Thehibikiew Not even bad in a good way

SeeQuant Blending excellent reporting and strong storytelling, this is a disturbing film truly stranger than fiction

Teddie Blake The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

Myron Clemons A film of deceptively outspoken contemporary relevance, this is cinema at its most alert, alarming and alive.

adriangr This film caused a stir when it was classed as a "Video Nasty" in the mid 1908s. but before then I don't remember it being reviewed or mentioned in most reference sources. Which is probably because it's mundane and forgettable.The film sees Udo Keir play a reclusive writer who has rented a remote cottage to bang out his next raunchy novel. Advertising for a typist produces sultry Linda Hayden as the (presumably) only applicant. As soon as she arrives you can tell from her frosty demeanour that she has an agenda of her own. Udo has his own problems, being troubled by continual flashbacks to some bloody trauma. The typing of the novel begins, intercut with a couple of appearances by British model Fiona Richmond as Udo's lover/prostitute, and couple of deaths of incidental characters as well.None of this is very engaging or gripping. The performances are almost all pretty bad. Fiona Richmond really has no acting talent at all, her inclusion in the film is purely for visual purposes (she gets naked in every scene she appears in). Linda Hayden does have proved acting ability, but here she seems to have been directed to sleepwalk her way through the script. Udo Kier is dubbed, so his performance has no depth at all, especially as he is given some very ridiculous things to do, especially in his sex scenes with Richmond. Actually, all the sex scenes are awkward and embarrassing, lacking any erotic charge and very poorly simulated. The same goes for the scenes of violence, in which those tiresome knives that squirt blood when drawn over skin are the tool of choice - I can't believe that when any of the knife attack footage was reviewed after shooting, they didn't realise how bad it was.Eventually the thing comes to a close with a rather unsurprising "reveal", and the credits finally roll - thank god. It's hard to believe that "Expose" was banned as a video nasty with content as lame as this, but that's what hype and hysteria does. Apparently this new Bluray release is uncut, so that means the British VHS release was even less impressive than this - if that's possible.Is it worth watching? If you like lots of female nudity, no matter how un-erotic it looks, then yes. Actually Linda Hayden comes across as far more alluring than Fiona Richmond, who I can now only remember for unwittingly displaying a mouth almost completely full of gold filings. But does it have tension, thrills and a gripping story? No.

Scott LeBrun Sleazy and sordid little British melodrama does have a following, and it's easy to see why. It's an erotically charged film with enough atmosphere, mood...not to mention lots of nudity and sex...to make it pleasing to watch if the potential viewer likes their sleaze. It does feel padded, even at a mere 84 minutes, but it's still quite amusing and has some very memorable sequences.Star Udo Kier certainly gives it his all. Even when dubbed by another actor, as he is here, he's fun and interesting as always. He plays Paul Martin, a hotshot yet unstable author who lives in seclusion and who's having trouble getting through his latest work. So what he does is hire a typist, Linda (delectable Linda Hayden of "Blood on Satan's Claw" fame), to assist him. But the seductive young woman only makes things worse, even coming on to Pauls' posh lady friend Suzanne (softcore icon Fiona Richmond) as part of the deal.Any fan of this film would be advised to purchase the Blu-ray & DVD combo pack from the Severin company as it shows the film in its entirety, including scenes of Hayden pleasuring herself, both in bed and in a field. Hayden and Richmond show off the goods to great effect, and Hayden delivers a pretty good performance in the bargain. In one scene, Pauls' discovery of Lindas' private possessions is intercut with scenes of her being raped by two local creeps, one of them played by the legendary stuntman Vic Armstrong. Things are further spiced up with some bloody mayhem. It's not hard to see why this would have been labelled a "Video Nasty".There's not a whole lot of story here, in the screenplay written by director James Kenelm Clarke, but it does have a decent revelation in the end as to Lindas' motivation.Very sexy stuff, overall.Eight out of 10.

