writers_reign Back in 1965 a modest five-hander slipped under the radar and attracted some tasty ink. It was shot in Gloomcolor which is black and white with a fog filter and the storyline followed two couples supported by the Thames. All five actors were more or less unknown and the film was called Four In The Morning. One of the males, Norman Rodway, worked steadily and in that same year played Hotspur in Orson Welles Chimes At Midnight, the finest Shakespeare movie ever made. Joe Melia also worked steadily without setting the world on fire as did Brian Phelan. One of the two females was Judi Dench, making her film debut, and what happened to her is anyone's guess. The other female, was Ann Lynn and she impressed me but slipped of my radar at least so when I noticed she had a role in Baby Love it was sufficient for me to watch it. Alas, I lived to regret it. Very wisely two of the five writers, Michael Robson and Henri Safran opted to remain uncredited, the other three clearly have no sense of shame. This is the kind of film that gives drek like The Texas Chain-Saw Massacre a good name. All I can say is give this one plenty of the back of your neck.

Robert J. Maxwell Perhaps this British movie from the late 60s has virtues that were hidden from me. I didn't think much of it. (My opinion may have been tainted by the sleazy transfer to DVD.) It's the story of Luci, a fifteen-year-old girl whose mother has just committed suicide and who is taken in by her mother's former beau and his family -- a nice wife and a goggle-eyed adolescent boy.It's a pretty nice house and a comfortable place, though the father is uptight and snarls a lot. Luci exploits all the family members by suggesting she's sexually available, although there isn't a lot of nudity or simulated coitus. What it is, is a set up for a pornographic movie, but without the skin, just the rather ordinary plot. In skin flicks, a plot like this would be used as a device to hinge together the varied couplings. In an underground skin flick they'd have introduced the family mule or something. They'd bring in the chauffeur and the idiot son who is kept in the attic. Here, without the couplings, it's just dull.And it's not simply that the plot isn't exactly gripping. The only talent visible on the screen is that of Luci's adopted mother, who gives a seasoned performance. Luci herself -- that is, Linda Hayden -- could have been replaced by any reasonably good-looking kid who had stood out from the crowd in her high school plays. The editing is pretty clumsy too. Luci is groped by a neighbor in the local cinema but the camera doesn't seem to know how to handle the situation any better than the heroine. The cuts are confusing and Luci's response is a blank.It's not a terrible movie -- not a fell insult to anyone's sensibilities. It's just cheap and rudely made. A little more gratuitous nudity would have helped. However, others have apparently got more out of it than I did.

MartinHafer Warning: Explicit nudity, lesbianism and all-around bad behavior make this a very poor choice for showing your kids or your 80 year-old mother.Wow. This is one sleazy movie and it's a shame, as a really good film seemed like it was hiding within and could have resulted had the direction and script been a little more clever and a little less sensationalistic. The disturbed relationships of all concerned did have the possibility of making a fine film.The movie starts with a middle-aged woman (Diana Dors) committing suicide. Her 15 year-old daughter inexplicably goes to live with her old lover and his new family. This really doesn't make much sense--you'd think there'd be SOMEONE related to her or a foster home instead of this person who she'd never even met. This is very contrived, but so be it. Once in this home, you are never sure how much this girl connives or just happens to fall into bizarre sexual relationships with the son, wife and tries desperately to have sex with the father!! In many ways, she appears to seek emotional love and support in the only way she understood--with her body. All in all, a surprisingly dark and twisted series of events that is rather hard to believe--especially in the end of the film when she is revealed to be a bit less naive than in the rest of the film.Sadly, had this movie taken more of the high road it actually could have been quite challenging but good entertainment. The Freudian aspects as well as as the idea of a sick family whose dynamics are thrown for a loop with the introduction of this troubled teen is fascinating. Think about it--because of their own inadequacies and unfulfilling relationships they each, in turn, seek it out in the girl. This could have been an interesting film that was less exploitation and more psychological. But, instead with glimpses here and there of the girl's body and lots of innuendo, the film just seemed more like soft-core porn than anything else.By the way, the 15 year-old in the film really was 15--making you feel, perhaps, a bit dirty for watching it. I just assumed she was of consenting age and was surprised when I looked it up on IMDb to see that somehow they got away with making a skin flick with an underage girl. That's rather sad.

jaibo This is a rarely seen and unjustly neglected gem from the "swinging London" period of British film-making. It's subject matter – a nubile, underage teenage girl is adopted by a middle class family and becomes the erotic focus of father, son and mother – was certainly ahead of its time, and its amoral stance towards this material make it even more surprising. It was cut by the BBFC for its original UK cinema release (it is surprising it was granted a certificate at all) and its unflinching approach to its underage protagonist's sexual allure and responsiveness would get it into as much if not more trouble with the moral guardians of today.The film begins with cross cutting Hayden's character Luci kissing a boy in front of a gaggle of her male and female schoolmates with the suicide of her mother (a debauched and distressing Diana Dors) in a hot bath with a razor. With her mother dead, Luci goes to live with her Mum's old flame Robert, played by Keith Barron, now a wealthy and successful London doctor. Luci's presence inflames both the teenage son of the doctor and his neglected wife, both of whom attempt to take advantage of Luci's disturbed state of mind (she is having nightmares and hallucinations featuring her dead mother) and Robert himself is also susceptible to the young nymphet's charms. But Luci is no innocent - she seems to know that sex is power and she plays the game for what its worth, hanging onto her position in the house through sheer female will and exploiting the desires of each member of the family when it suits her.This portrait of Luci as colluding with those who would pray on her is troubling, but psychologically acute. Luci is both powerless, disturbed and the off-spring of a Mother who clearly (we learn in flashbacks) was no sexual wallflower. Luci is very much the product of her background, one of financial and emotional poverty, and so is rather more sympathetic than the spoilt middle-class folk whose fantasy figure of attraction and repulsion she is forced by circumstance to be. The film ostensibly looks like one of those dramas in which a cuckoo comes in to disturb a nest, but in actuality the middle-class family was always already deeply divided and she but acts as a catalyst which brings the ruptures to the surface. There is a suggestion that Luci has been sexualised before we meet her – her mother's burly lover hangs around her house both before and after the suicide & the cruel laughter from mother and lover in the flashback where Luci catches them at it suggests that he was also involved with Luci, the mother rubbing her sexual competitiveness with her daughter in the poor child's face. This reading of the film makes sense of those moments where Luci responds to improper, aggressive advances in inappropriate situations – the black man in the nightclub, the groper in the cinema, the louts in the rowboat. She also flirts heavily with Robert's friend, a depressing old lecher played by Dick Emery who acts as a sort of Clare Quilty figure, embodying Robert's worst knowledge about himself.Baby Love is brilliantly put together, using a roaming camera which constantly prowls around the characters hoping to catch them as some sordid thing and fast editing offering us glimpses of impressionist moments from each situation. It seems extraordinary that the film was made over 40 years ago – it makes most teenage drama now look like punch-pulling chicken feed.