Anarchy TV (1997) from Johnny Web (Uncle Scoopy; Greg Wroblewski)

According to the opening title screen, Anarchy TV was based on a "true story" of radicals who took over a public access station. When their propaganda resulted in zero ratings and no attention from the media, they decided to deliver their message while doing nude aerobics, thus giving them a soapbox.


Lots. See the main commentary

I think this was supposed to be a media spoof like Al Yankovic's UHF. Or maybe it was supposed to be an earnest political polemic of some kind, supporting those radicals who really did all this in real life. Frankly, I didn't know whether they wanted to make fun of the anti-establishment people or sympathize with them. Those characters spend an awful lot of time talking about serious topics like racism and murder and corporate profits, so I think we were supposed to appreciate their point of view. Unfortunately, all of their points were so heavy-handed, and supported with such loopy evidence and wacky conspiracy theories, that the radical characters ended up neither funny nor sympathetic.

DVD info from Amazon

  • director commentary track

  • Timothy Leary interview

  • no widescreen

The performing would be about average in an episode of Scooby's Laff-a-Lympics. Alan Thicke does his best Dick Dastardly, and all four Zappa kids provide additional Hanna-Barbera style subtlety in minor roles.

This film would be a complete and utter failure except that it includes full-frontal nudity from a bunch of attractive people: Jessica Hecht (the lesbian who stole Ross's first wife on "Friends"), Tamayo Otsuki, Matt Winston, Jonathan Penner, and a bunch of unnamed naked prisoners.

The Critics Vote

  • no reviews online

The People Vote ...

  • IMDB summary. IMDb voters score it 4.1/10, and that's generous.
  • I don't think it had any theatrical showings except at some small film festivals.


The meaning of the IMDb score: 7.5 usually indicates a level of excellence equivalent to about three and a half stars from the critics. 6.0 usually indicates lukewarm watchability, comparable to approximately two and a half stars from the critics. The fives are generally not worthwhile unless they are really your kind of material, equivalent to about a two star rating from the critics. Films rated below five are generally awful even if you like that kind of film - this score is roughly equivalent to one and a half stars from the critics or even less, depending on just how far below five the rating is.

My own guideline: A means the movie is so good it will appeal to you even if you hate the genre. B means the movie is not good enough to win you over if you hate the genre, but is good enough to do so if you have an open mind about this type of film. C means it will only appeal to genre addicts, and has no crossover appeal. (C+ means it has no crossover appeal, but will be considered excellent by genre fans, while C- indicates that it we found it to be a poor movie although genre addicts find it watchable). D means you'll hate it even if you like the genre. E means that you'll hate it even if you love the genre. F means that the film is not only unappealing across-the-board, but technically inept as well.

Any film rated C- or better is recommended for fans of that type of film. Any film rated B- or better is recommended for just about anyone. We don't score films below C- that often, because we like movies and we think that most of them have at least a solid niche audience. Now that you know that, you should have serious reservations about any movie below C-.

Based on this description, this film would be an E without the nudity. It is not good as a comedy, and it is even worse as a political satire. If you are looking for a R-rated nudie film, however, this has some clear frontals from some attractive actors and actresses, so it could be considered a C- as a nudie film.

Return to the Movie House home page