I have to echo many of the comments here - it was a dreadful film, but worth a watch, mostly for Anna Friel and the quality technical aspects of the film (the cinematography, set and costume design are fantastic and help the film come off as quite epic at times). I also really liked the twist on the Bathory tale, which I wont describe to avoid spoilers. If you are a fan of the Bathory legend, gothic period films or Anna Friel, this would be worth it to watch despite itself.
Having said all those nice things and still recommending a watch for certain people, I cannot emphasize enough how bad this was. The dialog was truly horrible, many of the actors in important roles were amateur at best (or at least their poor command of the language and the dreadful lines they have to deliver make it seem that way), and the worst crime here is the addition of the monks as poorly conceived and totally unnecessary comic relief and as a vehicle for exposition. This element of the film is so terribly bad and inappropriate that whoever introduced it into this film needs to never, ever be involved in making another movie ever again because they are clearly an incompetent idiot. I cannot stress enough how much it killed this film. I saw the need for exposition, but it could have been done in 100 different, better and more appropriate ways, and the comic aspects were totally out of place here and killed what mood the film created. It truly helped ruin what could have been a fantastic film.
That is the most obvious example of what makes the movie so crushingly disappointing - seeing the potential of what could have been such a good film constantly squandered by bad film making, most of which seems to land on the shoulders of the script.
Someone should remake this in a few years, take out the comic relief, give it better dialog and hire better actors. If they did that it would be a top notch film.
My only explanation for the good ratings here (it's only a 6.7 but that is good on hyper-critical imdb) are that people from Slovakia and the Czech Republic are giving it good ratings because they are proud that it is a locally made film that is world class, at least in a technical sense (again, the cinematography, set and costume design are great) or maybe it's just simple nationalistic pride, because this film is bad. I would give it a 4 at best.
And trust me douces - nothing better could have happened to Famke Janssen than to but cut from this film. Anna Friel is not a big enough star to have the filmmakers use her name to sell this so she can get away with making a bad film and have it not be too noticed, but Famke is a large enough star for them to have used her to market this dreck and it could have really hurt her career.
reply
share
Mr_Igo
15 years ago
"...the quality technical aspects of the film (the cinematography, set and costume design are fantastic and help the film come off as quite epic at times). I also really liked the twist on the Bathory tale..."
"...his element of the film is so terribly bad and inappropriate that whoever introduced it into this film needs to never, ever be involved in making another movie ever again because they are clearly an incompetent idiot."
Rick, the person who introduced it into this film and needs to never, ever be involved in making another movie ever again is the same person, who is responsible for the the cinematography, set and costume design. It was the director, who was also the author of the idea of the movie, which you liked as well.
reply
share
rick-463
15 years ago
The director did the cinematography, set and costume design? Unlikely, and according to the film credits he did not.
And I'm not sure your point is anyway. I don't feel like I contradicted myself by saying some things were good and some were bad, even if those things are from the same person. People are capable of doing bad things and good things as well, but I will say again - if he is indeed the one responsible for ruining this film then it shows he should not be helming one regardless of what other good things he does. A good share of the fault probably lies with John Paul Chapple who is credited with the dialog, which was dreadful and the source of most of my dissatisfaction with the film. And the credits say the director wrote the script, but did he develop the original story idea? I don't know because I don't see a credit, but if he did, his re-imagining of the Bathory legend was great and he should have handed the idea over to someone who would have done a better job with making it into a film.
reply
share
Mr_Igo
15 years ago
"The director did the cinematography, set and costume design? Unlikely, and according to the film credits he did not."
In fact, he did the cinematography and set, although he is not credited here (I don't know why). He was one of the two cinematogaphers (you can verify it in the "making of")
Probably he is not primary responsible for the costumes but most visual part of the movie comes from his visions and sketches (eg. http://www.ceskatelevize.cz/specialy/bathory/en/about-movie/diaries/)
He is probably even responsible for the bad dialog, because as far as I know, the name John Paul Chapple in the credits was only a libation to a sponsor.
And yes, the story was completely Jakubisko's idea on which he was worknig on since the 80ties.
reply
share
endura-1
15 years ago
To Mr Igo
Could you recommend a movie/book that is fair to Bathory's story, a faithful account of her life? You seem pretty well informed.
I am watching the movie (2008 version) now but I am interested in historical facts more than a director's vision.
Thanks a lot in advance.
reply
share
Mr_Igo
15 years ago
Movies:
Though it may sound implausible, the most accurate is Bathory (2008). From the long list of movies involving her character these may be also worth watching:
Countess Dracula (1971), Ceremonia sangrienta (1973), Contes immoraux (1974), Krvava pani (1980 animated), Eternal (2004) and The Countess (2009) (I haven't seen this one yet, but I've read the script).
Literature:
There is also long list of books about her life but if you want the real character, you would have to avoid the fiction. It's the same as with the movies, even those, which tend to look as a historical fiction are just pure fantasy.
Try to look at the books written by the historians. I don't know what are your resources, but the best works have been written by hungarian and slovak historians (the opinions would vary but the facts are present). Anglo-american literature mostly exploits the vampire myth, so if this is your only resource, you must be careful with accepting the speculations.
The key for reading those books is very simple: we know very little about her real life. The most best-known "facts" (650 victims, blood bathing, diary) are only the myths. If you will find the book stating anything else, it's a crap.
reply
share
endura-1
15 years ago
Thank you. I am reading the book by Jozo Niznansky at the moment, it is a fiction, a novel. As you said to little is known about her REAL persona.
thanks again for response.
reply
share
morganseer
8 years ago
My only explanation for the good ratings here (it's only a 6.7 but that is good on hyper-critical imdb) are that people from Slovakia and the Czech Republic are giving it good ratings because they are proud that it is a locally made film that is world class, at least in a technical sense (again, the cinematography, set and costume design are great) or maybe it's just simple nationalistic pride, because this film is bad.
--------------------------
Not so. On their own movie website, the Czechs, who have quite a long history of making "world-class movies," have a lower rating for this movie than IMDb, (5.5 vs. 6.0 as of this date). I notice that a lot (if not all) movies on IMDb are initially rated highly prior to their release, apparently driven up by the cast and crew of each film. I'm guessing this film's crew had done the same.
reply
share