Unmoralische Geschichten

Four erotic tales, three set as period pieces, the fourth (actually the first episode in the film) is set in the present day. A young man researches and puts into action a plot to trap his 16-year-old female cousin into giving him head by isolating her on a stretch of beach cut off by the ocean at high tide. The problems are several. The girl obviously doesn't need to be trapped and is more than willing to explore her own sexuality so the cousin's plot is completely unnecessary. She also demonstrates that she's a good swimmer, so she isn't really trapped. He also seems to be kind of short sighted since Borowczyk's cuts from close ups of the girl's face to her vagina demonstrate her curiosity at his limited objectives. Silly really.

'Therese Philosophe' concerns a pious girl punished for something by being locked in her bedroom "for three days", she seems intent on biding her time putting a cucumber to a non-digestive use while reading. This was the most disappointing episode for me because the only reason I tracked down and bought the DVD was because I saw the wonderful erotic potential of Charlotte Alexandra in "Une vraie jeune fille". She's wasted here.

'Erzsebet Bathory' is a sixteenth-century countess who travels to various villages setting up job fairs to recruit young girls into service in her household. Her pitch is that she pays more than the king. That her recruiters have to drag the young girls from their homes kicking and screaming might bear testament to the fact that none of her previous 'employees' were ever seen again. She also seems to have bizarre bathing habits.

'Lucrezia Borgia' chronicles Pope Alexander VI's pursuit of family values by swimming in the shallow end of the gene pool with his daughter Lucrezia and her brother Cesare. Everyone lives happily ever after (except that heretic Savonarola). This was actually the most erotic of the four, but I'd rather watch Debbie do anybody...or Miss Elizabeth Bennet for that matter!

The only thing noteworthy about this film is that supposedly it was the first porn flic to rise above the miasma onto the radar screens of the mainstream media. Actually I would have guessed that that distinction would have fallen to a Radly Metzger film, but my love of baseball statistics and trivia doesn't extend to porn films so I won't bother to look it up.

Okay, okay... 1974. The Europeans have figured out that a world-wide audience exists for films that portray full-frontal nudity, regardless of storyline or context. Borowczyk has chosen four stories from four eras to flaunt some skin... the 1970s right back to the 1400s. He takes the cake, however, with the third segment, featuring Pablo's daughter Paloma Picasso: she plays a countess in the 1700s bent on preserving her youth and vitality by bathing in the blood of virgins. To get this far, we are treated to the most incredible series of visuals ever filmed! At least thirty young, beautiful, and (gasp!) very naked women are brought forward to shower, cavort, pray, play with each other, and perform some sort of ritual that leads to their demise. You will watch the whole film, but you will come away remembering only this third segment. All the nudity aside, credit Borowczyk and crew for doing a fine job technically and photographically on this film. Definitely worth seeing.

Overall, this film is quite boring. There are 4 unlinked segments, with only the third likely to keep you awake.

This is the familiar tale of Countess Elisabeth Bathory. Bathory is a historical character who apparently used to favour blood taken from naked virgins.This scenario is an exploitationers delight, and we get to see room loads of young girls running round in the buff.

But even so, this story seems to head nowhere, and much is left to your imagination.

Art or pornography? Well, if it's pornography certainly no pornographer in cinema as come as close to art as Borowczyk does here. The five "Immoral Tales" that make up this movie deal exclusively with sex in its various forms with a great emphasis on female nudity. Borowczyk deals with an almost fetishistic relish on the woman's body while almost totally ignoring the man's. With the exception of the first story, 'The Tide', the others are all taken from history or the past. We get St. Therese, she who was raped rather than give up her virginity; Elisabeth Bathory, she who liked to bathe, so they say, in the blood of virgins and Lucrezia Borgia, who apparently liked it whatever way she could get it. We also get a mini version of what became "The Beast" whose engorged phallus is one of the very few 'male' organs we see.

Visually the film's palette changes to suit the story at hand and this is very much a sex movie for the intelligentsia, which isn't to say that the 'dirty mac' brigade won't have a field day as well. Of course, since "Immoral Tales" first appeared movies have become a lot more sexually explicit and yet I happy to say this is a movie that can still provoke outrage today...of one kind or another.

Four tales from various historical eras. The first, 'The Tide', is set in the present day, and concerns a student and his young female cousin stranded on the beach by the tide, secluded from prying eyes. 'Therese Philosophe' is set in the nineteenth century, and concerns a girl being locked in her bedroom, where she contemplates the erotic potential of the objects contained within it. 'Erzsebet Bathory' is a portrait of the sixteenth-century countess who allegedly bathed in the blood of virgins, while 'Lucrezia Borgia' concerns an incestuous fifteenth-century orgy involving Lucrezia, her brother, and her father the Pope.

Such a crazy film. From the very plot synopsis, you might think this was something like Woody Allen's "Everything You Wanted To Know". I mean, heck, these are vignettes about unusual sexual practices, right? But the intent is clearly different. Allen was being funny and not all that risqué.

This film, on the other hand, has almost no humor and seems to be made for one purpose: to put as many nude women in one film as humanly possible. Granted, it is still a good film in some ways and has an artistic merit. It is not pornographic. But seeing as a similar film could have been made with only a fraction of the nudity, it is clear what the intention was.