La morte vivante

When two bumbling knuckleheads decide to rob the graves of a crypt where they go to dump barrels of toxic waste in, they quickly are in over their heads. An earth tremor spills one of the barrels onto the coffin of the deceased Catherine. After she shakes off her two year sabbatical in the catacombs she awakens to an insatiable lust for blood that quickly does in those poor goons. She goes back to the castle of her youth to reclaim her memories and for a light snack or two. When Helene, Catherine's childhood blood sister, races back to the castle to help Catherine she quickly learns that the pairs childhood vow to follow each other in to death will soon be fulfilled.

La Morte Vivante (Living Dead Girl) is considered to be one of Rollin's most commercial efforts. This being one of the first Rollin flicks that I've seen I can't really compare this to any of his others, that said I will say that his plain but adequate filming style goes about things in a leisurely paced fashion but comes alive at the right moments. This simple tale of two friends has a few gory moments and a generous helping of skin to satisfy most people who crave those things. The acting is good for the most part. Françoise Blanchard does a good job as the living dead girl. She even shows off an occasionally convincing dramatic moment when her character breaks down towards the end. Marina Pierro plays Catherine's friend Helene. It's not the best written part ever but she does what she needs with what she was given. . I would like to know why is it that she would call her best bud, two years after her death. But her character's devotion to her friend is pretty much the dead heart of this living dead girl.

In the end you have a rather simple tale that expands a little bit out of its' rather typical vampire / zombie roots. The film is plainly shot with an occasional flare and the sets, while convincing, are not as neat as they could have been. Is that one of the most boring mausoleums or is it me? Not horribly bad….but not totally engaging either.

I have only seen three Jean Rollin movies (the other two being 'La Vampire Nue' and 'Fascination'). Each made in a different decade, each one a vampire movie of some kind, but each different in approach and theme. All three are fascinating movies, hard to compare with any other horror director's output. While Rollin's work bears certain superficial resemblances to some of Jess Franco's, particularly the emphasis on mood, style and eroticism, each director is his own man. Rollin's movies, though as much exploitation films as Franco's, are not as camp or trashy. I hesitate to call them "art films", but in their own eccentric way they almost are.

'The Living Dead Girl' concerns the resurrection of a French heiress via a spill of "toxic waste". As much a zombie as a vampire, at least initially, she must relentlessly feed on blood to survive. In other director's hands the premise would then go into a familiar direction. Rollin however, takes into stranger territory of loyalty, love and guilt. The movie contains plenty of gore and a reasonably amount of nudity, but overall it will probably not be exactly what you expected. That's what makes it so damn interesting! Watch this without any preconceived ideas about what a vampire movie should or should not be and you will be in for a unique trip! Hats off once again to Jean Rollin for a totally unique experience.

I thought that this was a good vampire film. When they were children, Catherine and Hélène swore blood oaths that they would always love each other and, whomever died first, the other would follow. It was Catherine who was first to go. She was laid to rest in the Valmont crypt underneath the family castle. Two years later, however, some men reawaken Catherine while illegally dumping toxic waste in the Valmont vault. Catherine now needs the blood of the living to survive. Just returned from a trip, Hélène telephones the Valmont castle which, unknown to her, is up for sale. Catherine, who is a virtual zombie, picks up the receiver while playing a music box that she and Hélène shared. Not knowing who answered the phone, Hélène pays the castle a visit, and she finds find Catherine and the dead bodies. Concerned for Catherine, Hélène cleans up the mess, thinking that Catherine is sick and that her death was faked. When Hélène realises that Catherine needs human blood, she begins to bring young women to the castle to provide it, while trying harder and harder to bring Catherine out of her catatonia. I felt that this was a good vampire film.

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.

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.