Ceticultsot Beautiful, moving film.

MoPoshy Absolutely brilliant

Chirphymium It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

Janis One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.

chaos-rampant If Franco did a single great thing in his tortuous career, that was discovering Soledad Miranda.Forget what the plot is supposedly about. If you don't have the DVD, there's an accompanying interview with Franco on making the film. His discussion of De Sade and how that informs his work is as boring as De Sade's own writings, but look how he lights up when he starts talking about Soledad. As an old man, you can tell he is still touched by having known her. It is the same mystique that enthralled Von Sternberg to Dietrich.Born, according to Franco at least, to gypsy parents, she was a successful flamenco dancer and singer before making the transition to film. I've only seen her in this and Vampyros, she's great in both but in the extraordinary way of dancers. It isn't about acting, she wasn't much good in the sense Streep is good. It's having a presence, enchanting, teasing by simple breath.As Franco talks of her, that segment is peppered with images of her from the film, the rest of the film was beginning to blur but every single one of those I could instantly remember—crouched before a fireplace holding her knees, grazing a thigh, splayed on a bed, pensive with sunglasses in the car, gypsy tinkle in the eye before murder, playful dancing out of her skimpy skirt, I will probably revisit the film years later and be able to recall every pose. And isn't this what the film is about?It's Franco photographing Soledad.There's a surrogate father here who, in essence, takes Soledad on the journey to staged erotic images. Franco is actually in the film as the 'writer' looking for a fascinating character. It's probably his most pure, because it is most purely about his desire to photograph beauty (and murder). The film begins with a softcore scene that leads to strangulation, 'looked on' by Franco as the director. Framed as Soledad's confessional to Franco, the whole film is gauzy, erotic reminisces on a deathbed. So how poignant when you know that she was already dead when the film was released? That, framed as memory, this is the last we'll see of her? And the images? The violence is tame by contemporary standards, which is for the better, fewer distraction. Being so blatantly stagy, it even adds to the effect. And whereas the male-driven story of violence is typically sloppy, the images, Soledad's images as she remembers, attain a unique quality. Soft around the edges, selfless by contrast to Sade's juvenile philosophy of selfishness. Seeing select footage of this at some film festival, you'd call it experimental. Sometimes the camera roams over mundane details, sometimes it floats in air, sometimes it blurs and finds again, faces, textures of weather. It's as if someone is trying to remember, distorting, fixating, carried along by intruding thoughts—a sort of inverse visual Lolita.It isn't self-consciously so, which again is for the better. A filmmaker with a semiconscious talent for images, films a woman (not outright sexy) semiconscious of her allure. It's great if you can drift in that space between them.

pushthenpull69 There must have been some creative photography work or it took four years to edit and perhaps add more footage but Soledad died in a car crash Aug 18 1970. How Franco directed her beyond the grave must be one of the arcane skills of this director. Maybe bringing back Monroe, Orson Wells, and some others to act would be a worthwhile event.. but seriously, someone should find out how or why this took so long to make.. Perhaps her accident wasn't. Just part of the trivia this director has created.. I mean really just how many Eugenie did me make - four?? I like Lindberg's the most... and yet I still have to write... to make another line

