Will Packwood's Rating:

Starring: Julie Meadows, Gina Ryder, Keri Windsor, Charlie, Monique DeMoan, Ian Daniels, Jonathan Sims, Nick Manning, Evan Stone, Marty Romano.

What did I think of their performances? In a word: Uninspired. There was a lot of squealing and moaning in the sex scenes, but the erotic action seldom warrants all the noise. Julie Meadows is the star here I suppose and this took some thought - plays, "Julie. " Of course the names have absolutely no bearing on the paper-thin plot anyway, so if the rest of the "actors" and "actresses" in this had used their own names it would be easier to identify them for future reference - both good and bad. But I digress. Julie, who is not a top tier porn actress, is surrounded by a troop of second string players. Not that this is necessarily bad. Sometimes the second stringers play harder - but not here.

I've seen several of these same performers in other movie where they have been much better. But in "Sweet Desires" the director, F. J. Lincoln, doesn't know what to do with them.

None of the performances are memorable, and to be honest, most of the sex scenes are so similar, they are almost interchangeable. This ultimately makes them boring - and that is what happened here.

Additionally, some directors think they have to put every minute of a sex act on the scene - they think their work is too good to edit - and it makes the scenes drag.

It was a clear, shot on video, porno flick that was probably shot in a day or two at someone's house - someone with a small gym and a whirlpool bath. I worried at the beginning that the "special effect" overlay of the water flushing over the action and the credits in the intro wouldn't disappear when the picture started, but thankfully it did. They didn't go overboard on the set, costumes or script - but I have seen some pretty good stuff that was shot in this same way.

Lukewarm, at best, you'll want to have the remote control handy and your finger permanently positioned above the FF button as you view this. There are seven sex scenes, I think, I may have nodded off through some of them, so I'm not positive. It opens with Julie's husband studying at a table in what is supposed to be their house. She brings him some snacks. The typical inane porn chatter centers on how snacks and chocolate make you horny and this leads him to grab a can of whipped cream and carry Julie upstairs. Now I will describe the mechanical sequence of events in this one scene and will tell you that the exact same sequence is done over and over and over again, with minor variations, in nearly all of the sex scenes in this entire film! He eats her, she blows him, he gives her the high hard one and cums on her chest. (For variation, sometimes the stud cums on the belly or the ass, being careful to keep the cum as far as possible away from any of the actresses lips and face. ) There's not a single facial in the whole film.

In the second scene, Gina Ryder and her boyfriend wander in and find what is left of the snacks and the "goodies" affect them the same way - wonder where you can by this ice cream they are eating? Gina is hot and I like her. In the past she has been open to just about anything, but here we get the same tired sequence - he eats her, she blows him. . . well, you get the picture. Like so many of the scenes in this video, each act is filmed far too long to suit me.

Later, Julie does two more guys in separate scenes and for comic relief, in the tub scene reveals she is studying to be a doctor. There is the obligatory lesbo scene with Keri Windsor, with a series of forgettable fucks sandwiched in for filler. Julie winds up taking it up the ass in the last scene, but most viewers will probably be dozing by the time this happens unless they fast forward to the end. The last two scenes, in fact, involve anal sex, with some out of shape, overly-tattooed motorcyle type stud, doing the butt boning - whoa, talk about innovation.

This may be classified as porn for women, or couple's porn. And while there is nothing wrong with that, msot porn watchers, and more importantly, buyer's are men. If this type repetitive action gets your girl in the mood, you might like it.

Gina Ryder's scene with her boyfriend was probably the best of a bad bunch. Gina looks great with a cock in her mouth and she makes eye contact with the guy she's swallowing.

I think that has been covered above. The sheer monotoy of watching so many poorly directed, uninspired scenes made me drowsy. This cast had real potential, but it was squandered in this senseless outting.

I'd give it a 5 and that may be overly generous. If you really like Julie Meadows, you might want to add this to your collection. But, otherwise, if you want something to get your rod hard, you'd better look elsewhere.

Posted By Will Packwood, www.excaliburfilms.com | 10/12/06 1:58 PM