A Porn Hero? In A Teen Comedy? Look Out For The Girl Next Door

When hardened artistic film critics begin calling down studios for poor moral decisions, it’s time to stop and listen.

In his review of the Fox movie The Girl Next Door, Roger Ebert opens his opinion column by saying, “The studio should be ashamed of itself for advertising The Girl Next Door as a teenage comedy. It’s a nasty piece of business, involving a romance between a teenage porn actress and a high school senior.” Later in the same paragraph, he states, “…this is a dishonest ‘comedy’ that had me feeling queasy, uneasy and then unclean. Who in the world read this script and thought it was acceptable?”

Remember, this is the guy who penned the 1970 sex spoof Beyond the Valley of the Dolls, which was awarded the classic “X” rating and later re-rated to NC-17. I highly admire Mr. Ebert and his flair for engaging criticism, but this guy is no prude. Yet even he can clearly see what is happening with the selling of porn to America’s children.

Previously I wrote about the many techniques the porn industry is using to creep into the lives of our children. It seems the biggest goal of these purveyors of sleaze, is to make pornography into something you can bring home to mom and dad. Something you can share, just as you would a favorite song or movie. Something as fresh and innocent as the girl next door.

This film accomplishes that exact marketing ploy through various means. First, they begin by building audience compassion for Danielle (played by Elisha Cuthbert), a character who—at least for a good portion of this movie—wants us to believe she’s caught in a nasty web of pornographic sex hustlers.

But perhaps our greatest sympathy should be for her mental health. This new kid on the block swings wildly between distinct personalities, and quickly doffs her innocent charm after commanding her eighteen-year-old neighbor, Matthew, to completely disrobe while standing on a street in front of her car’s headlights.

Second, the creators distort our sensibilities when Matthew, an honor-role high school senior, has to come up with 25 grand so he can help an impoverished child genius come and study at his school. The solution? Danielle calls some of her “colleagues” to create a video with Matthew and some of his other senior class buddies. The sales of the tape should earn them the money.

Finally, the real cherry on this sundae is the “hero” – a porn mogul who saves the day by agreeing to distribute the production made by the three boys and girls in the high school’s dark corners and empty classrooms during the evening of their graduation celebration.

To be fair, the writers do offer a small justification in the end. Without giving the movie away (just in case you still want to see it), the video isn’t exactly what you may think it is.

However, that’s little consolation for what is otherwise a blatant attempt to market pornography to a young audience. Even with this film’s R-rating, it’s locked on the target of adolescent viewers, and will draw tons of testosterone-tempted teens to peer through the many knotholes of the flimsy ratings system. Take your pick of holes in the fence: go with an older friend, wait for the video (I’m betting a director’s edition with extra footage is in the works for this one), or simply lie your way into the theater.

Perhaps I should diffuse some of the speculation. Cuthbert never appears nude in this film. Only a couple of scenes include breast nudity by other actresses, which – considering the R-rating – is tamer than what I was expecting. In fact, some quick editing could have brought this film into a PG-13 arena. But who would want to watch a PG-13 movie about pornography?

Returning to Ebert’s review: “We can deal with porn stars, lap dances and whatever else, in a movie that declares itself and plays fair, but to insert this material into something with the look and feel of a teen comedy makes it unsetting.”

I give that conclusion “Two thumbs up!”

Rod Gustafson