SPOILERS THROUGHOUT: Lipstick is a really creepy movie with some very disturbing scenes. In spite of that, I think it's a good film with an important message. This movie has caught some flack and maybe, as with many movies, it was ahead of its time. But I think even being released now it would cause some controversy. The bottom line is, 90 percent of the movie is on the bizarre side-tough to watch film. But a good one and depicts Hemmingway's story in such a horrifying way it's almost guaranteed to disturb and scare. In addition to a very hard to watch rape scene, the scenes of the rapist crank calling Hemmingway, the eerie music and the way Hmemingway's case is handled are simultaneously tragic, frightening and will leave you with a feeling of disgust for certain characters-number one being the rapist. I beg to differ about 1 Hemingway sister being better then the other-BOTH were equally powerful and the movie was fantastically acted. All these years later, I've never forgotten it. You won't either if you watch this terribly disturbing underrated movie.

Fashion model is raped by her kid sister's music teacher and hopes to have her day in court, but the creep turns out to be a convincing actor on the witness stand. However one views this picture, there was absolutely no reason to frame certain shots of the rape sequence with close-ups of Margaux Hemingway's bare breasts or buttocks. I don't think there's yet been a way to stage a rape scene for a dramatic film and not have it come off as some pervert's fantasy. Once you get passed that, however, there are some good bits and pieces: pre-teen Mariel Hemingway sticking up for Margaux in court ("Not my sister! Not my SISTER!"); Mariel stumbling upon Margaux in her room post-rape and leaving, embarrassed; the two sisters looking each other in the eye and then embracing. The movie is basically exploitation-schlock and doesn't really deserve to have such strong moments. For instance, what is Chris Sarandon doing make prank phone calls in the *, or licking a body-microphone like a ice cream cone? There's a screwy bit of logic to the finale (not the revenge part, the tag in the courtroom) and all of Margaux's big scenes are something to see (she works that dialogue hard with a voice that sounds like Rice Crispies). It's not a terrible film, but it doesn't understand that you can't preach about sex being 'dangerous business' and then show off your leading lady's naked body with peepshow camera moves. "Lipstick" mixes scummy sleaze freely with camp-theatrics. No wonder it's still being talked about after all these years! ** from ****

It is hard to make an unbiased judgment on a film like this that had such an impact on me at such a young age. This is with out a doubt the worst kind of exploitation film. I was unfortunate enough to see this film for the first time in my youth, Iwill never forget it. I thought it was the most horrible movie ever made. I then saw it again earlier this year and was once again horrified. I am not a zealot or one to say what others should and should not see but I did take great offense to the way in which something as horrible as rape was dealt with in this movie. I love lowbrow cinema but this is just plain nasty. Rent some Rus Myer instead.

There is a significant social statement contained within the body of this harrowing tale. Just where does consensual sensuality leave off and blatant assault begin? The meager stats for court convictions of males in rape cases speaks to the futility of provable evidence to bring about justice. It's one thing for a woman to experience a violation, yet another to prove it to a jury. With clever defense attorneys twisting facts around to suggest enticement, women face an uphill battle to overcome reasonable doubt. "Lipstick" dramatizes such a scenario in graphic terms--possibly so much so that its potent social commentary might become blurred. Just as there can be a fine line between consent and assault, so can there be also between legitimate expose and sleazy exploitation. The cast, headed by Margeaux and Mariel Hemingway, Chris Sarandon and Anne Bancroft, all invest deep emotion into their roles. It's certainly a sobering enterprise, with little in the way of character background, particularly as to the accused. Other than that he creates what some might consider "weird" art, there's nothing to suggest his rationale for physical abuses of not one, but two, sisters. All we know of him is that he's a respected educator and dance theater professional. Further, casting handsome Sarandon in the role begs the question, "Why do things the hard way?" By not addressing character background the scriptor left a decided void, suggesting an interest more on surface than substance. Nor does the film's slick title or glossy production design help raise the product's standard. When originally shown on the large screen in 1976, it apparently was too much for some audiences, and the film gained a poor rep. Viewed today, while it's still a rough enterprise, it does raise awareness as to the painful plight of abused women. In that regard, the film has relevance--for it does indeed affect us all.

Not bad as otherwise suggested, this is an interesting exploitation film that served as the film debut of Margaux Hemmingway. Unfortunately, little sis Mariel totally steals the show from poor, pretty Margaux. Chris Sarandon is competent as the psycho rapist, as is the always great Anne Bancroft, but Perry King, then a pretty big star, has a worthless role as Margaux's boyfriend. Worth a look.

This was first viewed by me on H.B.O. in 1980. I found the acting, and content very appropriate for this time frame. The was the fist time I saw two Hemingway sisters playing sisters. With a name like Hemingway I was sure it would be good. I was not dis-appointed. Chris Sarandon (Susan's former Husband) will always be remembered for his part in this movie. See this movie from beginning to end to get the full effect.

This movie did get a bad rap. Chris Sarandon is excellent as a school teacher who rapes fashion model Margeaux Hemingway. There is lots of tension before the rape and we really see Chris as a big time weirdo who plays really bad music while poor Margeaux tries to make an excuse to leave the room. When he sees this as a way of her dismissing him as a person he goes berserk. The rape scene is actually not as graphic as some of the crap that passes todays censors. For a first time actress I think Margeaux was quite good. Her little sister proves natural acting talent does run in the Hemingway family. She does excel in this role an gives an understated perforamce especially after she herself is raped by the same teacher. The building used in the fashion sequences is not the Beverly Center as mentioned by another IMDb user but actually the Pacific Design Center a few blocks away. The ending is quite good as it shows the hypocrisy of our legal system. Anne Bancroft adds a bit of class to this production and the disco music is dated but it gives this movie a cool 70's feel. The ending is sensational but still believable.

If you don't want to see Margaux Hemingway naked, why would you want to rent this 1976 bomb that did nothing but make thousands of audience members sick. A very disturbing film that goes nowhere in good taste. The sad fact that the one disturbing scene that we are all aware about is the only reason why the movie was made and is still watched today. The late, and may have been great, Margaux Hemingway did all that she could to make this dramatic role of hers a drama. The public didn't get it. Instead, it began her dying career as a model / actress.

Just viewed this film and found it fantastic, there was no mention in the horrible rape case about DNA, no such thing existed. This film showed exactly what a woman goes through when she is raped, it needs to be viewed and observed by appreciative fans of Margaux Hemingway, who gave a wonderful performance.

This film is so ridiculously idiot that you may actually laugh at it. But no, even this is too much for this lost meters of celluloid. I found it as an offer in a magazine and that's why I've seen it. I regret the time I lost to see this. 1 out of 10 (because they don't have a lower grade).