# Girl Next Door, The (1999/II)

### reviewed by
Murali Krishnan

    [3.0/4.0]

The world of adult films is a compelling subject for a documentary film. It is a topic that many people are aware of, but not in much detail. It has a sordid nature that draws prurient interest, but it is also yet another human endeavor, with the same banality as other occupations.

Rather that examining the porn industry directly, this film by veteran documentary filmmaker Christine Fugate follows the career of one particular individual, adult film star Stacy Valentine. The film follows Stacy for several years and focuses primarily on her personal life, which is also highly influenced by her professional life.

As the film begins, Stacy is an established presence in the adult film world. Stacy gives a first person account of how she entered the business. She relates that her husband at the time encouraged her to send nude photos to a magazine. Upon winning an amateur contest, she progressed to doing professional magazine layouts, and then to starring in films. The professional success and financial foundation that came from these first forays into the business gave her the confidence to leave her controlling husband and move to Hollywood to pursue a full-time career as a porn star.

The film then follows Stacy as she builds her career. In detailing her professional life, the film follows her on some actual shoots of her films, as well as following her self-promotion as she attends adult film conventions, industry awards, and even a trip to Cannes. Also chronicled is the regular maintenance that must be performed to keep up to date for her job, like going to tanning salons and having various types of plastic surgery performed. The film follows her personal life as she travels back to Oklahoma to visit her mother, and as she tries to develop a relationship with her boyfriend, Julian.

The primary flaw with the film is that it lacks a clear vision for its subject. It follows Stacy for too narrow a period of time to make a clear point. The strength of the film is that it skillfully balances both the lurid and mundane aspects of its source material. When dealing with a sensational topic like this, it is easy for a film to focus on the sordid details and lose sight of its main subject. The primary focus of the film is on Stacy as an individual, and a secondary portrait of the adult film industry can be extrapolated. The film cannot avoid containing a significant amount of frank sexual imagery, but it tries to keep the clinical, professional perspective in which it was produced. The most objectionable imagery may be the detailed coverage of Stacy's many plastic surgeries.

The film is successfully able to humanize Stacy. Her reasons for choosing her profession are an odd mix of security and insecurity. She is totally comfortable with sex and her sexuality, but she feels that sex is the only thing she is good at. She likes the financial rewards of her job because it gives her total independence, which is important because she does not want to be dependent on a man for security. Ultimately, Stacy feels the same types of personal and professional pressures as most people, but her world is totally alien compared to that which most people inhabit.

Recommended. Although the film lacks enough focus to be completely engaging, it competently outlines its subject. It shows the ways that individuals who are part of the adult film business deal with career related problems like everyone else, and also presents some of the obstacles particular with that line of work. Because of its subject, the film necessarily contains a large amount of nudity and sexual content.

    (c) 2000 Murali Krishnan
    The Art House Squatter
    http://ArtHouseSquatter.com

    Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
    Before you buy.

The review above was posted to the rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup (de.rec.film.kritiken for German reviews).
The Internet Movie Database accepts no responsibility for the contents of the review and has no editorial control. Unless stated otherwise, the copyright belongs to the author.
Please direct comments/criticisms of the review to relevant newsgroups.
Broken URLs inthe reviews are the responsibility of the author.
The formatting of the review is likely to differ from the original due to ASCII to HTML conversion.

Related links: index of all rec.arts.movies.reviews reviews