Ecstasy Girls II tries its best to be a sequel to the original Ecstasy Girls, but sheer logistics don't allow for a complete follow-up. The original was filmed in 1979, and all of the female leads, such as Desiree Cousteau, have since departed the adult film industry. The men in porn, traditionally, have longevity, and Paul Thomas, John Leslie, Jamie Gillis and Frank Hollowell reprise their roles from the first movie.

Ecstasy Girls II works on a level of its own. The story here is more plausible than the first, and the sex, while lacking in the original film's kinkiness, is superbly erotic. It includes one of the best sex scenes shot on film this year, a scorcher with Joanna Storm and John Leslie on an office floor.

References to the first film are made throughout. This time out, Gillis and Thomas play moralistic pseudo-sleuths, who are hired to find a missing girl (Heather Wayne) who has inherited a fortune and who could be used as a money ploy. This takes womanizer Gillis and henpecked Thomas (his fiance Kari Foxx seems to be hanging around too much) to see a publisher, a brothel, a dance club and any number of links that would enable them to find Wayne's whereabouts. If there's any problem with the story at all, perhaps it's a bit too serious.

Ecstasy Girls II has a few plot surprises, but I think viewers will be more interested in the erotic scenes. Foxx and Francois Papillon perform an exotic sex scene, and Gillis literally turns Wayne inside out in the film's finale. It's nice to see the fine actress Tish Ambrose working, and her three-way with Thomas and Foxx in a limo is wonderful.

Technically, Ecstasy Girls II suffers only slightly from the 16mm print quality, but Robert McCallum's direction is second to none. He knows how to film both sex and plot, and the film moves along at a wonderfully exciting pace. The acting is way beyond average, with Veronica Hart (in a non-sexual stint as the brothel madame), Gillis, Leslie and Thomas turning in well-developed performances.

As sequels go, Ecstasy Girls II looks very good. Robert McCallum waited seven years, and perhaps that's a good period of time to wait before doing a follow-up to a successful feature. This film seems fresh and vibrant.