Two Orphan Vampires

French cult filmmaker Jean Rollin again explores some familiar themes in this effort from his latter days. The two title characters are girls played by Alexandra Pic and Isabelle Teboul. People think that they are blind, and they cannot in fact see during the daytime, but they see everything in shades of blue during the night. They bemoan the fact that they are doomed to an endless cycle of new "lives" and imminent "death", while putting the bite on various unlucky French citizens. Although a kindly eye doctor (Bernard Charnace) adopts them, they don't want to let a change of scenery keep them from their usual habits.

Adapted by Rollin from a series of novels he had written, this understandably comes as a disappointment to fans of his highly erotic (and superior) 1970s output. This is more tame due to the ages of his two leads, and yet it still does have some sex appeal, and much of the atmosphere that is inherent in his work. It's haunting, with a lovely score by Philippe D'Aram, and has a fairly amusing script wherein the girls equate themselves with Aztec goddesses (since they see themselves as not being truly immortal). The supporting cast is good, including such performers as Natalie Perrey (also the script supervisor) as Sister Martha, Gudule as the Mother Superior, Nada Le Hoangan as the sickly Virginia, and the stunning Veronique Djaouti as the "She-Wolf". In quick cameos we see Rollin favourite Brigitte Lahaie and the great Tina Aumont as a "ghoul".

Pic and Teboul do a good job of maintaining some viewer interest, even as the film goes on quite a long time and meanders a bit. Even as they're willing to do evil things, their childish playfulness prevents them from being completely disagreeable. And their devotion to each other holds firm, all the way to the conclusion that is as haunting as the majority of the film.

Overall, "Two Orphan Vampires" is a good, if not great, Rollin film.

Seven out of 10.

It starts well enough with the lovely orphan girls and their white sticks and their apparent blindness. Alexandra Pic and Isabelle Teboul are great throughout but the film is rather long and some of it seems to be repeated again. I understand that Jean Rollin was unwell at the time and, of course, this is a rather late of his films.

I have a real love-hate relationship with Jean Rollin. If I sit down to watch one of his films I can usually rely on two things; 1, the movie will look great, have an intriguing premise, and feature some stunningly beautiful women. And 2, by the end of it I'll feel hugely let-down and look on the whole thing as a missed opportunity. I know a lot of European directors favour 'style over substance', but Rollin often takes that to a new level. The fact that what's good about his stuff is often SO good is exactly what makes it so annoying; if he missed the mark by a mile it wouldn't matter, but the gorgeous cinematography, composition, lighting, and location work just make the whole thing all the more frustrating.

This movie is a rare exception. Two blind girls (supposedly around the 15-16 yr mark, although the actresses seem to be late teens/early twenties) live at a Catholic orphanage/school. However, at night they can see because they're actually vampires, who after 'lights out' leave the orphanage to hunt. These vampires are more along the lines of Stoker's Dracula; they can move around in daylight, but their vampire abilities only manifest at night when their sight returns and they sprout fangs.

There are several kills (six, by my count), but a fair amount of time is also spent lying around in cemeteries as the girls reminisce about their previous lives (it seems they've been hunted, destroyed, and resurrected several times over 500 years) as well as try to remember who they were before they became vampires. Alexandra Pic (looking like a cross between young Ellen Page and young Jennifer Connelly) and Isabelle Teboul have an ethereal presence as the two girls, and there are cameos by Rollin favourites Tina Aumont and Brigitte Lahaie. It's about 10 minutes too long, and there are still some things that don't make any sense - but that's Rollin. It's slow but very watchable. Some nudity - but for Rollin, not much. 7/10.

(aka: TWO ORPHAN VAMPIRES)

This DVD has some serious compression problems. Everytime the camera pans to the left or right, the whole screen gets blurry. Plus whenever the characters move, it looks like the speed has been turned down half a notch.

That said, the film itself is a low budget affair (which is a typical feature of Jean Rollin's films) about two female vampires who are blind during the day, but can see at night. They have lived throughout eternity, being killed off occasionally through the ages, only to be resurrected later. By what, this is never explained.

No where near as good as Rollin's THE GRAPES OF DEATH or his later film FASCINATION, but there are worse such as the schlock Jess Franco puts out. The film goes on about 20 minutes too long with a lot of pointless talk about how mankind just doesn't understand them and that they have to kill in order to keep existing in the neverworld that they are condemned to live in.

All this talk just bores the hell out of me. 3 out of 10

No pun intended obviously as always. Jean Rollins - I reckon reading and seeing that name, people acquainted to him and his movies in general (most likely to be fan of his), will have some inkling ... but more an expectation of what to expect here. And then the movie comes and blows away all that - not in the sense you may think (not that kind of movie here).

The movie has one interesting new item/fact or whatever you would call it. I mean you can watch the whole thing under the prism of what is real and what is not ... but if we take this for what we are being shown, than we do get to see Vampires who are "daywalkers" ... but can not see when the sun is out.

So a nice spin on the whole blood sucking thing (individuals). If you are here for nudity and other such things ... well do not bother! It does have some nudity, but not to the degree you may be accustomed to when it comes to Rollins or other directors (and even some of the actors involved - like Brigitte Lahaie, who has a minor role in this).

It has a sort of over arching story .... but it is more about cinematography and getting from one place to another. And some "cameos" along the way. Though sometimes the lighting does not work in any way that would be good ... that aside, the effects are decent to say the least. Not much substance but still at least fragments of the fantasy (world) Rollins likes to delve in ... if you can dig it ... well you need no more ... (nudity/other things) ...