Exoticalot People are voting emotionally.

UnowPriceless hyped garbage

Humaira Grant It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

Caryl It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties. It's a feast for the eyes. But what really makes this dramedy work is the acting.

movieman_kev Ginger (Cheri Caffero) is back once again infiltrating a kidnapping racket (apparently no one cared that she was a racist sociopath in the first one). Better than the first film, "Ginger", but what the hell could be worse??? So that's not a selling point. Most of the girls have breast so small they could pass for boy scouts. So nothing to rave about there. The only quasi-good looking one of the bunch is Jennifer Brooks. Gone are the racism elements. But it wouldn't be a Ginger film without the light S&M scenes. Don't get me wrong, this one is still crap, just crap that's not as repellent as the original.My Grade: D+ Eye Candy: Cheri Caffero, Gerie Bronson, Honey Well, Ined Som, Jennifer Brooks, and Jeremie Rain show breasts and bush

julian kennedy The Abductors: 8 out of 10: Lets face it some bad movies age better than others. From the wonderfully horrible fashion and hair worn by the leads to décor including shag carpets (that they actually shag on) and chintzy coconuts holding push pins. (in the bank presidents office no less) the Abductors is filled with seventies kitsch. It also has an attitude towards woman so politically incorrect they would burn down the theater today. (Great film to show during a Take Back the Night meeting just make sure you park away from the ensuing riot.) The Abductors is a bit like a feminist raison de ere. Like any good exploitation film there is a ton of nubile flesh on display. The Ginger films add bondage, rape and generally cruelty that separates it from the cheerleader and nurse pictures that were its competition at the seventies drive-in. In addition the girls are silicone free with tan lines to boot which I admit I find more appealing than the cookie cutter Playboy models of today's exploitation.Downsides include remarkably incompetent gunfights (the prop guns don't fire on cue) and the state police (who look Canadian for some reason) are out of a thirties gangster movie (Complete with a Tommy gun that smokes like a Cheech and Chong extra.) Strange pacing including a gratuitous drum solo and maraca-shaking scene. (No really Ginger brought her own maracas to the disco) and a lead actress Cheri Caffro who looks like a hooker a few years past her prime complete with pancake make-up (The other lead actress Jennifer Brooks is so hopelessly nubile Caffro looks like her mom.). Great flick to watch while the significant other is out of the house (preferably safely out of town.) The Ginger films like that other exploitation classic I Spit on Your Grave is a viewing pleasure best kept close to the vest.

L. Denis Brown Cannibalism and the white slave trade are two subjects that hold a prurient vicarious fascination for many young people and when either is featured in a film it will usually guarantee at least a limited measure of success at the box office as long as the movie is reasonably competently produced. There have been a long string of such films going back to silent movie days and stars such as Rudolph Valentino. Many young women going abroad for the first time have confessed to experiencing fantasies in which they either find that they are destined to become part of the diet of some savage captors, or that they have been allotted to a place in the harem of some secluded middle eastern or oriental despot with little prospect of ever escaping. Both situations have certainly occurred on occasion in the past, in the latter case there are a few well documented stories of women who have created themselves very successful lives and become famous in the process. However in my opinion, it is stretching fantasy too far to contemplate a school in a secluded part of North America where girls abducted from their families are forcibly trained to be the willing "companions" of successful business men who are queuing up to pay very large sums of money to purchase their own complaisant "sex slave". Admittedly police records show that there have been some cases where girls who were forcibly abducted have developed a relationship with their captors such that they make no effort to escape even when this becomes possible; but such a situation seems unlikely to develop in more than a limited number of cases; and what very successful businessman would be prepared to rely on his purchase not being one of those who eventually seize an opportunity to escape, in the process putting him behind bars for a large part of the remainder of his life? Nevertheless this is precisely the scenario for "The Abductors (1972)'', the second of the "Ginger" films. In general I do not usually enjoy films which are pure fantasies (such as the later James Bond films), or which stretch the bound of credulity too far, and this reduces the rating I might otherwise give the film. However it is probably the most coherent and sophisticated of the three films in the "Ginger" series and, once the viewer has accepted its basic premise, the story unfolds with fewer gaps or holes than in the other two films. It is nevertheless almost the ultimate in soft porn sexploitation, and anyone considering viewing this film for the first time is entitled to have some idea of what to expect. - SPOILERS AHEAD - It opens with the abduction of three young cheerleaders who are forced at gunpoint to undress in front of their captors and then told they are to be trained to become the sex toys of rich men. The cost of refusal would be torture, and a curtain is drawn aside to give them a glimpse of an earlier recalcitrant captive being tortured. Still obdurate, this girl is later raped (quite graphically on screen), after which she gives no more trouble. The good guys set up another girl as a decoy to lead them to the scene, but they lose track of her after she is captured and also facing the worst. Three rich men (looking in some ways rather more like College nerds than powerful business men) are taken to the hideaway to claim the three captured cheerleaders they have "bought" but this still does not alert the good guys to its location, and almost in despair Ginger herself then becomes a second decoy to be abducted in turn. This leads to a barnstorming climax where the good guys finally locate and attack the hideaway just in time to save the day. Surprisingly this is not the finale, this film still has one more twist, probably intended to add a little more credibility to the story. It is all meaningless, empty of real characterisation, and without any social value; but it hardly misses a trick and is fun to watch for those who occasionally want to relax and enjoy a pure fantasy of this kind. It features enough bondage to make it politically incorrect for the mainstream cinema today, and so there are not many new releases which compete with it in this respect; DVD copies of this 30+ year old film will therefore probably continue to sell for some time to come.

crack-4 The movie starts off on a good note w/two gentlemen escorting a half naked woman into a room where they leave her. The basic plot is 3 cheerleaders are kidnapped, made to strip, and taught sex acts so they may be sold to businessmen to be their "mistresses in bondage" for the price of $100,000. Any attempt to resist is punished by being tied up. To show their complete cooperation, they are asked to removed their underwear. None of the three decline. A detective is assigned to investigate this, she eventually finds the location of the girls but is caught by the evil henchmen. She is then put in the same position they were, but manages to break free. This movie was everything I expected. Full frontal nudity, as well as a somewhat enticing story line. It's a grade above the usual corny 70's porn acting.