La morte vivante

This is an interesting film on several levels. It is not full of top notch acting, but it is different and I like that.

First, some sleaze-bags are dumping chemical waste in an underground burial vault that dates from the 12th century. A tremor releases gases and awakens our living dead girl (Françoise Blanchard). She wanders into the castle above, which happens to have been her home when she died two years ago.

Now, the realtor (Dominique Treillou) brings her boyfriend for a weekend of fun. Surprise! Our living dead girl needs some blood to survive. Now, is she a zombie or a vampire? She doesn't bite, but tears the flesh apart, but she doesn't eat the flesh either; she drinks them dry. Topic for discussion.

What I like about European films is that they have no problems with full frontal. They also use very healthy actresses, not some skinny starlet. Gorgeous bodies are on display in this film.

There isn't much story here. The film has constant flashbacks to the childhood of the zombie and her friend Hélène (Marina Pierro). Hélène comes to the castle after a phone call to see if her friend is alive. At first she doesn't understand, but is soon getting her fresh meat to drink dry.

The living dead girl just wants to die, but Hélène wants to keep her alive. One is never sure if there is more to this relationship than childhood friendship, but there is only one possible ending to it.

Really should be seen by all zombie lovers for a different take on the subject.

I hate to admit it, but I like the idea of Jean Rollin more than the reality of sitting through one of his films. It's not that I don't appreciate what he's doing. I do. He has a unique world view and holds a special place in the world of "fantastique" cinema that is indisputable.

Still, I find his films a little boring.

Case in point THE LIVING DEAD GIRL springs from a simple and fascinating concept of a dead woman, who must drink blood to survive, returning to a château to be with an old friend.

As fascinating as the concept is, Rollin doesn't do a whole lot with it. He serves up plenty of atmosphere, imbues his material with a subtle eroticism and draws a superb performance from the beautiful Francoise Blanchard. What else do you want? you may ask. I'm not sure. I wanted more to happen, I guess. I wanted Rollin to jettison the boring bits and replace them with his signature set pieces.

It's been described as "savage", an adjective I wouldn't use myself. It's also been described as "dreamy". For the most part that's true. My frustration is with the film's uneven tone. Why couldn't it remain "dreamy" right through? You do need patience and a little forgiveness to enjoy Rollin.

I still wouldn't miss anything he's done. He's one of us.

(This Film Rates a B+ ) A dead girl comes back to life and requires blood to stay alive, zombie/vampire like. She reunites with her childhood "girlfriend" who truly loves her and will do anything to understand and help them be together. While one believes she is alive, the other believes she is dead. This film is pretty crude at times with more of a 1970's feel than 1982. There some laughable moments throughout; Are French people really bad kissers or is it just horrible acting? How about the girl getting a blood squirt to the face at the 29:45 minute mark or her dramatic death down the stairs. There are plenty of good gore effects plus a creepy yet soothing and psychopathic emotional element to the film/story line. The script is decent and often times poetic. Predictable, over dramatized but savoy. The set/scenery are foreign and fantastic plus the cinematography has some brilliant artistic moments. T&A are present. And that ending!

I expect that Rollin, when he made this film, was just trying to make a few bucks off teenage boys with a plain old breast-and-blood flick. And really, that's all this is. Certainly every cast member gets naked at one time or another, and certainly there's plenty of blood, though the gore is never really overwhelming. Also, the script is pretty poorly written. I mean, it's inaccurate to say that the story is full of plot holes…the story itself is basically one big plot hole, starting with the first scene and continuing the length of the picture. I spent a lot of the time staring at the screen saying, "What? But, but…what?" What sets this film apart, though, what makes it worth watching, is the interesting transition taking place in the relationship between the main characters, which intimates a depth of story that Rollin probably didn't intend. The story is that Catherine (the Living Dead Girl in question) has to kill and feed on her victims, and with each victim she grows more nearly alive. But the interesting thing is that, as Catherine becomes more nearly human, she becomes more and more horrified with what she's become and what she's compelled to do. Meanwhile, her friend and protector Helene, at first revolted by the change in her friend, becomes more and more inured to the horror she and Catherine are perpetrating. It's interesting that, as Catherine becomes more and more human, Helene becomes more and more monstrous. To me, the dynamic between the two main characters is an idea that deserves a better exploration than this movie is able (or willing) to give. I would love to see someone like David Cronenberg rewrite and remake this movie; I believe it could be a horror classic with the right people behind it.

OK, a trawl through my past user comments will reveal that I am really interested in this genre of movies for purely purient interest. Having said that, I do know a good film when I see one. While Holywood rarely produces these, neither does Jean Rollin.

I simply cannot understand how some people can give films such as these high marks. Different strokes obviously. To be fair, this is the best produced Rollin film (out of three) that I have seen, but the others were pretty bad, so that is no commendation. Can bad acting, sloppy plotting and woeful gore effects really be that easily ignored?

The story revolves around a girl brought back from the dead who needs blood to sustain herself, her childhood friend's efforts to meet her need, and a French-American's efforts to expose what is going on. The story is threadbare and doesn't go anywhere. Everyone but the vampire girl bleed profusely by the film's end, but to no effect. Little horror, only litres of fake blood and latex gore.

Worst of all, there is little nudity or sex action to compensate. The opportunity of a lesbian relationship (de rigueur I would have thought!) between the vampire and her girlfriend is not realised, and there is only one sex scene. Isn't this the reason thats these films are made?!? I can think of no other. The other Rollin films I have seen (earlier than this one) are worse overall, but manage to compensate by some spirited flesh action.

And have I mentioned the screaming that occurs throughout the film? It's a wonder my neighbours haven't called the police.

So to those who rate this film highly, purporting it to be some kind of arty French tour de force: I have seen films which are the real thing, and it is an insult to competant French directors to make any comparison with Rollin.