FuzzyTagz
If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.
WillSushyMedia
This movie was so-so. It had it's moments, but wasn't the greatest.
Lucia Ayala
It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.
tedg
This is so audacious it deserves some attention. Sure it is juvenile and cheesy. The problem of course is it somehow conflates excrement and sex, both in the story and the manner of telling the story. That ruins it: it is no "Barbarella."But it has a framing worthy of "Orgazmo." It starts by being a cheap movie that the characters step out of. And then seamlessly they step back into it. What starts out as an aversion to boogers turns into a society of turds, a field of farts, an attack dick, a collection of pseudoscience revolving around erectile dysfunction (though the term didn't exist then) and submission rays. No mention of gleet.That movie within a movie thing is pretty cool, especially when what you see is stupid. It gives an excuse, after all, you are not seeing the real movie, but the cheesy movie within. Worked great for an even cheesier production: "Robot Monster."Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 3: Has some interesting elements.
Baldach
If you wonder where the creators of South Park get their toilet humor here is a good place to look. Flesh Gordon is sexually perverted satire of Flash Gordon. Flesh Gordon will bascially have sex with anything that is a female adult (notice I did not mention human). I thought some of the scences where Flesh and the Professor were chasing the kidnappers of the cheerleaders were funny. However parts were Flesh goes into the bowels of a planet and find giant talking feces was just plan disgusting for me. If you can take satire or crude humor do not watch this movie other wise you have been warned.
filmbuff1970
I saw the movie at a Midnight Show.what a mistake that was.this is so unfunny.This movie was made about 15 years too late.The movie is cheap tacky but so badly done.it has nothing to redeem it.comedys are rarely this boring.1 out of 10
LJ27
Because I liked the special effects and stop-motion animation from the first film, I decided to check out the sequel. It contains stop-motion animation and special effects too but they pale beside the work done in the original. Several of the people who worked on the original were later Academy Award winners (such as Rick Baker and Dennis Muren) but the effects in this one are not as good and are few and far between. As far as porno films go, this one has less nudity in it than the original had. It's mostly crude toilet humor and bad acting. Dialogue scenes go one forever and the sound mix is so bad you can't understand what anyone is saying most of the time but since nothing said pertains to the plot (if there is one) then it doesn't matter. It starts out trying to create a 1930s atmosphere which is good but after that, it's a bunch of half naked people standing around talking. The first film is faster paced and better made and looks like STAR WARS compared to this.
