O Juiz Sanguinário

Along with Witchfinder General (1968), The Bloody Judge was part of a small subset of films from the late 60's / early 70's that can best be described as historical horror movies. In these we have a true historical subject which is played up in such a way that it crosses over into the territory of the horror film. Seeing as this was a point in time where there was a plethora of period set costume horror flicks anyway, I suppose it makes a lot of sense that these films were made too. Like a lot of continental offerings from the period, this one throws in a lot of sadistic torture, nudity and sleaze as well and so covers the erotic horror sub-genre too. This is hardly surprising when you take into account that its director was the legendary Jesus Franco who was something of an expert at this kind of thing.

The Bloody Judge came out at a point when Franco was enjoying the most high profile time of his career and so this one like a few others he made at the time is pretty high budgeted by his subsequent standards. It has good locations and a fine cast and benefits from professional editing and photography as well. It was also one of several collaborations Franco had with horror stalwart Christopher Lee too. Unlike their earlier Fu Manchu collaborations, the role of the infamous Lord Chief Justice Jeffreys – aka 'The Hanging Judge' – was much better suited to Lee. He is very good as this cold central character, although he seemingly was not best pleased at all when he saw the finished film, presumably as a result of the salacious content Franco is famed for. The cast is good beyond Lee too; we have the beautiful Maria Rohm, the fine character actor Leo Genn and last but not least Franco regular Howard Vernon in a great over the top turn as a torturer/executioner.

Like Witchfinder General before it and several others too, this one is set in witch hunting times. It's a period in history peculiarly well suited to horror movies. Most costume horrors tend to be set in the later Victorian period but when we go back further into the far scarier, unenlightened years of the 1600's we are squarely in a historical period where many very horrible things occurred and it is very well suited, therefore, to horror stories. Like most historical films, this one also takes considerable liberties with the actual history to be honest. But let's be fair, lots of critically acclaimed big budget historical movies do exactly the same – Braveheart for instance – and if they can then why bother complaining if these far smaller films do a similar thing.

For my money this is one of the better Franco films out there. I think the story and central character are good ones for the treatment and the production value is good enough to pull it off. The smattering of salacious content throughout didn't do it any harm and simply added to the entertainment factor to be perfectly honest. This maybe isn't of the level of the more personal delirious Franco efforts such as Vampyros Lesbos but it's definitely one of his most well made. I enjoyed it a fair bit.

As said, I just witnessed the full uncut version of the Bloody Judge. Like you could see IMDb never made notice of this version so I thought it must be wrong on the DVD but no, it clocked in at exactly 103 minutes. It's English spoken until the extra minutes appear, they are in German but the subtitles stays intact. The extra minutes are no more then a torture scene with full nudity, the others include all nudity with a love scene between the bloody judge and the witch, the last extra is a lesbian scene in the torture room with frontal bush nudity. Thinking of the year it was made, 1970, it was normal that it was cut out. Anyway, the storyline does refer to the real history but the movie is way too long. There is a lot of blah blah and the torture scenes are really laughable. You only see blood but it never runs or you never see cuts made by the executioner. A shame, could have done better by Franco. The performances are really good but the suspense isn't there due the lack of storyline, they really refer to much to history. It is nice to see how they made you say you are a witch. There are better witch hunt movies out there, I guess would Lee never appeared in it it would be a forgotten flick. It's not for the geeks of horror, just one of the Jess Franco flicks with the usual T&A features. It's available in his 103 minutes in Belgium with the German pieces in it, judge it for yourselves

O.K., it's no Witchfinder General (but then again, what is?), but Jess Franco's The Bloody Judge is a well-written, well-acted, well-made historical-horror hybrid in the tradition of it's obvious model, Rowland V. Lee's The Tower of London. Franco stalwart Howard Vernon delivers a delicious homage to Karloff's Mord the Executioner from that film, and Christopher Lee is excellent, if somewhat insecurely emphatic and earnest, as the cruel, narrow, and hypocritical Judge Jeffries. The score, by Bruno Nicolai, is majestic and memorable, and the film as a whole is vividly entertaining. Having seen this film over 25 years ago, on television, heavily edited, under the title Night of the Blood Monster, I was amazed at how much of it had lain dormant in my memory, ready to be jostled into consciousness. Whole scenes played out in my mind as I re-watched them on my wide screen TV.

