The Book of Revelation (2006) from Johnny Web (Uncle Scoopy; Greg Wroblewski)

A very handsome heterosexual ballet dancer is kidnapped by three hooded women and forced to submit to their every sexual whim for twelve days. They make him masturbate. They make him dance for them. They sit on his penis while he's chained to the ground. The sodomize him with a strap-on. And so forth.

He is totally traumatized by the experience, but when he reports it to the police, they react the same way those cops on South Park reacted when the little kid was seduced by a hot female teacher. (They called him in, not to investigate the crime of statutory rape, but to give him a medal as "the luckiest boy in the whole world.") When the cops start laughing at him, he decides to take matters into his own hands, which means that he resolves to undress every woman in Australia until he finds the ones with the matching birthmarks and tattoos. He doesn't seem to realize that the kidnappers know his face, and are not likely to agree to a sexual liaison that will allow him to identify them. Then he tries the other plan. He resolves to stalk every woman in Australia to see if any of them do anything suspicious. As you might guess, the innocent ones are not particularly pleased that some stranger is stalking them. Then he tries the other, other plan when he gets an inspiration from his doctor. Since his kidnappers sedated him, and that required some medical knowledge, he resolves to check out every nurse in Australia until he finds the right one.

Master detective, that lad.

If you can believe it, he eventually loses even more of his mind.

As bad as it sounds, the plot isn't a complete write-off. The script does manage to create some suspense by setting up the film as a series of puzzles. First he disappears. He goes out for a pack of smokes, and never returns (shades of Rabbit Angstrom). Of course everyone wonders where he has been and assumes he has run away, so the film poses its first mystery. It begins as a missing persons case by showing various police procedures and indulging some intense hand-wringing from his friends. The dancer is not seen in this portion of the film. The mystery ends abruptly when we see him being pushed from a vehicle and dumped in an open field. He returns to his home and is obviously in shock, so mystery number two involves wondering what the hell is wrong with him. He won't talk about it at first, and the script reveals very slowly what has happened to him. The third mystery involves his quest for the identities of his tormentors.

When we finally see what happened to him in captivity, we realize that the entire film is basically a female sexual fantasy gussied up with a psychological thriller plot to make it cinematic, and then set in the world of ballet to pass it off as High Art. The guy has a spectacularly good body, and the camera takes it all in. He even masturbates on camera, and the film shows everything but the money shot. The female director was at least willing to allow two of the female captors to get naked as well, and one of them does quite a hot masturbation routine, so we guys at least have something to do while our dates are tickling the taco.

As if the ballet background and the sexual abuse theme were not sufficiently arty to justify the sex scenes, there are other arthouse elements as well. There are those sorts of scenes that Tarkovsky and Bergman love where a person is alone on a city street with the sound of his footsteps, even though it seems that the street should be teeming with people. And then there is Greta Scacchi as the mistress of ballet, who is diagnosed with cancer during the male dancer's traumatic quest for the kidnappers. Scacchi had been his friend and mentor but he just ignored her while he was obsessed with his womanhunt. When he finally gets back to see her, she is barely recognizable, obviously a chemotherapy patient, and this shocks him out of his own self-absorption. 

Given all these elements, women have the full panoply of arthouse armor to defend against attacks that the film is merely exploitative! Geez, women sure need a lot of justification to clout off. Hell, we guys can do it if we see some particularly well-designed power tools.

Or even if we don't.

If all the artiness is not sufficient to convince their girlfriends that they watched this film for its artistic merit, the ladies may also gush over the music and the cinematography, which is beautiful and colorful.

In fact, it seems too beautiful for the dreary subject matter, as if the entire point of the film were really not to present the grim story, but to photograph the hunky guy ...

oh ....

Oh, let's be kind. We guys have been using films to satisfy and expand our sexual fantasies for years, and it would not be difficult to find several movies which do so under the guise of art, even from the greatest directors. (Peter Greenaway and Stanley Kubrick spring to mind.)

So let's let the women have this one.


DVD features not announced yet.



Zoe Naylor does full frontal and rear nudity, and Odette Joannidis does full frontal nudity.

Tom Long does full frontal and rear nudity while he is chained up in captivity. He also masturbates on camera, which shows everything but the money shot.

The Critics Vote ...

  • Amazingly, the best review of this film is at the World Socialist Web Site!

The People Vote ...

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, or a C- from our system. 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 a D on our scale. (Possibly even less, depending on just how far below five the rating is.

Our 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. Any film rated B- or better is recommended for just about anyone. In order to rate at least a B-, a film should be both a critical and commercial success. Exceptions: (1) We will occasionally rate a film B- with good popular acceptance and bad reviews, if we believe the critics have severely underrated a film. (2) We may also assign a B- or better to a well-reviewed film which did not do well at the box office if we feel that the fault lay in the marketing of the film, and that the film might have been a hit if people had known about it. (Like, for example, The Waterdance.)
  • C+ means it has no crossover appeal, but will be considered excellent by people who enjoy this kind of movie. If this is your kind of movie, a C+ and an A are indistinguishable to you.
  • C means it is competent, but uninspired genre fare. People who like this kind of movie will think it satisfactory. Others probably will not.
  • C- indicates that it we found it to be a poor movie, but genre addicts find it watchable. Any film rated C- or better is recommended for fans of that type of film, but films with this rating should be approached with caution by mainstream audiences, who may find them incompetent or repulsive or both. If this is NOT your kind of movie, a C- and an E are indistinguishable to you.
  • D means you'll hate it even if you like the genre. 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-. Films rated below C- generally have both bad reviews and poor popular acceptance.
  • 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.


Based on this description, this film is a C+. Highly recommended for women who masturbate frequently. It's the Queen Kong of female masturbatory fantasy movies, and is packaged in convenient art film form, so nobody has to know!

Return to the Movie House home page