting blondes get it on next: Brea Bennett and Lux Kassidy. I had seen Lux in several earlier features, including the lousy SANATORIUM, and their typical seduction segment (lovemaking starts off with telltale "You can trust me" line) is nothing to write home about.
Finale pairs Samantha Ryan with Brenda James in a younger/older hookup in which James belabors her "reluctant virgin" routine, a bit much in her case at age 40. She actually won a meaningless industry Best Actress award for the same nonsense in a later feature DIRTY SECRETS by Kay Brandt, and is just as tiresome here.
My favorite scene is Ryan running the Committee Meeting. It was a challenge to identify all the uncredited extras who appear along with the 1.0 stars, but I managed to spot Dana DeArmond (with different hairstyle than usual) and Shayla LaVeaux in speaking roles plus many cameos by: Elexis Monroe, India Summer, Darryl Hanah, Melissa Monet, Dyanna Lauren and Prinzzess. Another Girlfriends regular Kelly Leigh is singled out by Ryan (with applause) as a new committee member, but I didn't see her actually appear on screen in the video. Separately, Tanya Tate has a striking but brief cameo as Shyla's mother in a scene whose implications are never resolved.
0 out of 0 found this helpful