Paul Andrews Expose, also know under the title The House on Straw Hill, is set in the English countryside in a large house rented out by writer Paul Martin (Udo Kier) as he tries to complete his second novel. However things are not going that well, perhaps it's the disturbing visions he has? Or maybe his large breasted assistant Suzanne (Fiona Richmond) is distracting him too much with their nocturnal activities? Then again it could simply be writer's block, in an attempt to get back on track Paul hassles his publisher to hire a temporary typist so he can dictate. Paul is sent an attractive young lady named Linda Hindstatt (Linda Hayden) who at first seems perfect but that impression doesn't linger for long, why does she masturbate over photo's of Paul? Why does she masturbate in the middle of a corn field? Why does she masturbate in bed at night? Why does she have a dildo in her suitcase? What secret is she hiding? As time passes the house on straw hill becomes embroiled in seedy sex & brutal violence...This English production was written & directed by James Kenelm Clarke & has gained a certain amount of notoriety since it was banned & placed on the 'Video Nasties' list here in the UK during the early eighties. I don't really know why but I rather like Expose. The script doesn't quite know what it wants to be & features an unusual & heady mixture of murder, gore, mystery, intrigue, sleaze, sex, nudity, rape & a implausible twist ending that when all pieced together astonishingly works. The pace is measured & is sometimes slow but at the same time I found it fascinating to watch, the opening scenes feature Paul putting on a pair of rubber gloves before having sex with Suzanne! Why? I want to know why he puts on rubber gloves before having sex, I honestly can't think of a single reasonable explanation as to why! Linda masturbates all the time & what about that rape scene? As Linda is raped at gunpoint she starts to stroke the barrel of the shotgun in a very suggestive manner if you catch my drift... I just think Expose is a great blend of weirdness, violence, sex & sleaze although the story could have been better if the mystery elements had been developed & expanded upon, I mean there's a killer running around but there are only three people in the house & it's far from difficult to work out the killers identity.Director Clarke does a decent job & I just love the look & feel of Expose. It's the whole era, the Essex locations, the cars, clothes, dialogue & the quaint English countryside. The notion that the two rapists ride around on bikes is just so English! There is a gory slit throat, someone is bloodily stabbed in a shower, the rapists are shot & there are some gory suicide flashbacks. There's plenty of sexual content & it's pretty graphic.Technically the film is good & while it isn't going to win any awards for artistic merit it's more than acceptable. The acting was OK, Hayden is pretty attractive (apparently she hates Expose & regrets doing it), Richmond has a really bad tan & Kier is always good value for money & watchable if nothing else. Karl Howman is one of the rapists, English users may recognise him from the cheesy 'Flash' washing up liquid commercials!I really liked Expose, I'm not sure I could recommend it because you have to be of a certain disposition but for low budget exploitation fans this is a must. Sex, rape, blood, violence, murder & sleaze, what more do you want?

Libretio EXPOSÉ Aspect ratio: 1.85:1Sound format: MonoNot so much a horror film, more a psychological thriller with lashings of nudity and violence, this cheapjack contribution to the 'sex-horror' subgenre of 1970's cinema stars Euro favorite Udo Kier (sporting a dubbed mid-Atlantic accent) as a successful novelist whose guilty secrets have isolated him within a picturesque cottage deep in the English countryside. Under a deadline to complete another book in the wake of his first bestseller, he hires temp secretary Linda Hayden (THE BLOOD ON SATAN'S CLAW), a ripe young sexpot given to masturbating languorously wherever the fancy takes her (in her bedroom, in the fields surrounding Kier's home) and murdering anyone who disturbs her fragile psychosis. 'Nothing, but nothing, is left to the imagination...' promised the original UK ad-mats, and - true to form - the film wears its exploitation elements like a badge of honor, casting British sex queen Fiona Richmond in her first major role (prompting acres of free publicity in contemporary skin mags) as Kier's highly-sexed girlfriend who enjoys lusty romps with her neurotic paramour before surrendering to a lesbian liaison with the lovely Linda.Directed by James Kenelm Clarke (HARDCORE, LET'S GET LAID), produced by Brian Smedley-Aston (VAMPYRES, DEADLY MANOR), and partly financed by Paul Raymond (the smut baron who launched Richmond to fame), the film slows to a crawl between the aforementioned bouts of nudity and violence, until the reasons for Hayden's murderous rampage are unveiled and she launches a merciless assault on the object of her bloody wrath. Though she (reportedly) distanced herself from the production in later interviews, Hayden is the film's trump card, a voluptuous beauty whose ample charms and faux innocence conceal a cat-like fury. Sleaze fans will certainly get their money's worth, though casual viewers may be less forgiving of the movie's many drawbacks. Also known as TRAUMA and THE HOUSE ON STRAW HILL.