Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueA rich society girl is recruited to go undercover and expose a drug/blackmail/prostitution ring in her small town.A rich society girl is recruited to go undercover and expose a drug/blackmail/prostitution ring in her small town.A rich society girl is recruited to go undercover and expose a drug/blackmail/prostitution ring in her small town.
Photos
Casey Donovan
- Rodney
- (as Calvin Culver)
Lise Mauer
- Elizabeth Anderson
- (as Lise D. Mauer)
- …
Tracey Walter
- Ginger's Brother
- (as Tracey Walters)
Histoire
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesGinger includes Cheri Caffaro's first nude scenes. She was 25 at the time. In a 1974 interview, she explained why she decided to get naked and how it was very upsetting. "Nudity is one way to get into the movies. I'm not saying it's the best way, but right now (the early 1970s) we're going though a nude cycle so you have to go along with it." She started auditioning for movies in her early 20s, but they all required nudity, which she did not want to do. But, she said, she finally got tired of fighting it after not being cast in anything. "I took the role of Ginger....There were some nude scenes in the picture, but I decided it would be all right." When the time came to film her first scene, suddenly she was not so sure. "I looked at all of the technicians and crew members and got upset. But I'd signed the contract and I don't believe in not keeping my word. So I stepped in front of the camera without a stitch on." When she noticed the mostly male group staring at her, she remembers blushing all over. Director Don Schain was so impressed with her, he cast her for the sequel, where she again spent considerable time running around and even performing fight scenes naked, as well as having steamy borderline X-rated sex scenes with naked guys. At that point, Caffaro said being exposed in front of everyone was habit forming. She and Schain started a relationship and soon got married. He directed her in a few more films and asked his wife to get naked in all of them. She said being married to him actually made her more comfortable and secure being nude. She then joked that the naked male actors she had sex scenes with were a lot more nervous, because they knew they were kissing her and fondling her body in front of her husband.
- ConnexionsFeatured in Twisted Sex Vol. 19 (1998)
Commentaire en vedette
When I reviewed the film 'Christina' for IMDb, I commented that it was very poorly made in comparison with many of the earlier films of the same genre, such as the early 1970's series featuring the female private investigator Ginger. Later thinking back about this spontaneous comment I found it hard to rationalise why I had hated watching Christina, but had enjoyed the Ginger series; and I began to wonder whether this was solely because I was looking back at the latter series, which I have not viewed during the quarter century since they were first released, through the rose coloured spectacles of relative youth. Many of the criticisms I had made about Christina seemed on reflection to have been equally applicable to the Ginger films. These and other films of the same genre were made on a relatively low budget for the sole purpose of bringing in good returns to their promoters; or (if we are more charitable) building up the funds required for the production of a planned future epic or Oscar winner. They are basically simple exploitation movies with an appeal based on sex and violence and with no pretensions to cinematographic significance. The promoters know that the largest cinema audiences consist of young people who typically attend in groups or pairs and who expect an interesting but not memorable screening they can enjoy together. Films such as "Ginger" or "Pepper" appeal to girls and women because they feature an unusually capable female investigator who can always deal with male colleagues or opponents on a more than equal basis. Their recipe includes enough violence and female nudity to ensure that they have an equal appeal for youths and young men; and they always show respect for the traditional values of Society - the good guys always win out in the end and there is no tolerance of either criminals or revolutionaries. Why then should I remember the Ginger films quarter of a century later, whilst most of the other films of the same genre which I have seen since have now been totally forgotten?
To answer this question I obtained copies of the first and third of the Ginger films ("Ginger" and "Girls are for Loving") to watch again, and am now submitting my comments on both to IMDb. These two sets of comments should be regarded as complimentary - probably the main difference between these films is that the first is a typical very low budget production designed to test the market, whilst the third has clearly benefited from rather less financial constraints. In these comments I am limiting myself to generalities when considering 'Ginger', but examining more specific considerations in the case of 'Girls are for Loving'.
