Excellent, a Must See

Fun premise, good actors, bad writing. This film seemed to have potential at the beginning but it quickly devolves into a trite action film. Ultimately it's very boring.

It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties.

It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

Despite their obvious sexploitation potential, the "nunsploitation" films actually started out as more or less serious and even somewhat historically accurate dramas criticizing the Church. The original film that started it all, "The Nun of Monza" (which I've yet to see) is in this vein, as is the early 70's loose trilogy of Italian nun films--"Story of a Cloistered Nun", "The Nuns of St. Archangel", and "The Sinful Nuns of St. Valentines"--and also perhaps the best of all of these films, "Flavia, the Heretic". The mid-70's though saw the influence of "The Exorcist" and these films began to delve into not-so-historically-accurate satanic themes and completely over-the-top hallucinatory delerium typified by Jess Franco's "Love Letters from a Portugese Nun", the two Mexican nun films--"Satanic Pandemonium" and "Alucarda", not to mention the rather incoherent films of hack Bruno Mattei, "The Other Hell" and "The True Story of the Nun of Monza". Then there were the flat-out, almost completely plot-less lesbian sex romps like Walerian Browzyx's "Behind Convent Walls" as well as just plain weird stuff like the giallo/"nunsploitation" hybrid "Killer Nun". Sleazemaster Joe d'Amato had earlier directed "Images in a Convent", which manages to combine the latter two strains (hallucinatory satanism AND a plot less sex romp) so it's interesting here he decided to go all the way back to the beginning and make a fairly historical drama based on a novel by Denis Diderot no less.The story involves a young girl (Eva Grimaldi) who is confined to a convent after her lustful father tries to rape her. She becomes a favorite of the Mother Superior and a potential lover of the young father-confessor, but falls prey to the machinations of another ambitious nun (Karin Weil) who is plotting to take over the convent. The supporting cast meanwhile includes Gabriel Tinti (Mr. Laura Gemser)as the monsignor and Jessica Moore (from D'Amato's "11 Days and 11 Nights"). There's nudity aplenty courtesy of Weil, Moore, and (especially) Grimaldi, but D'Amato seems, uncharacteristically, much more interested in serious drama than softcore porn.The problem is, with the exception of the underrated Tinti, D'Amato is saddled here with softcore porn star cast who don't pull off serious drama very well. Grimaldi is especially unconvincing as an innocent virgin (a role earlier assayed by much stronger actresses like Eleanora Giorgi, Ornella Muti, and Jenny Tamburi). The role perhaps should have been played by Jessica Moore, but she was not really a great actress either (and besides, even at eighteen here, she had a body like Jessica RABBIT and wouldn't have very convincing PLAYING an eighteen-year-old). That's not to say this movie is in any way bad, but it is odd that D'Amato would go so much in the way of serious drama with THIS cast, who were really built for a flat-out sex romp.

Convent of Sinners (1986) ** 1/2 (out of 4) Nunsploitation flick from director Joe D'Amato is actually very tame for the genre and instead of nothing but sex, the film goes for drama and protest against the Catholic Church. After being raped by her father, a young girl (Eva Grimaldi) is sent to a convent where she becomes very close with the head nun. Soon the other nuns get jealous and decide to tell the higher ups that the girl is possessed by the Devil. Running just under 90-minutes, the film does drag in spots but D'Amato's message against the Church is loud and very clear. Most of these nunsploitation films are nothing but lesbian sex but that too is rather small in this film as it's clear the director is going for something deeper. The camera-work (also by D'Amato) is very good and the leads do a nice job as well.

Even though I don't consider myself a very big fan of the bizarre nunsploitation genre, I do often find myself watching them. I still haven't seen a true masterpiece of the genre; but while this one isn't that Holy Grail either, it's slightly more professionally done than the majority of its ilk, and may even appeal to those who don't watch films just see naked women and random sleaze. Joe D'Amato's name is synonymous with sleaze and nudity, and so it's rather odd that this film appears to focus more on characters and the implications of the plot rather than God-fearing women stripping off for one another. Joe D'Amato, the director of my favourite nunsploitation film so far; the completely over the top 'Images in a Convent' doesn't give this film the same handling, but once again sleaze makes up the backbone. After being raped by her own father, a young woman named Suzanne is sent off to a convent for 'her sins'. Naturally, she isn't very pleased about this chain of events; and it's not long before she wants to forsake her vows and leave the convent; only her fellow nuns are none too pleased and argue that she has become possessed by the devil.The film does feature several nude scenes, although there isn't anything too 'bad' in this film. One scene which sees the central character have holy water forced through a certain orifice is liable to offend and please fans of this sort of film, however. It's clear that the film was made on a low budget, although the talented D'Amato masks this brilliantly with some crisp and clear cinematography and a lack of sequences that may show his budget restraints. The central story is actually well used, although personally I found it a little too dry as I really don't have much of an interest in the way that convents are run and the methods they use to keep their personnel in check. D'Amato seems to have wanted to make the film a bit more deep than the usual nunsploitation, and this is shown by the way that the central character is made out to be a martyr, almost in the style of the likes of Joan of Arc as she wrongly becomes the victim of sins she hasn't committed. Overall, I won't say that I'm a big fan of this film; but of the few nunsploitation films I have watched, this certainly isn't the worst.

