Picture of Beauty (2017)

the chilly bugger. As Franek’s painting grows bolder and less traditional, Julia’s unhappy new life unravels and sends her fleeing through forests, pagan revelries and the consequences of several very poor decisions. The women’s stories gradually circle back toward Franek, his assistant Hazel and the unfinished canvas, with sexual freedom becoming their only believable escape from husbands, fathers, priests and policemen. Maxim Ford clearly wants an old-school European erotic parable about repression, art and liberation, but the thin script, stiff English dialogue and erratic editing frequently turn solemn drama into accidental comedy. The endless slow motion does not help; every naked stroll is treated as though Venus has just emerged from the local duck pond. Still, a few painterly studio compositions and sunlit outdoor sequences reveal genuine visual instinct, and the film’s complete lack of embarrassment gives it a peculiar, disreputable charm. It may not work as serious cinema, but as an earnest skin flick wearing an arthouse beret, it is hard to look away.

The story is set in Eastern Europe shortly before the First World War, when arranged marriages, clerical authority and rigid sexual rules made a woman’s independence a dangerous hobby. Shot in Poland, the film makes attractive use of woodland paths, rustic village buildings, shadowy interiors and a secluded lake where much of the cast conveniently forgets its clothing. Period authenticity is decidedly wobbly—the costumes, grooming and behaviour often feel more modern than pre-war—but the countryside supplies the production value that the budget cannot. Folk-flavoured music, pagan dancing, candlelit rooms and naked bodies posed like paintings create the flavour of a rediscovered 1970s Euro-erotic curiosity, though the choppy storytelling and overcooked slow motion give it the vibe of late-night cable discovering Ingmar Bergman after several bottles of wine.

Taylor Sands makes Julia the softer, more vulnerable beauty, all wide-eyed romantic longing and sensual curiosity, while Danielle Rose plays Stephanie with a cooler, more assertive allure—the woman most likely to enter a painter’s studio, drop her dress and start rewriting his artistic philosophy. Neither performance is especially polished, and some line readings land with the grace of a dropped wardrobe, but both actresses possess enough natural screen presence to survive the dialogue. Ford photographs them lovingly and very frequently without clothes, making their bodies as important to the film as their characters. This is not coy, strategically covered erotica: expect prolonged full-frontal nudity, lesbian and heterosexual encounters, bondage imagery and some unsimulated sexual activity. In short, the flesh is considerably more convincing than the acting, the sex is far more developed than the plot, and the ladies are unquestionably the picture’s principal beauty.

Artists, Period Costumes, Romantic Classical Background Music, Lush Outdoors & of course, Gorgeous Pretty Young Damsels with Beautiful Bodies.

In an early 20th century Beautiful Polish village, a painter with an unusual commission finds two pretty girls to model for him. The girls slowly come of age while exploring their sexuality and finding liberation in a repressed society.

The movie is full of Art, Period Costumes (19th century women’s underwear), Great sets, Soothing & Romantic Classical Background Music, Lush Nature Outdoors and of course, Gorgeous Pretty Young Demsels with Beautiful Bodies, unusually smooth & hairless for early 20th century 😛😛😍😋🔥🔥

These JUICED highlights includes Hand picked hot scenes for some Innocent Visual Debauchery 😛😋🔥🔥🍷🍷🌿🌿