This was my first experience of a Sam Fuller picture, and I have to say, it was quite the revelation. The entire film keeps you slightly off balance, starting right out of the gate with that bizarre opening, which could have had any number of interpretations. It was interesting that the full details of that encounter weren't revealed until some time later in the story, by which time I had started to form a different idea of what had originally happened. But the scene that changed the entire picture for me had to be Kelly's (Constance Towers) discovery of Grant's (Michael Dante) pedophilia. Even though it was all done by inference and suggestion, I was immediately creeped out by the assault on innocence that changed the whole complexion of the story on a dime. Kelly's reaction was swift and deadly, and in keeping with the street smarts gained from a life of prostitution.

I was surprised to see that this film was made as late as 1964. It had a lot of the earmarks of the type of 'educational' film that came out of the 1930's and '40's that have earned cult status for their camp portrayals. I'm thinking of titles like "Delinquent Daughters" and "Slaves in Bondage", but here, the emphasis doesn't seem to be on creating sensationalism as much as forcing the viewer to think outside the box regarding aberrant behavior. Grant's conversation when he's outed as a pervert is particularly revealing; he believes that he and Kelly could have a wonderful marriage because they're both abnormal. How's that for a rationale?

For it's unusual and offbeat subject matter, "The Naked Kiss" is a stunningly surprising movie, one that won't appeal to every taste, but it certainly leaves it's impact on the viewer in a way that precariously treads the line between entertainment and revulsion. Constance Towers is unusually effective in maintaining credibility for her character after the shock of that opening scene wears off. This is only the second time I've seen a bald woman in a picture, the first being Persis Khambatta in the 1979 flick - "Star Trek: The Motion Picture". In both instances, there's something to say about how sexy a bald woman can be under the right circumstances. I think Captain Kirk would agree.

I'm sure this must have caused a bit of a stir when it was released. It deals with the crime of child sexual abuse. It has as its central figure a young prostitute who is trying to go straight. She has a natural propensity for children and works with them in a hospital. Her past is always lurking in the shadows as she bobs and weaves through a net of suspicion. Her relationship with a cop is the center and he must constantly be on his guard to do what he must do and yet trust her motives. Enter a man who has designs on her, but who has his own little secret. This movie is pretty good, showing how she must deal with her own perverse upbringing and activity and do the honorable thing wherever possible. I did have some trouble with her rapid transition. It's just a little too pat. She is almost too good to be true. Too easy in some respects. Still, there are good performances and the movie breaks some ground.

In THE NAKED KISS, the film makers purport to do an exposée on sexual depravity--in particularly focusing on prostitution and pedophilia. However, this film does NOT appear to be a public service but more just an opportunity to shock the audience. And, considering the film came out in 1964, it occasionally leaves the audience wondering what the heck had just happened! For lovers of trashy films, however, this is an absolute must-see, as this makes films like PEYTON PLACE seem like a Disney production!

The film begins with a wildly over-the-top scene as a prostitute fight (Kelly) with a drunk a man (late in the film you find out this is her pimp). In the process, her wig is stripped off--revealing a bald head! And what follows is an amazingly vicious beating of the man. No holds were barred in this slug-fest!

The film now skips ahead two years. The same woman, now a blonde, arrives in a small town. Now here is one of the confusing moments. She says that she is a representative for a champagne company. Apparently, this is some sort of code for "hooker"--though no one would know this...except for Captain Griff of the local police. He does what any cop would do under the circumstances--he takes her home and pays for a great time. First, considering the rather advanced age of the leading lady (she looked very old for the role),this seemed surprising as apparently there is a brothel across the river and they must have had SOMEONE more interesting than Kelly. Second, once again, this is handled with such kid gloves that the viewer still isn't sure what transpired between Griff and Kelly. Did he let her sleep in the guest room or did they do the old 'horizontal mambo', so to speak.

Now the film skips a bit ahead again. Apparently Kelly has given up her sleazy ways and now works with handicapped kids. She is practically an angel she is so perfect at this job--I mean REAAALLY perfect--Mother Theresa perfect. Life is good and the only one in town aware of her sordid past is Griff.

A bit later, she meets a wonderful and rich guy who is too good to be true. Even after she tells him about her past, he STILL wants to marry her. What a guy, right? Nope!! J.L. Grant has a secret of his own and Kelly discovers "it" during yet another confusing scene. We know that a child was involved but what he was doing with her is completely vague. Most people will assume he was sexually abusing the kid, but for all we know he was teaching her macramé or making cookies! But, we're more inclined to think he was a child molester because when Kelly walks in, she decides to beat her fiancé to death--and you usually don't do that over macramé or cookies. Don't mess with this lady! Now she is accused of murder and everyone, particularly Grant's best friend (Griff) thinks she's a cold-blooded murderer--not a person who just rid the world of a....whatever he was! Will she fry or go free--see for yourself.

Overall, this film is anything but subtle. It bathes in sleaze and exploitation but oddly because it was made before the production code was totally abandoned, you never are explicitly told anything!! So, it teases but doesn't exactly please. This is a bad film in many ways but is handled in such a salacious manner that it's pretty exciting stuff....highly sanitized but exciting.

This was NOT director Sam Fuller's finest moment--trading some of his cache for great economical film making for a bit of titillation and trash.