Female Vampire (1973)

hyped garbage

Great Film overall

Excellent, Without a doubt!!

Don't listen to the negative reviews

Hmm. When watching this film you might be forgiven for forgetting that you're actually supposed to be viewing a horror film. I mean, yes, the theme is vampires, but there is no actual horror in this film - one graphic and a couple of implied deaths, yes, but nothing else that would disturb you. The fact is, that director Jess Franco was out to make a film where he could show the world as much of his wife Lina Romay in the nude as possible - and he succeeded. The horror, unfortunately, only comes second.As you might expect from a director with Franco's reputation, this isn't a film for all tastes. Most film fans will likely be put off by the lack of an actual plot or story to THE FEMALE VAMPIRE - instead, it's just a number of scenes linked together with some added filler in-between to stand in for the plot. All of these scenes are sexual in nature, which quickly became boring for me but might appeal to other viewers. Romay is actually not bad as the vampire herself, a mute, waif-like figure who walks about in a see-through nightie. It's clear that Franco desperately wants to make a film in the style of Jean Rollin and he does succeed to some degree - scenes of Romay stalking the woods looking for victims are done quite effectively. It's just a shame there are only a couple of them.One thing this film has in its favour is the music. There's a main theme which plays constantly, a kind of lyrical piece with a mournful woman wailing. It's actually very good and gives the film an effectiveness that it really shouldn't have. Aside from the passable Romay are some stock wooden actors and poor dubbing; turning up in one role is the director himself, playing a doctor who obviously models himself every night on Dracula's Van Helsing. Elsewhere we have some hairy French macho-types to give you nightmares and a character named Dr. Orloff but who is totally unrelated to the mad doctor of Franco's first horror film, THE AWFUL DR. ORLOFF (this guy is blind, for a start).Infuriatingly, just when it looks like something interesting is going to happen in this film, it abruptly cuts to the closing titles and fails to tie up any of the loose ends - in fact, nothing happens! Fans of female vampires should be sure to check out Hammer's Karnstein trilogy in place of this dull affair. It's clear that this film is a rip-off of that trilogy (the naming of the vampiress as KarLstein kind of gives the game away) but it lacks the necessary pacing and action to make it entertaining. A brief spot of gore or a cheesy special effect would have helped come to think of it. As sex films go, this explicit exercise in voyeurism would probably fit the bill quite nicely, but for a horror film, it just doesn't cut it.

There's no question that Franco was inept in many ways, starting with some unbelievably dumb stories. Not what the story is about but how, usually awkward, wooden, unnatural in anything that resembles life. Still, he led a pretty admirable life, shooting films, composing music, traveling around sunny locales, meeting and undressing some pretty women with his camera. I can think of ways much worse to spend my time on earth.And even more appealing to me, there's something to be said about his mentality towards films, probably immersed whilst doing it but quickly moving on, unattached. It's freeing to see. So when all is said, you have probably decided what use you have for any of these films. This isn't one of his best, far from it actually. For me, that's Eugenie De Sade and Vampyros. I rate it low, because it is bad in all the parts, even the sex which is neither erotic nor dangerous as he probably thought. What he explains about the 'world of pleasure' are childish notions.Still, what it is has its attractive aura. The very loose structure, a woman simply walks around having sex, the languid locations in Madeira, the vapid look on Lina Romay's face as she glides unattached in the nude, the overall air of casual commitment to dumb (as in inarticulate) passion. Oh, he's still the dull man from interviews but this improvised void endears. It's like we're on vacation, leisurely pacing around as we do some trivial stuff (shooting a softcore film) in order to be far from home.

People will tell you all kinds of things about Jesus Franco. He's made about five billion films over the past five decades so he must be doing something right, right? Wrong! Nearly every single film I have seen of his reeks of Eurotrash amateurism. Even more depressingly, the man does not seem interested in making anything other than tedious soft-core porn with wafer thin plot lines that pretentious people like to claim is art because he'll throw in a shot of a mountain or the ocean every once in awhile. I guess some people just need to find an excuse to justify the fact they like watching porn, as if something like this somehow brings T&A flicks to a more respectable level. Unfortunately for Jess, many films from the same decade literally crush his lame efforts when it comes to style, plot, direction, acting and eroticism. "Les Avaleuses" or one of its five hundred different titles is nothing more than dull trash with neither the talent or imagination to make it worthy of note. Franco also is rather obnoxious any time you see him interviewed. He has an inflated sense of his own importance, which in the film-making world is almost nonexistent. On several occasions, I've even seen him insult far more talented directors whose ideas he in turn blatantly steals. I've often wondered if this man is obnoxious, clueless or just senile. It's hard to tell but one thing he is not is a good film director.I hate even referring to this as a film. There is almost no plot and from a technical standpoint it is inept. Things going out of focus all the time is not art, it's laziness and incompetence on the part of someone more interested in zooming in on unkempt crotches than making a decent erotic vampire film. What storyline there is is basically gratuitous nude shots of Franco's wife Lina Romay repeated over and over again. Though a fairly attractive woman, once you've seen a few of these films you're already bored seeing her naked. She's not a very good actress either. She brings nothing to the film or her role other than what God gave her, some of which could use a good trimming. The others nude actresses on display here aren't especially attractive either. Unless you are an obsessive fan of this director (believe it or not, he does have fans) or can't get your hands on more explicit adult material, I wouldn't waste my time viewing this.

I am a Franco-phile, but the man tries my patience at times. Despite some striking images of semi-naked women striding through fog-enshrouded forests and a magnificent score by Daniel White, the director's technical sloppiness capsized my enjoyment. His zooms are shaky, even wide shots are often soft, and music cues between scenes are often cut off without justification. It's sad that Franco cared so little at times for his own aesthetics and tolerated shabbiness.Lina Romay, Franco's replacement muse after Soledad Miranda died tragically, plays the bloodsucker of the title, a tragic figure doomed to wander in the shadows of the Spanish countryside, her thirst for blood eternal, her hunger for sex insatiable.The film is a series of erotic encounters (some hardcore) interspersed with meandering dialog scenes and pretty scenery. It is slow and wants to be hypnotic, but the terrible dubbing renders it dreadfully melodramatic at times and its poetry is constantly undercut by a subplot starring Franco himself.Romay is flat as an actress and comes across as an erotic try-hard, too, never even coming close to filling the shoes of the celluloid enchantress Miranda."Female Vampire" is a disappointment.