The Suckers (1972) User Reviews

not good enough

[christopher-underwood · 5/10 · 29 August 2013]

This is really, just not good enough. I have seen other 'Vinegar Syndrome' and this is pretty inferior. Anthony Spinelli's, 'Confessions', for instance, screams 70s cinema and tells a simple story, with heavy scenes of sex without insulting one's intelligence. Here the scenes are too slow and too long - maybe cutting this down to 60 minutes might have been an idea - and there is too much dialogue, which is all bad.

The girls are nice enough and the early scenes OK to begin with but then this 70s sexploitation take on 'A Dangerous Game' does take till beyond halfway to even get to the actual hunt. There is some novelty in the capturing but nothing like it could have been. As for the title, I assume this is a reference to the easily deceived, although I suppose it might be intended as a double meaning and be suggesting even more of what it doesn't deliver.

The Suckers: If The Most Dangerous Game was a porno.....

[Platypuschow · 3/10 · 30 April 2019]

Yet another adaptation of The Most Dangerous Game (1932), but this time they decided to truly stand out from the rest.

The general gist of it is a psychotic hunter lures people into a hunt where they themselves are the prey. Here is no different, only every other scene is a sex scene.

With very graphic sex and nudity The Suckers could have an altogether different meaning. This type of film was common place in the 70's, however I'm very surprised they did this with an adaptation of a much loved classic.

Because of this there really isn't much in the way of content. The story is heavily condensed and when it's time for action it all looks terrible. It's like they cast porn actors who didn't know what to do when their clothes were on.

It's a great tale, but this is a near porn adaptation and won't appeal to people seeking the original story.

The Good:

It's at least based on a decent story

The Bad:

Awful fight scenes

T&A detracts badly from the plot

I simply cannot root for a hunter

Problem at confused ending.

[robert-hoskin · 2/10 · 1 April 2021]

I have seen this film on 'The Classic Porn' site and found out this film with repeated Ending credits for the second time before the end of this film which was also shown first after the beginning of the film. Bad editing easily found in it but not much, as it's film condition is damaged with blue marks on the 35mm celluloid, but it can be restored using DIAMANT software. Nice but disappointed outing that this is.

The proof of the pudding is in the ... title!

[Coventry · 3/10 · 5 April 2024]

The makers of this drive-in exploitation disaster probably want us to refer to their film as another version of the almighty cult/thriller monument "The Most Dangerous Game". No way, though, as it's truly way too much honor to mention the name of that immortal classic in the same paragraph as this dud. "The Suckers" is nothing more than a dull and monotonous sex film; - absolutely nothing. A typically early 70s sex flick, I may add, because the women are incredibly beautiful and perfectly curved whereas the males are filthy pigs with beer bellies and hairy backs.

Three hot models, their agent, and a notorious big game hunter are lured to the estate of a sleazy millionaire named Vandermeer, supposedly for a totally new and innovative kind of hunting party. The first 55 minutes purely exist of overlong and dreadfully unexciting softcore sex sequences, and during the final 20 minutes there's a little bit of action and a disgusting rape sequence. Trust your instinct and the warning in the title on this one: it genuinely sucks.

Sturdy soft-core variant on "The Most Dangerous Game"

[Woodyanders · 8/10 · 25 February 2014]

A group of thrill-seekers find themselves being hunted down like animals by evil, yet wealthy and powerful big game hunter Mr. Vandemeer (well played with deliciously wicked aplomb by Steve Vincent). Director Stu Segall, working from a compact script by Harold Lime, relates the familiar, but still effective and engrossing story at a snappy pace, makes good use of the remote woodland location, stages the major hunting set piece in a taut and exciting manner, and doesn't pull any punches with the harsh sordid tone once the hunt itself begins (for example, poor Sandy Dempsey as bitter lesbian Joanne gets brutally raped by one of Vandemeer's sadistic lackeys prior to being stabbed to death with a knife). Moreover, there's plenty of tasty female nudity from a trio of smoking hot women (the delectable Laurie Rose of "The Hot Box" fame in particular is quite the scrumptious sight sans clothes). Better still, the soft-core sex scenes are really steamy and pretty explicit, with a Sapphic bathtub make-out session between Rose and Dempsey rating as the definite erotic highlight. The cast do competent work in their roles: Vincent has a ball with his juicy villain part, Rose and Dempsey are both appropriately sexy, Richard Smedley is decent enough as tough Vietnam veteran Jeff Baxter, and luscious long-haired brunette Barbara Mills contributes a pleasingly testy turn as snarky photographer Cindy. Hal Guthu's no-frills cinematography provides a suitably rough and unpolished look. The groovy throbbing score hits the swinging spot. A nice'n'nasty item.