Las dos huérfanas vampiras

Now *this* is the film that separates the men from the boys. If it's in-yer-face sex and horror you want; then I suggest you bugger off now, because Jean Rollin has concocted something very very different... And are you man enough to take it?

Rollin's filmic obsession with vampires- and let's face it, with erotic young women- has never looked this beautiful. Like many films to come out of Europe, this eschews huge action and movement in favour of stillness and thought. It's beautiful to look at, and within the frame Rollin has trapped a whole other world- a vivid, colourful world of rich tones and contrasts, waif-like vampires and deep brown earth. Like some kind of comfortable dream on a hot Summer's evening, 'Two Orphan Vampires' slides from plot point to plot point at its own leisure. At times there's not a lot going on; but there's always something to look at.

Perhaps the most astonishing thing about the film, is the way in which Rollin makes the tiny budget work to his advantage. We meet a vampire queen, a ghoul and a werewolf. But we are only *told* this is what they are- they appear outwardly 'normal'... and although it's a cliche to say 'our imaginations do the rest', here it is so true. Late in the film there is a scene in which one of the characters explains some of her past; stuff that Hollywood would salivate over. Rollin has her hunched over a table and s-l-o-w-l-y tracks the camera towards her. No fuss, no noise, no elaborately staged flash-backs and set-pieces. Stillness. Quiet. And an otherworldliness that will leave you changed. It's like looking at a painting that illustrates a poem you strongly admire, and finding the artist has got it just 'right'. 'Two Orphan Vampires' is a tribute to the enduring presence of Jean Rollin- a writer/director of integrity, vision and wit.

Steev

A dreamy dark fairy tale about two lesbian orphans who are blind. Also they are vampire and can see in blue vision at night.

I haven't seen many Jean Rollins films, but I enjoyed this one much more than Demonaniacs. It was dark, but sweet. It was dream like with poetic dialog. The relationship between the two orphans was wholesome and Ioving. They weren't strong, they questioned who they are, and they enjoy some brandy to go with their blood. The movie was a great watch and I now feel the need to watch more of Rollins films.

So many French film makers hide behind the term "surrealism", when what they are making is just garbage. Film is a total art form using motion, sound and text..not just one of the three elements. With Jean Rollins you get nowhere near the full package. What you do get is a very interesting series of photographs, exceptionally lighted, and edited together. Because of the photography-- I will say it is a beautiful film---what makes it even more beautiful, to watch, is the two leading actresses: Alexandra Pic (Louise) and Isabelle Teboul (Henriette). It is obvious that these two actresses are young and inexperienced, they do, nevertheless, a reasonably good job; even if they come across as walking right out of acting class. That is alright, however, since everyone has to start somewhere.

The plot is nothing more than an outline and I have to admit that I would be interested in reading the books to see how well the subject matter is covered. The dialogue is overblown and comes off as being an exercise in amateurism, not surrealism; although the actresses do their best. A plus is that the gore is minimal and looks unrealistic and the director also gets points for the absurdness of some of the "supernatural" characters the two orphan girls come across during the course of the action.

Jean Rollin passed away last year and we will not be seeing another new film by him. I think he had a wonderful eye for finding a hole in the world. By that I would consider him a true surrealist. This particular film, or any of his films for that matter, are not for everyone. He often said he did not make straight horror films, rather fantasy films. He also said he never wanted all the sex, but that is how the distributors wanted to market it. In this film there is one scene where the two embrace naked. The actresses looked uncomfortable which made me feel the same. It is a shame that a film maker has to market something in such a way that changes his vision...but that's show business; I am sure that there are many fifteen year old boys out there that a glad that it is so.

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.

Two Orphan Vampires (1997)

** (out of 4)

Later day Rollin film about two sisters who are blind during the day but at night can see blue as they stalk the streets of Paris looking for blood. This is certainly a very big departure for Rollin especially when compared to his more famous, early 70's vampire films. Whereas his earlier films were full of sex, blood and violence, this one here is pretty darn close to PG-rated, although there are a few shots of bloody lips and one brief scene of a woman's breasts. This is a rather strange film to review because on one hand it's not very good but on the other I somewhat respect what Rollin was going for. I think the best thing about the film is the atmosphere Rollin creates with his small budget. As with many Rollin films, this one here moves too slowly, which is the ultimate death key. The film comes close to 105-minutes, which feels twice as long once you get to the half way point. Another problem is that the dialogue is among the worst I've ever heard and I'd swear that a two-year-old wrote it. Alexandra Pic and Isabelle Teboul turn in fairly good performances as the teenage vampires.