To be balanced, it was ok. Seeing it in the context of it's time, I think that it is at best an "average" bit of teleplay, and at worst, exploitation thinly disguised as an important "exposé" or scared straight message.
It supposedly shows us a cautionary tale of what happens to bad kids (those unsavoury ne'er do wells who defy their parents, runaway, smoke, drink, try drugs, hang out in pinball arcades, ride motorcycles, dress provocatively, go parking at lover's lane, rumble with gangs, shoplift, get in the car with strangers, etc) as a lesson, but it appears more like a way to tactically relax the censors and sell some more ad time with prurient, suggestive content. Linda Blair was still popular from her Exorcist role in 1973, and she was probably cast for the same reason, that she had that baby-face look and despite her age was willing to work with adult themes.
The producers were possibly influenced by Corman-esque sexploitation films, like Women in Cages (from 1971) or other film makers who were pushing the boundaries of what was permissible in edgy cinema at the time without earning the dreaded X rating (today X is immediately associated with porn, but it simply meant "for adult audiences only"), like Beyond the Valley of the Dolls or the Best Picture winning Midnight Cowboy (both from 1970).
"Sick, twisted and bizarre"? I don't think so. But many films of this genre have certainly been done better.
reply
share