Snow Babes

The cover poster of this film is NOT representative of the film itself. While it CLEARLY targets the "voyeur" aspect reminiscent of 80s "snow girl" classics. The women on the cover poster are NOT in the film, nor do they represent anything close to the (only) two women in this film. It's nothing short of false advertising and "bait and switch." There's that old saying "The camera adds 10 pounds" But this film has me wondering if it's not quite a bit more. The women in this are not unattractive. They are simply a different type of woman than the cover would have potential viewers believe. The two women in this film are NOT thin white girls with no tattoos or piercings, having "apple bottoms" and smooth bodies ready for the beach - nothing could be farther from truth. How a film maker gets away with such misrepresentation is a mystery to me. Clearly the budget is low, which is fine. The comedy is stupid.. which is also fine, if it were anywhere close to funny. It's not. The acting is fairly atrocious. The primary problem is the entire film is predicated on finding these two women to be "babes". That didn't work for me. It may for others. There are long, drawn out montages for "tease" moments... But, well, if you don't find these women particularly attractive.....

Also, despite the name, there are no babes in this movie. The main character is disgusting looking. Even with pillow fights and massages, there's nothing sexual or even sensual in this movie. I can't think of anything redeeming about this movie. There is no humor because the movie annoyingly takes itself too seriously, and there basically is no plot. Much of the movie is senseless like the gorilla costume. Why? Jamie Morgan is especially bad. The IMDb page says it had a $100k budget. I don't understand why they couldn't have afforded someone less worse. The only thing in the movie as bad as her was the ridiculous looking fake CGI snow. The only positive was some nice shots including drone shots of the ski slope and lodge to start the movie. It goes downhill from there.

The cover poster of this film is NOT representative of the film itself. While it CLEARLY targets the "voyeur" aspect reminiscent of 80s "snow girl" classics. The women on the cover poster are NOT in the film, nor do they represent anything close to the (only) two women in this film. It's nothing short of false advertising and "bait and switch." There's that old saying "The camera adds 10 pounds" But this film has me wondering if it's not A LOT more than that. The women in this are not unattractive. They are simply a different "type" of woman than the cover would have potential viewers believe. Clearly the budget is low, which is fine. The comedy is stupid.. which is also fine, if it were anywhere close to funny. It's not. The acting is fairly atrocious. The primary problem is the entire film is predicated on finding these two women to be "babes". That didn't work for me. It may for others. There are long, drawn out montages for "tease" moments... But, well, if you don't find these women particularly attractive.....

Wow, how we have evolved during the past few decades. This thing falls short of any decent skin shown in the film. At least when you watched this type of movie from the 70-2010's you knew you were going to see some butts, *, and hot sexy chicks. You obviously need something like this to be able to watch such a poor storyline with horrbile acting skills. Not even sure where they found these 2 girls. They do not fit the profile for a sexy movie. Goes to show how backwards we have gone making exploitation films. Definitely nothing like Porkies, American Pie, and all the other great movies growing up.