I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

Wonderful character development!

I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

Mostly, the movie is committed to the value of a good time.

Absolutely god-awful exploitation film is something of a rape/revenge story with a woeful lack of attention to the "revenge" part. The movie instead focuses on the rape of a lipstick model by a weirdo music teacher and no one believing that she was raped. It holds your attention because you want so badly to see the rapist scumbag get his just desserts. The worst part is that because the victim was a lipstick model who sometimes posed half-naked the rapists' lawyer drags out all these seductive ads she did and badgers her on the witness stand about her "wanting it". It's repulsive. Unfortunately, I'm sure this kind of stuff happens in real life. Chris Sarandon is excellent as the rapist creep (it's hard to believe he also played Al Pacino's transvestite lover in Dog Day Afternoon), Margeaux Hemingway is ok as the victim. Not great. Just passable. Young Mariel Hemingway is excellent playing real-life sister Margeaux's sister in the movie. This is one of those movies that could only have been made in the 1970s, a decade rife with cynicism and a total lack of nostalgia. People would actually go and see movies like this in a theater, which seems extremely odd today.

The more I see references to the psychological drama/thriller movies of the 1970's, the more I wish I could see them again.Lipstick (1976) was made during an era that saw thrillers like Duel, Badham County, Hardcore, The Dirty Harry series and politically incorrect teen movies like Animal House. The scripts and characterisations had to be good because this was pre special effects, they actually shot films outdoors in real life settings, not just studio caverns.This is a beautifully made film and we can appreciate the freshness of the Hemingway sisters , as well as understand the difficulties a disturbed young man faces when his desires get the better of him.The revenge aspect would make the viewer feel good as they see justice as being done.Though in the end no one wins, expect viewers who are treated to almost 2 hours of suspense , escapism and possibly voyeurism as the girls are so attractive.I am tired of the franchise films of today, the TV remakes, the special effects-making actors and writers redundant when good scripts and real life locations are needed to help us identify with the situation.

There is a significant social statement contained within the body of this harrowing tale. Just where does consensual sensuality leave off and blatant assault begin?The meager stats for court convictions of males in rape cases speaks to the futility of provable evidence to bring about justice. It's one thing for a woman to experience a violation, yet another to prove it to a jury. With clever defense attorneys twisting facts around to suggest enticement, women face an uphill battle to overcome reasonable doubt. "Lipstick" dramatizes such a scenario in graphic terms--possibly so much so that its potent social commentary might become blurred. Just as there can be a fine line between consent and assault, so can there be also between legitimate expose and sleazy exploitation. The cast, headed by Margeaux and Mariel Hemingway, Chris Sarandon and Anne Bancroft, all invest deep emotion into their roles. It's certainly a sobering enterprise, with little in the way of character background, particularly as to the accused. Other than that he creates what some might consider "weird" art, there's nothing to suggest his rationale for physical abuses of not one, but two, sisters. All we know of him is that he's a respected educator and dance theater professional. Further, casting handsome Sarandon in the role begs the question, "Why do things the hard way?"By not addressing character background the scriptor left a decided void, suggesting an interest more on surface than substance. Nor does the film's slick title or glossy production design help raise the product's standard.When originally shown on the large screen in 1976, it apparently was too much for some audiences, and the film gained a poor rep. Viewed today, while it's still a rough enterprise, it does raise awareness as to the painful plight of abused women. In that regard, the film has relevance--for it does indeed affect us all.

SPOILERS THROUGHOUT:Lipstick is a really creepy movie with some very disturbing scenes. In spite of that, I think it's a good film with an important message. This movie has caught some flack and maybe, as with many movies, it was ahead of its time. But I think even being released now it would cause some controversy. The bottom line is, 90 percent of the movie is on the bizarre side-tough to watch film. But a good one and depicts Hemmingway's story in such a horrifying way it's almost guaranteed to disturb and scare. In addition to a very hard to watch rape scene, the scenes of the rapist crank calling Hemmingway, the eerie music and the way Hmemingway's case is handled are simultaneously tragic, frightening and will leave you with a feeling of disgust for certain characters-number one being the rapist. I beg to differ about 1 Hemingway sister being better then the other-BOTH were equally powerful and the movie was fantastically acted. All these years later, I've never forgotten it. You won't either if you watch this terribly disturbing underrated movie.