La Comtesse

As much as I wanted to like this film, I was left feeling unsatisfied after watching it.

It felt as if the writers were unsure of what direction they were taking, most of the time. It wasn't a horror, a psychological thriller, or an accurate historical flick... though it did have elements of all the aforementioned.

I was also disappointed to find that (since it's such a dark movie) there was virtually no suspense or build-up. I caught myself growing bored at many points throughout the film, which is really surprising given the subject material. It doesn't help that the acting seems forced most of the time (as if the actors are reading their lines off of cue cards), or that Delpy and Bruhl have about 0 chemistry...

I did, however, love the costumes and the sets, as well as Anamaria Marinca's unique character.

All in all, I was just hoping for a bit more. A bit more horror, a bit more suspense, a bit more passion. This movie left little to no impression on me... and I was sorely disappointed.

I haven't seen the film yet, I was thinking of seeing it this week, but given some of the things I've read in the reviews, I may not bother. The story recounted in the film is NOT a true story at all. Countess Elizabeth Bathory existed and she was indeed charged with a number of supposed murders, but the charges were never properly proved. In fact no evidence was properly presented - her 'trial' was a politically motivated set-up. She was an extremely rich and powerful woman living at a time when in most societies, but especially Eastern European ones, wealthy and powerful women were hugely resented by their male counterparts.

Once she was widowed Countess Bathory chose not to remarry as she did not want another man to take control of her lands. She wanted to rule her estates herself - and she was a very capable ruler. Unfortunately powerful men in Hungary (and the Austro-Hungarian Empire) were greedy for her lands. They could not dispossess her legally, so they hatched a plot to have her charged with terrible crimes. Her servants were tortured and forced to accuse her, however, no credible evidence was ever presented. It was enough however, for her lands to be confiscated.

As for punishment, she was NOT bricked up in a room and fed through a hole in the wall. That is fantasy. She was confined to a few rooms in one of her castles, a kind of house arrest. Sadly films like this perpetuate the myth and falsehoods about a woman who, although tough and sometimes hard on her servants, was never guilty of the horrendous crimes of which she has been accused. I am so sick and tired of seeing history re-written and fabricated that I probably won't go and see it now - and I would warn anyone who thinks they are going to see something 'historical' that it just isn't.

Well, actually, in the Little Carpathians, apparently, which are not part of Transylvania, or so Wikipedia tells me.

I really enjoyed this film (at home on pay-per-view)though I think it is intended for a pretty narrow audience. As others have noted, the dialogue is amazingly stilted (very literary, rather like a French novel of the 17th or 18th century) and delivered in near-monotone. I kept feeling that the whole movie had been dubbed into English. On the other hand, I found the acting very fine, and I admired the insistence on presenting these characters as not at all like you, me, or the folks in the latest TV drama. The Countess in particular is a strange, unique portrait--her piety, her desire for amorous adventure, her pride, her intelligence. And that's before you get to the blood-of-virgins part.

The film proposes that what we are seeing before our eyes is not the truth about the Countess. We are watching a fantasy of a noblewoman enacting a tale "told by the victors"--by the men who were enriched by her downfall and relieved, too, to be rid of the very possibility of an intelligent woman. The tale is told, too, by the peasants and others whose sons are fighting in her army. Yet the man who questions the gory story is her lover, and he too may be deceived. There is no simple answer to the question, what really happened?--no resolution.

In short, it's an intellectual (and visual) treat, but it won't affect your blood sugar.

I really wanted to like this. Based on the true story of 17th century Countess Bathory, who grew obsessed with retaining her youth, and decided the best way to do this was by bathing in the blood of virgins. What could have been a disturbing descent into madness turns out to be a dull by the numbers bio-pic/period piece.

Julie Delpy does an alright job in the titular role, but the departure from her usual romantic roles doesn't really work, as Delpy just seems like she's on auto-pilot throughout most of the film. The script, written by Delpy, treats the Countess as some sort of feminist pioneer, and at other times, shows her to be a monster. The movie wants to have it both ways, but in the end it it just seems really confused and tiresome.

I must admit that I had expected a bit more from this movie, especially given the story that it was portraying and telling. I just had expected something grander than what director Julie Delphy dished out here.

Everyone should be fairly familiar with the bloody story of Countess Bathory, well at least if you have just an ounce of interesting in World history. So I am not going to delve into details about the storyline.

What worked for this movie was the acting. Julie Delphy, who both directed and starred in the movie, did a great job in her portrayal of the Countess Erzebet Bathory. There was something very raw and emotional about her acting in "The Countess" and she really carried the movie all by herself.

Julie Delphy seems rather talented, doing acting, directing, producing and even writing the music for this 2009 movie.

But the movie was just too slow paced for my liking, but it was an interesting portrayal of the infamous Countess Erzebet Bathory.