Stripteaser II (1997) from Johnny Web (Uncle Scoopy; Greg Wroblewski)

This is a terrible movie. I watched it only because Maria Ford is supposed to be in it as an uncredited dancer, and I was curious. After watching the entire mess, I still didn't know where the hell she was, so I started researching her pictures. Well, guess what? The mystery was solved when I saw UC99's caps from an earlier film! The director of Stripteaser 2 just re-used some footage from two scenes in Showgirl Murders. It didn't seem too much out of place because the character had no lines in Stripteaser 2, and did not interact with any other members of the cast. She was just an anonymous dancer working a special room with anonymous clients. Just atmosphere. One of our readers identified another unrelated scene as Elena Sahagun in a 1990 movie called Naked Obsession.

I assume it this was all done with the proper permissions.

They had to have been desperate for content, because this entire film runs only 78 minutes, even with the scenes from Showgirl Murders and Naked Obsession -  and lots more padding as well! The opening credits run exactly 5:22, Ford and Sahagun's scenes run a couple of minutes, and there is one more strip scene, a whiffy montage, and a chase scene which are also unrelated to the movie and don't feature anyone in the cast.

The car chase is not a bad one at all, with two vehicles destroyed in dramatic crashes. I assume that it is some close-up footage shot for this film edited into long shots from another film. Three reasons for my conclusion:

  • It begins with an obviously looped-in voice saying "Hey, he's driving off with one of our girls", even though the guy doing the actual driving is the only person in the scene, he is outside the club, and nobody came out after him! So whose voice is it, and where is it coming from?
  • Two guys from the strip club seem to die chasing our hero, but when he returns the next night, nobody mentions anything about it.
  • A cop also seems to have died in that same chase, but the police chief shows no interest the next night.

Between the five unrelated nudity scenes, the opening credits, the closing credits, and the car chase, there must be 18 minutes of extraneous footage, leaving us with a 60 minute film. I suppose at least 35 minutes of that consists of actual wordless strip acts performed by the women in the cast. There is also a sex scene which probably lasts about five minutes, so the time spent on plot and character development is approximately 20 minutes. 

You have to love a film with essentially no content. This is close to my dream of a film with opening credits which go directly to the closing credits. And they both can be very short. We won't have any music or visuals during the credits, just word screens shown in silence, and therefore the only credit needed is "the credit guy" (assuming he does his own editing).

Stripteaser 2 has plenty of nudity, but even that is disappointing. The strippers never remove their bottoms, so the only brief flash of pubic hair comes when Kim Dawson has a sex scene. Some of the topless footage is also badly interlaced, but some of it is OK.


Lots. Kim Dawson provides the only frontal, but the following women show their breasts:

  • Taylor St Clair
  • Kiva
  • Kim Dawson
  • Stacey Leigh Mobley
  • Lisa Ann Brown
  • Kimberly Blair
  • Three unknowns
  • Maria Ford, in the footage from Showgirl Murders

DVD info from Amazon

  • no widescreen

  • no meaningful features

Surprisingly enough, the film has one positive. It has a good musical score. The songs are alternative rock, and the incidental music is wailing progressive jazz which would make a perfect backdrop for a noir detective story with a hard-boiled voice-over. I was thinking "jeez, this music is much better than I would expect from this kind of movie", and then noticed that one of the comments at IMDb said the same thing.

The Critics Vote

  • No reviews online. Oddly enough, Roger Ebert missed this one. I guess it came out during his vacation week.

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.

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-.

I'm assuming that people watch these films for the stripping rather than the plot. If so, the film is a C-, but no higher. It has a lot of nudity, but there's only one brief shot below the waist, and some of the topless footage is damaged by interlacing. If you watch for the drama, it is an E-. There is very little plot or character development. The technical aspects are not incompetent enough to merit an F throughout the film, but some scenes are that bad, so it's between E and F.

Return to the Movie House home page