SnoReptilePlenty Memorable, crazy movie

ShangLuda Admirable film.

TaryBiggBall It was OK. I don't see why everyone loves it so much. It wasn't very smart or deep or well-directed.

Forumrxes Yo, there's no way for me to review this film without saying, take your *insert ethnicity + "ass" here* to see this film,like now. You have to see it in order to know what you're really messing with.

Psyche-8 Moira Davis (Shannon Tweed) is unhappily married to abusive husband Daniel (Joe Cortese) who is having an affair with his secretary (Rochelle Swanson) practically under Moira's nose. Moira begins having dreams where she is making passionate love to a mysterious man in a house she doesn't recognise. A visit to an astrologer (Stella Stevens) reveals that Moira's dreams are 'real' and that her and her mystery man share a psychic link. After a few near misses, Moira eventually meets the man of her dreams, whose name is Nick Richardson (Andrew Stevens) and has been having the same dreams about her. The two quickly begin an affair and fall in love but Moira's powerful husband finds out and swears revenge. What is to become of Moira and Nick? 'Illicit Dreams' is everything you might expect from a low-budget sexual thriller: B-movie cast – check; clichéd one-dimensional characters – check; shaky acting – check; questionable chemistry - check; largely implausible plot line – big check. Nevertheless, I thought the psychic dreams/star-crossed lovers angle was intriguing and I did find myself rooting for Moira who is desperate to escape from her brute of a husband and sail off into the sunset with Nick. If you haven't seen this film, read no further…Unfortunately it was not to be and here is where the film really fails the viewer. It all comes to a head in a predictable chase scene with Daniel, having already murdered his secretary after she betrays him, brandishing a gun and threatening to kill Moira too. At the last minute, Nick saves her by shooting Daniel dead. He takes Moira in his arms and swears he'll never leave her and then… Moira wakes up in bed next to her husband who sleepily asks her to make him a cup of coffee and the film ends. My reaction to this was "whaaat?!" And not in a good way. This film is no 'Inception' or 'Vanilla Sky' as at least with those films you still had a pretty good idea of what was real and what was dream. With 'Illicit Dreams', the audience is left not knowing whether the whole film was Moira's elongated dream or just parts of it and it just left too many unanswered questions to be enjoyable: was any of it real? Is Nick real or just a figment of Moira's imagination? What about Nick's friend and his scenes without Moira – were they not real either? Did she even visit the astrologer or was that part of the dream too? Is Daniel really as bad as he's painted? Was he having an affair at all or again, was this part of Moira's dream? Was the first part of the film real up to a point? If so, when did the dream take over? Or was the last scene of Moira waking up a dream too? The filmmakers intended to keep the viewer guessing (mission accomplished) but was it also their intention to frustrate and annoy? Best case scenario is that the film was only partially a dream and now the action will play out in real life exactly the same. Alternatively, the dream will have inspired Moira to end her unhappy marriage. But either way, so much was left unanswered that I'd even go as far as saying that the ending ruined the whole film for me.I've given this film 4 out of 10 holding my attention as long as it did but I certainly have no desire to watch it again.

decdr-599-960752 This film isn't half the original script I read, that Jim Fitzpatrick wrote. This film is more about Andrew Stevens fantasies than the audiences. Everything was about him, including screen time...brooding moments...with a lot of useless confusing moments he threw-on the screen to separate himself from Fitzpatrick's romantic piece. Fitzpatrick's original script was more about the soul and the spirit of love and desire, than screwing and personal fears. In my opinion, Stevens ruined what could've been a classic film, if he just would've stuck to the original storyline. Unfortunately, when you take someone's script and mess it up with your ego...you're already dead in the water.

Dr. Gore *SPOILER ALERT* *SPOILER ALERT* I bought this video for two bucks. I saw UNRATED on the back of the video box and decided to give it a shot. Well, it's official. I'm not a Shannon Tweed fan. She has a nice, muscular body but she just doesn't do it for me. Most of her movies try to be some sort of thriller with some sex on the side. The sex scenes should be the main course! "Illicit Dreams" has her finding the love of her life in her dreams. So who does she dream about night after night? Who is the only man for her who burns with a love that can transcend all space and time? Yeah, it's Andrew Stevens. This is a dream lover? Tweed has some strange fantasies.So Tweed spends her illicit dream filled nights rolling around with Andrew Stevens. Anybody is better than her piggish, brute of a husband. Soon Tweed will realize that Stevens is the only man for her. She must get away. She must break free. After many dream sex scenes with Stevens, Tweed finally makes contact with him through their psychic link. Their love burns brighter than a thousand stars that have just gone supernova. Only this love will save her from her psychotic husband. If only I cared… "Illicit Dreams" is a pretty standard sex thriller. Shannon Tweed is a B-movie sex queen but I just can't get into her flicks. There's always too much thriller and not enough sex. If you're not too demanding, you might find something to like here. If you just want to see Tweed naked, you've definitely come to the right place.

gridoon "Illicit Dreams" is not the first film to feature the premise of a woman who has recurring nightmares (remember "Still of the Night"?), and it certainly isn't the best, either. But this being an erotic thriller that fails both with the eroticism and with the thrills, we have to content ourselves with whatever interest the plot holds. And it does hold some, mainly due to the metaphysical angle (psychokinetic connection, or something like that, bonds the two leads) that's rare for a Shannon Tweed flick. Andrew Stevens directs, and he gives an unusually bright, richly colored look to the film. But he can't do anything about the ludicrous, hard-to-swallow final "twist". (*1/2)