Vicio y virtud

Anybody who has seen Pasolini's 'Salo' will realise that Pasolini owed a debt to Vadim as the similarities in certain sections of the film are perfectly obvious. The key scene in relation to 'Salo' is when the 'victims' enter the chateau and once they are in the chateau suffer the same sort of torments as in Pasolini's film.

The basic difference between the two films is that despite the horrific subject matter Vadim retains a sense of romanticism which Pasolini rejected. It is a great pity this film is not more widely available on video as it is beautifully shot in scope with a delirious score that mixes Gotterdammerung with 'Les Parapluies de Cherbourg'!

The acting, especially from Annie Girardot is exemplary. You can see why this actress gave a such a terrific performance recently in 'La Pianiste'. It was however one of Deneuve's first roles and like all her early films she was not at her best, but clearly decorative.

A 'must-see' film for all those film lovers who have appreciated the likes of 'The Night Porter' and Visconti's 'The Damned'.

10/10

Outside the fact that both works ("le vice et la vertu" and "salo' ) take place during WW2,it's absolutely impossible to compare an auteur like Pasolini to a mediocre third-rate drudge whose works have not worn well at all:"And God created woman" and the first version of "les liaisons dangereuses" are dated old hat stuff.

Vadim's movie is entertaining,if it's not taken literally:it's a farce which recalls erotic comics of the sixties,particularly the scenes in the baroque castle where Hossein and Girardot give the victims (including the latter's clueless sister Justine-Deneuve- and the future Bond villainess Luciana Paluzzi) a rough time .

Pasolini's work will hurt you,shock you,leave you completely depressed and exhausted .Vadim's will make you laugh ,and wonder why all these talented actors got lost is this masquerade.

Roger Vadim opens this movie with a short introduction. He explains to viewers that this story uses history as a backdrop to explore human themes, and with that places himself with the likes of Shakespeare, who used the same method to explore the human condition.

This movie is much than the superficial elements of keeping sex slaves. It is a story of power, survival, opportunity, greed, lust, and love. WWII provides an ample setting for these human emotions to play itself out. Some viewers may not believe there is much love, yet this deserves more attention.

Love has many faces and is an emotion that bares its soul in a variety of ways, using broken and bitter people who, through circumstances from WWII, find themselves expressing love that is both crippled and heart wrenching.

Finally this movie questions other concepts, so important in war, such as camaraderie, patriotism, losing and winning, and how soldiers manage these additional pressures when confronted on a daily basis.

This is an intense movie, and although it can be confusing at times with so much Roger Vadim wants to say, he has shown considerable skill in trying to tie all these elements together.

nothing bad or good. only a strange movie with an admirable cast and too high ambition. because it is a dark comedy with ambition of reflection about power. because it is chaotic and without a precise sense. a Vadim movie, far by profound purpose, nice for the presence of Girardot and Deneuve, a parable not real credible, strange dialogs and , in fact, only a confuse parable. the only sin - the ambition to be more than a Vadim film. to improvise a message who seems unclear and artificial. to do a serious film with fragile tools and a not inspired script. a castle and the end of a war. and Robert Hossein looking to save his character . nothing new.