Les raisins de la mort

A bleak gallic version of 'Night of the Living Dead', except that this time the victims remain horribly sentient and resemble lepers rather than zombies.

The makers probably had the outbreak of mass psychosis at Point-Saint-Esprit in 1951 in mind (which was caused by ergot in the local bread rather than pesticide in the local wine as depicted here).

I saw this for the first time recently. The film's gore may remind viewers of Fulci. The settings may remind of Who Can kill a Child and Tombs of the blind Dead. The film has lingering shots of oozing stuff n nasty ulcers, it has nudity, a decapitation n hell lottuva weirdness. Dont worry about the oozing ulcers, we have porn actress Brigitte Lahaie, who doesnt hesitate to undress. In one scene a woman is shown wearing a red shirt n the next she is shown wearing a braless gown. The best part about this film is Jean Rollin's exquisite cinematography and surrealistic atmosphere throughout.

Now here is a rarity. A movie I came across late at night on one of Sky's inferior movie channels (in this case zone horror) that I actually found quite enjoyable. If you are a fan of old school horror then I imagine you will enjoy this. Yes there are some ropey gore effects and some dodgy editing but overall there is a sense of menace which is greatly aided by the slow burning pace and genuinely spooky sound track. The basic premise of the film s that off a pesticide that has been sprayed on the grapes of a vineyard turn all those who consume the wine into some form of diseased zombie type. A young girl on the way to see her boyfriend at the vineyard has to deal with it. This is my first experience of French horror and of the movies of Jean Rollin and I have to say I will be seeking out more of both on this showing. You do have to take into account that this is a 1978 movie and it does show it's age but it has genuine fright moments and a real seedy scary under currant and a lot of modern horror directors could learn a thing or two about pacing a horror movie from here. A real unexpected treat. I would definitely watch this again and for fans of the genre give an extra mark.

Jean Rollin's "Grapes of Death" is a refreshing living dead poem, and an effective low key horror film from France's gentleman auteur.

After Elizabeth (Marie-Georges Pascal) encounters a rotting man and the corpse of her traveling companion on a deserted train, she flees into the countryside where she must battle a plague of the sad, tortured dead. The "grapes" of the title relate to the cause of the spreading problem.

Rollin's films have always found horror and dread in rural landscapes and crumbling architecture; in "Grapes" the fascination with these elements continues and is intensified by suitably evocative photography. Despite some ropey focus and action sequences that don't quite cut smoothly, this is the director's most technically polished work and an important addition to French "cinefantastique".

Although the plot line bears some similarity to Romero's "The Crazies" and the visuals pre-date the recent dead-on-arrival French "Revenants" (see review), Rollin does not run this show along traditional genre lines. Instead, he has the heroine Pascal encountering a blind woman who is oblivious to the contagion and a recluse (Brigitte Lahaie) who may be her savior in a white nightie. Elizabeth's final reunion with her boyfriend has a sad, tragic quality that becomes, like the rest of the film, quite surreal.

There is sporadic gore and the violence is shockingly sudden in parts, but Rollin's trademark dream-like pacing and social commentary are there to be enjoyed and appreciated.

This film is watchable, but it is hit-and-miss in several respects. The atmosphere and story are not too bad, and the gore is a bit amateurish but plentiful. My major objection to the film is the poor editing. If you are ever asked about the importance of editing and continuity to the watchability of a film, just point to this film as an example of how NOT to do it. Due to the poor editing and lack of continuity, people "jump" all over the screen and sets, showing up in one place after starting in another. One of the actresses literally walks around a corner of a building and changes clothes completely at the same time. (No, I don't believe that this was intentional.) A couple huge dogs just show up at one point (which also makes no sense), wounds change locations, and some events were obviously intended to precede other events that now appear earlier in the film.

Don't get me wrong, this film is worth your time if you're a fan, but it is definitely not a slick, finished product.