Monday, 4 January 2016
Bikini Time Machine (4 Stars)
This is the 26th film in the Medina Collection, made in 2010. It was originally called "Rewind Time Machine", but it was renamed for the DVD release. Bikinis aren't needed to travel in time, but it doesn't really matter. "Bikini" gives the wrong information, but "Rewind" gives no information at all.
I hope this post will make my regular readers happy. You might have thought that I had abandoned my reviews of the Medina Collection. I don't give up so easily. I merely wanted to watch a few other films over the Christmas and New Year period, including a few films that I had bought in the Black Friday sales. Now I'll try to finish the last eight Medina films in the next week.
Maybe a more appropriate name for the film would be "Bikini Diner". Two girls are running a diner together which is losing them money. They don't want to sell it, because it belonged to the grandfather of one of them. Now they have an ultimatum. If they don't pay $15,000 to renew the lease within two weeks they will be evicted.
The leaseholder is Ted Newsom. I never knew he could be so evil! Boo! Hiss! If he keeps this up I'll smash all of his DVDs!
As a rich land owner Ted is able to live in a beautiful mansion. Doesn't this look very similar to the archaeologist's mansion in "Teenage Cavegirl"? And Darvella's mansion in "Curse of the Erotic Tiki"? And the major's house in "Erotic Dreams of Jeannie"?
Fortunately, one of the diner's customers is a scientist who has invented a time machine. He pays the girls $200 a time to send them back into the past. But even that isn't enough to pay off their debts in such a short time.
On a different topic, one of my best friends also has a blog in which she writes about films and other topics. It's a very good blog that I read regularly. She posts every day. Most of the films she reviews are new films that I have also watched, so I leave frequent comments. This weekend I noticed that she had deleted two of my comments, so I asked her about it. At first she made vague replies, making me think the comments had been deleted by accident, but yesterday she gave me a direct answer. It's her blog, it's her opinions on films, and she doesn't want any comments that disagree with her evaluation of a film. As long as I agree with her I can comment, but I'm not allowed to defend any films that she considers bad or criticise films that she likes.
Today I sent her a message asking her to be more open-minded, saying that she can't expect everyone to think the same as her. This made her angry. She accused me of trying to dictate to her how she should run her blog. After this she muted me on Facebook.
This is amazing to me. I can understand people getting worked up about touchy subjects like religion or politics, but breaking off a friendship because of films? (To be specific, the film that started the disagreement was "Everest", which she called the best film of the year. I agreed that it was a very good film, but I told her I found other films better).
I'm trying my hardest to be sympathetic with her and understand her point of view. It's true, it's her blog, and if she wants to run it like a dictatorship in which no other opinions are tolerated, she can do so. It's her choice. However, for me this runs against the spirit of free speech which characterises blogging. This is not and never will be how I run my own blog. I welcome everyone to write whatever comments they want on my blog, as long as they are relevant to my posts. If you think that a film that I've given a high rating is rubbish, tell me so. There's a slim chance that I might change my mind, if you present good arguments for your case, but it's more likely that I shall defend my opinion. Nevertheless, I like to hear what my readers think.