Viewing these two films for a second time I found it very hard to identify any areas where they are significantly better in quality than 'Christina'. All these films feature violence, nudity and sexually suggestive situations, with no redeeming social message, often to the point where they would be regarded by most viewers as no more than soft porn. They are intended to provide easy viewing but not memorable fare. The Martin and Porter Guide to Home Videos makes the telling comment that it will not describe "Ginger" as the best of these three films, but rather as the least repulsive. However the Ginger films are still available as DVD's, and are presumably still selling, over 30 years after they were first released, so I am not alone in remembering them when so many of their later imitators have been totally forgotten. After watching them again I feel certain that this difference is primarily attributable to a much greater tautness in the script. Watching many other similar films, viewers encounter numerous rather boring sequences where they wonder why they are wasting their time watching such trash. Ultimately this leads to a low rating for the film in question. The problem here lies in the direction. Whilst they were no better made or acted, the direction of the Ginger films is such that the story carries the viewer forward from moment to moment in a way which leaves little time for introspection or boredom to develop. In my view this is the reason they have survived whilst so many later films have fallen by the wayside. But their appeal is purely that of a guilty pleasure, re-watching them reminded me of the appeal of splurging on a massive and rich ice cream concoction after a long period of dieting. The only reason why this may be said to be a good thing to do is that, certainly for some people, an occasional indulgence of this kind can be of enormous value in helping them to maintain the ongoing discipline of dieting over an extended period of time.
If you know that you enjoy this type of occasional indulgence, watch one or more of the Ginger films. You will probably not be disappointed.
To answer this question I obtained copies of the first and third of the Ginger films ("Ginger" and "Girls are for Loving") to watch again, and am now submitting my comments on both to IMDb. These two sets of comments should be regarded as complimentary - probably the main difference between these films is that the first is a typical very low budget production designed to test the market, whilst the third has clearly benefited from rather less financial constraints. In these comments I am limiting myself to generalities when considering 'Ginger', but examining more specific considerations in the case of 'Girls are for Loving'.
Viewing these two films for a second time I found it very hard to identify any areas where they are significantly better in quality than 'Christina'. All these films feature violence, nudity and sexually suggestive situations, with no redeeming social message, often to the point where they would be regarded by most viewers as no more than soft porn. They are intended to provide easy viewing but not memorable fare. The Martin and Porter Guide to Home Videos makes the telling comment that it will not describe "Ginger" as the best of these three films, but rather as the least repulsive. However the Ginger films are still available as DVD's, and are presumably still selling, over 30 years after they were first released, so I am not alone in remembering them when so many of their later imitators have been totally forgotten. After watching them again I feel certain that this difference is primarily attributable to a much greater tautness in the script. Watching many other similar films, viewers encounter numerous rather boring sequences where they wonder why they are wasting their time watching such trash. Ultimately this leads to a low rating for the film in question. The problem here lies in the direction. Whilst they were no better made or acted, the direction of the Ginger films is such that the story carries the viewer forward from moment to moment in a way which leaves little time for introspection or boredom to develop. In my view this is the reason they have survived whilst so many later films have fallen by the wayside. But their appeal is purely that of a guilty pleasure, re-watching them reminded me of the appeal of splurging on a massive and rich ice cream concoction after a long period of dieting. The only reason why this may be said to be a good thing to do is that, certainly for some people, an occasional indulgence of this kind can be of enormous value in helping them to maintain the ongoing discipline of dieting over an extended period of time.
If you know that you enjoy this type of occasional indulgence, watch one or more of the Ginger films. You will probably not be disappointed.
- bbhlthph
- 20 nov. 2004
- Lien permanent
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et surveiller les recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Ginger?Propulsé par Alexa
Détails
Box-office
- Brut – États-Unis et Canada
- 872 256 $ US
- Durée1 heure 30 minutes
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant