30 of 33 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Again, There Should Be A 'Zero Stars' Rating, February 20, 2002
This is the most ridiculous and absurd piece of trash I have ever seen.
I picked it up on the recommendation of the local film critic flyer, and, first off, let me explain that DIARY OF A SEX ADDICT is not a film in any sense of the word. It's an experiment shot on someone's camcorder and edited haphazardly probably on someone's home television system.
How in the name of art the producers were able to lure credible acting talent (the likes of which include Rosanna Arquette and Nastassia Kinski) to participate in this lurid sexploitation (that, incidentally, show virtually no nudity) is beyond me.
The story of a high-class restaurant chef who finds himself, in his bored marriage (???), addicted to sex with (literally ANY) other women is nothing more than a porn-king Peter Pan tale that has no discernible beginning, middle, nor end.
The feature is rated R for extreme sexual situations, but, again, there is no sex to be seen or experienced in this film. The story tries to be about the addiction, with staccatoed flashback/inserts that add nothing to the tale, but ends up being little more than a waste of film.
DO NOT, under any circumstances, rent this picture. I know that we, as people, sometimes enjoy the freakish habit of reading a bad review and figure, "I'll rent it for the laughs." There are no laughs here. There is only incomprehensible drivel that goes nowhere s-l-o-w-l-y.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
18 of 23 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Among top 2 WORST movies I've ever seen, May 6, 2002
I bought this movie (tape format) basically because of the following 3 reasons:
1) Arquette and Kinsky were in it
2) Front artwork and title were kind of luring.
3) Bluckbuster had a discount for it on tape (9.99)
Terrible waste of money and time. Mediocre video mode, from the very start makes it look like the cheapest soap opera. What is worse, bottom line absolutely everything in the movie really ends up reaching the level of the cheapest soap opera you might be able to think of. Arquette's explosion at the end is indeed the only 10 seconds worth watching as another reviewer said, there's really nothing else worth the time and money. Given the [...] bucks I had to pay for the tape, that makes those the 10 most expensive seconds of movie material I've paid for in my life. Don't waste your time/money unless you want to explore how BAD a movie can be. Don't even read more reviews, just pick any other DVD, *ANY* other. It won't be this bad, trust me.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
9 of 11 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
Pretty damn awful...., February 24, 2002
What an embarrassment. My main question is why would two such accomplished actresses as Rosanna Arquette and Natassia Kinski fall so low to be in this film?? I gave it two stars...one for each actress...because that's about all this travesty deserves. And why is it shot on video?? Lack of budget? Or is this director trying to make some kind of point by using video?? The story could be good, but the main character is so totally repulsive and the actor is wrong for the part; what the audience needs to make this film SOME kind of a success is a protagonist to care about. The film needs a better actor to bring out the self-loathing within the character and at the same time to suggest qualities that would make him likeable so as to gather some kind of sympathy from the audience; as we have it, this actor makes a few facial grimaces to suggest his conflict, then off we go on another sexual escapade. He's totally one-dimensional. The direction is awkward and clumsy, and at some points Natassia Kinski looks downright embarrassed to be in this thing.
The only thing I found believeable was Grace's (Arquette) reaction at the film's end, although I severely doubt that ANY wife would be so ignorant all along about her husband's activities ("indiscretions" sure isn't the word in THIS case). See this film only if there's nothing else in the cinematic world to watch. Maybe one day we'll have a GOOD film on this topic as it's one that desperately needs to be explored, and it cries out for a better treatment than what we have (or lack) here.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