MARIO GAUCI This week-end I have watched another Jess Franco movie, my fifth so far: EUGENIE DE SADE (1970), or as the on-screen title would have it, simply, EUGENIE (by way of the recently released R2 DVD from Oracle Entertainment).Unfortunately, I was rather disappointed by the film itself, especially in view of its reputation as possibly Franco's best. I liked certain aspects of it, surely, but on the whole I felt that it was somewhat overrated. For starters, there are numerous plot-holes which are just too blatant to be left without comment:1. If Albert and Eugenie decided to start filming their murders just prior to meeting Paul (which eventually was to bring about their downfall), where did the footage which Franco's Tanner is watching at the beginning of the film come from?!2. If Albert's intention was always to 'pervert' Eugenie (because as he tells her he had killed her mother for just this purpose), it is hardly plausible that he would have waited this long before attempting anything!3. If Tanner knows just what Albert and Eugenie are up to, why does he need to pester Eugenie on her death-bed in order to discover what makes them 'tick'?4. In her narration, Eugenie refers to Tanner by name (as if he weren't there) rather than address him directly; also, since Albert never had a chance to tell her he killed Paul, let alone how he did it, how come she knows about it?I noticed other stuff that didn't quite come off:· The entire hitch-hiker scene went on 'bloody forever' (as Brian Lindsey had described another scene from the film on the 'Eccentric Cinema' website)· Soledad's strip-tease is more (unintentionally) comical than erotic (though she does otherwise strike a perfect balance between innocence and deadly allure)· The Albert/Eugenie relationship, complete with gratuitous sex scenes, is unconvincing to say the least (Paul Muller is quite good, but miscast, here)!· During Albert's attack on Eugenie, the scene displays a very discreet use of gore for what he is supposed to be doing to her (cut her open with a pair of scissors)!Another aspect I was let down by was the extreme realism of the settings: of course, this may very well be what the subject called for but, to me, when compared to the sunny/tropical settings of EUGENIE…THE STORY OF HER JOURNEY INTO PERVERSION (1969) and A VIRGIN AMONG THE LIVING DEAD (1971) – to say nothing of the atmospheric 'noirish' ambiance of THE DIABOLICAL DOCTOR Z (1965) – both the autumnal Parisian backdrop of the first half and the scenes which takes place in a 'mod' (i.e. dated) Berlin seemed too mundane and failed to draw me into the proceedings as much as I would have liked! As for Bruno Nicolai's score (which some consider to be his finest work!), I did not find it to be especially memorable and, indeed, repeated the same motifs over and over.Still, I have to say something about the quality of the DVD itself, because this had a definite bearing on my rather negative reaction to the film. First of all, the English subtitles flashed by very rapidly (causing me to miss some of the dialogue) but, worse than this, too often these did not even match what was being said in French (I can understand the language but I still prefer to watch it accompanied with subtitles)! Besides, in a couple of spots, subtitles appeared on the screen when none of the characters was actually speaking! By the way, does anyone know whether French was this film's original language (could it possibly have been German?); much as the English dubbing was horrid, I did not feel that the dialogue sounded very natural in French either. As was the case with A VIRGIN AMONG THE LIVING DEAD, the theatrical trailer included on the disc featured a number of alternate takes – not to mention that ultra-catchy riff from EUGENIE…THE STORY OF HER JOURNEY INTO PERVERSION!I have resisted doing a proper review for this film, as I would like to watch it again before committing myself to pass judgment on it. Suffice to say that, for now, I consider EUGENIE…THE STORY OF HER JOURNEY INTO PERVERSION a much better film (perhaps the best Franco I've seen so far), and even A VIRGIN AMONG THE LIVING DEAD (by any stretch a less 'coherent' film than EUGENIE DE SADE) was more readily enjoyable. To tell you the truth, my disappointment over EUGENIE DE SADE has practically brought my Franco experience to an indefinite halt. I almost cancelled the orders I made for both EXORCISM (1974) and JACK THE RIPPER (1976) and have postponed my purchase of the R2 DVD editions of VAMPYROS LESBOS (1970) and SHE KILLED IN ECSTASY (1970). Actually, in a few days I should be getting VHS dubs of 4 (!) new Francos - SUCCUBUS (1967), VENUS IN FURS (1968), LES POSSEDEES DU DIABLE (1974; aka: LORNA THE EXORCIST) and THE SADIST OF NOTRE DAME (1979)! Hopefully, when I watch these films my initial 'admiration' for the work of Jess Franco will be re-awakened

Infofreak First things first - 'Eugenie De Sade' isn't to be confused with Jess Franco's other De Sade adaptation 'Eugenie', which to make matters worse also featured Paul Muller, one of his regular actors. That Eugenie starred the gorgeous Marie Liljedahl, this Eugenie stars the gorgeous Soledad Miranda (Franco sure had some stunning leading ladies!). Miranda, who died tragically in the same year as this movie was released, is best remembered for her role in 'Vampyros Lesbos', arguably Franco's best film. Miranda plays Eugenie, the devoted daughter of Albert Radeck de Franval (Muller), a writer and researcher specializing in erotica. One day she reads a "forbidden" book from her stepfather's collection, and this irrevocably alters their relationship. She becomes his love slave and obeys his every command. He makes her his accomplice in a series of murders, and for a time, both are ecstatic. But when Eugenie begins to fall in love with her latest victim, Paul, a flaky jazz rock musician (Andres Monales, also from 'Vampyros Lesbos'), the wrath of de Franval is sure to be swift and savage. Having nosy writer Tanner (played by Franco himself) hot on their trail doesn't help matters any either. This is one of Franco's better efforts and as good a place as any to jump into his world. Franco's movies are generally stylish, erotic and dreamlike, and that certainly describes this one. The two leads are perfectly cast. Muller plays the jaded sophisticate very well, and Miranda is just beautiful. Anybody who has ever enjoyed a Franco movie should try and see this one. You won't be disappointed!