There are a few people, including the otherwise estimable Glenn Erickson, of the hugely insightful and informative DVD Savant site, who have claimed, based on the evidence of this film, that Jess Franco could not have "directed" the legendary Battle of Shrewsbury in Orson Welles' Chimes at Midnight. First, lets get a few facts straight. It is well documented that Franco shot the second unit on Chimes at Midnight, which included much of the battle scene. This means that Franco shot a lot of coverage of the battle, working from a general outline given by Welles. Later, Welles took the miles of footage into the editing room and, many months later, emerged with the shattering sequence that appears in his picture. Franco, obviously, had nothing to do with this editing process, and, as far as I can tell, has never claimed otherwise. To compare the battle scene in The Bloody Judge with Welles' magnificent achievement is grotesquely unfair, as I am sure that Franco was allowed minutes rather than months to assemble The Bloody Judge for exhibition. Given the strictures under which he was working, Franco, his cast, and his collaborators should be commended for having produced a film with such a high level of professionalism. Welles, that most populist of auteurs, who once stated that he would rather watch paint dry than sit through an Antonioni film, and who responded to energy, verve, iconoclasm, and enthusiasm, had seen and appreciated those qualities an early Franco effort, which eventually led to the offer to work on Chimes. If Franco was good enough for Welles, he should be good enough for us. The two are closer than you think...

Jess Franco's "Il Trono di fuoco" aka. "The Bloody Judge" of 1970 is one of a bunch of early 70s exploitation flicks inspired by the success of Michael Reeves' 1968 masterpiece "Witchfinder General" (starring the great Vincent Price). People familiar with Jess Franco's cinema might expect an immensely sleazy and gruesome film that mainly takes place in torture chambers, but the film is actually tame for what one might expect. Even though there are a bunch of very brutal scenes, the level of sleaze and violence is quite low for a Jess Franco film, and the film is not even nearly as nasty as other popular 'Hexploitation' films of the time, such as the ultra-gruesome "Mark Of The Devil" from the same year. Equally surprising is the budget that was obviously quite high for Jess Franco standards, as realistic costumes and nice settings are provided.

Horror icon Christopher Lee, who worked with Jess Franco on several occasions, plays Lord George Jeffreys, the infamous and merciless judge and Lord Chancellor in England torn by strife between the reigning King James II and William of Orange. Convincend of doing what's necessary, the cruel judge mercilessly persecutes 'traitors', who sympathize with the King's opponent William of Orange, as well as 'witches', who are accused of being in league with the devil...

Christopher Lee is, as always, great in his role as the merciless judge (who is based on the infamous real-life 'hanging-judge' George 1st baron Jeffreys). Beautiful Maria Rohm, who starred in many Franco-highlights, most memorably in "Venus in Furs" and "Count Dracula", plays the female lead here, and she fits in her role very well. Jess Franco-fans will also recognize another regular in his films, Howard Vernon, who plays the executioner. Another great enrichment to the film is the great score by Bruno Nicolai. Jess Franco, one of the most prolific directors ever, has directed a bunch of absolutely awesome films, as well as total stinkers. "The Bloody Judge" is definitely one of his better films (even though, in my opinion, not one of his masterpieces), and a more than decent historical horror film. Highly recommended!

This film is an unique thing. Being possibly the best of B-category Franco's movies, this one is very hard to find in Russia. And I guess only Franco's true fans and the lovers of the costume movies (like me)really have any reason to search for it.

Nevertheless, this film could be worse if not Christopher Lee. The man destined to play fantastic villains all his life now was playing a real historic villain (was the real Judge Jeffreys a villain? I think not but Jess Franco used another version). But Lee was ready to play in a HISTORIC movie, and instead of it he was to perform a horror show. Although his performance in this role was a very good one, he was disappointed and detested and told later he doesn't want any credits for this film.

There are some very rough mistakes (or special changes) in the movie: 1) The date is missed. The year 1685 was the real time of Monmouth rebellion, but the events destroying James II' and Jeffreys' power, has happened only 4 years later, in 1688-89, and called "Glorious Revolution". 2) Sir George Jeffreys really has died in the Tower of London - but of stone, not of a heart-attack as it's shown. 3) Jeffreys, how good or bad he was, has never been neither womanizer nor witch-hunter. Moreover he did all he could to prevent death sentences to alleged witches. And there was nothing to suggest that he had a mistress or used the arrested women for his lust. It is nothing but a profanation. 4) There were NO witch hunt in later 1680's in England. Even the few who was charged were mostly acquitted. The horrible things shown in film as Ketch's work were used normally in Scotland, not England.