Aristide Massacesi, the undisputed King of Italian Sexploitation Movies, here credited as Dario Donati, did it again. After his infamous '79 "Immagini di un convento" aka "Visions in a Convent", an erotic/porn romp starring sultry Paola Senatore (for the erotic part) and totally uninhibited Marina Hedman (for the porn department), comes back several years later, with his second entry in the "Convent Erotica" or "Nunsploitation" sub-genre. Actually in this one, he makes an honest effort to improve the quality of this production and he...almost succeeds. Still a low-budget production but with great Renaissance settings, excellent cinematography, an attractive cast lead by a gorgeous young Eva Grimaldi (at the beginning of her career, bound to become one of the most recognized Icons of Euro Sex-Cinema), decent acting and a clever and quite exploitative direction. As a matter of fact, even if less explicit and graphic then its predecessor, we get here the "whole sleaze enchilada" containing: more then obligatory nuns-lesbian action, nuns-masturbation, nuns-whipping, nuns-torture, nuns-fondling, nun-priest sex action, naked nuns frolicking in bathtubs, a hunky handyman who is mute but compensates his handicap, by being available to "comfort and service" needy nuns and the most incredible and unthinkable exorcism practice, involving holy water and an enema syringe...Wow! Do I need to say more? All the nuns are young and pretty (even Mother Superior is not bad at all...) and you really wonder if, to become a nun in those days, girls had to meet very high beauty parameters.... The story is quite the "classic one": a young girl, Suzanne, is raped by her step-father and consequently (as customary in those days), sent to a convent, to get her out of the way. There she finds soon out, that life behind the convent walls can be quite exciting. She has a steamy sensual relationship with Mother Superior, assorted lesbian encounters with other nuns and a sacrilegious sexual relationship with the young Father Confessor of the convent. This, however, unchains the jealousy and angriness of the other nuns, lead by the Vice-Mother Superior, who "has plans" for Suzanne. Repeatedly rejected, she accuses her of being possessed by the Devil and manages to send her to trial before the Archbishop. Suzanne gets tortured and exorcised (with great satisfaction of the male audience..). She still proclaims her love for God, but also confesses a lack of religious vocation, which made her vulnerable to the "temptations of the flesh". Unable to prove her innocence, abandoned by her lover (who realizes, at the end, that a career in the Vatican is more important then a love relationship) and rejected by the vast majority of the Sisterhood, she "flips-out", gets into convulsions, tears open her robe and (beautifully) naked, drops unconscious on the floor of the church! Highly dramatic organ music - THE END – rolling closing-credits....let's go to bed! OK, OK, it's only a Sex-Movie but why have those "Nunsploitation" or "Convent Erotica" flicks become so popular during the '70 and '80s and, in several cases, so successful? (I'd like to recommend very stylish and stimulating Walerian Borowczyk's '78 "Behind the Convent Walls" and both equally excellent Domenico Paolella's '73 "The Nuns of Saint Archangel" and "Story of a Cloistered Nun" and, it goes without saying, the one who started the whole genre: delirious Ken Russell's '71 "The Devils"). I think mainly for their anti-clerical spirit, which started spreading during the seventies, showing the Church, the Cloister, the Inquisition and similar institutions as very corrupt and barbaric. But not only for this reason. They also depict a microcosm, in which young women are "prisoners" confined in limited space, where the most evil and powerful, can sadistically abuse the weakest and the most innocent. I believe the majority of male readers will agree that the half-naked body of a nun (who implies purity, since she is supposed to deny her body and all her sexual desires), becomes a "perverse object of desire". If the very same body undergoes whipping or any other act of (sexual) abuse, it tremendously increases its erotic appeal. A sexual act, like fondling or masturbation, performed on screen by a beautiful actress impersonating a nun, in various stages of undressing of her rough underwear, alone or with a partner, set in a Cloister, becomes an almost unbeatable element for high-voltage and kinky eroticism. What is it? Perverse and fetishistic erotic fantasies? Desire for sacrilegious profanation of a symbol of purity? Expression of a "macho culture" originated "love'n'hate" relationship towards women? Desire of revenge for a symbol of forbidden, unnatural and inaccessible femininity? I don't think I go wrong if I say: a mixture of all of the above! So, if you enjoyed watching "Convent of Sinners" aka "La Monaca del Peccato" (like I did) but, at the end of the movie, felt a sudden urge to...take a shower, it's OK, go ahead and you'll feel (a little) better afterward. I give this one a seven (with a little sense of guilt) out of ten.