Greenes Please don't spend money on this.

PodBill Just what I expected

ShangLuda Admirable film.

Scarlet The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

dmacewen-619-299258 It's true that a myth has been built around Elisabeth Bathory. But that myth is not her reputation as a monster: that is wholly deserved and borne out by historical fact. The myth is that of Bathory as vain, beauty-obsessed blood-bather. While there might be some genuine basis for this -- serial killers, after all, have been obsessed with stranger notions than the ones legend has attributed to Bathory -- the bottom line is that this lesbian murderess was a sadistic fiend who extracted intense sexual pleasure from the torture and murder of young girls. The revised version was manufactured in the Victorian era, because people couldn't bear to acknowledge that the "gentler sex" could be as bloodthirsty as men. This was, after all, the era of John Ruskin, "separate spheres," and the notion of woman as civilizing influence. Thus, Elisabeth Bathory was turned into a supernatural fiend whose story mainly served to warn women of the evils of "female vanity."Apparently, we have not come very far from the mentality of the nineteenth century, for we still live in a culture that cannot or will not view women as anything other than wholesome pillars of moral rectitude. Thus, Karla Homolka's depredations were whitewashed in a loathsome and factually corrupt straight-to-video movie. Aileen Wuornos is turned into some kind of culture hero. And gender feminists refer to the likes of Homolka and others as "classic examples of female victims of male sadism."Now we have this pack of lies, in which Bathory is victimized by power hungry men while she valiantly strives to protect her children. Yes, the old standby, folks: when you want to make excuses for evil women, just portray them as nurturing and self-sacrificing, willingly shouldering the burden of undeserved ignominy for the sake of their children. The kind of characterization which has nauseated feminists and gelded Marxist males for generations, but which they never fail to exploit when it suits their purposes.I'm a huge fan of the beautiful and talented Anna Friel. Her presence and performance are the only reasons I give this piece of dreck two stars. May everyone else involved with its production rot in hell.

Sheena Aikens The review that I just read was pretty accurate...I do not think they quite understood what I took as the meaning as the movie. The confusion in the movie was the entire point in my opinion. She was never tried and proved guilty...everything was confusing during that time whether she was guilty of anything at all. She lost her temper and killed a couple of people...when someone was sneaking mushrooms into her drinks. IF they were wanting to go about it in a actual historically accurate method...which they did...she was possibly the victim of a political/religious conspiracy with the church wanting her land and all. Look up Elizabeth Bathory on Wikipedia. It goes through a thorough synopsis of her entire life...the accusations and also the conspiracy theory. Nothing was ever confirmed...so unless the people who made the movie wanted to give their opinion, which I do not believe they intended to do...they would have to leave it just as confusing and surrounded by myth as the entire story was. I kind of thought it was a good little effect on how much myth there was when they had her burn the castle she was imprisoned in...when in all reality nobody knows how she died or when she died. There were several days of uneaten food when they found her. Speculation was the point and the "spies" were there because they were there in real life. I have not found any information regarding an affair with the artist so that might have just been to show that she was possibly a normal wanting love kind of woman....we all have a romantic side even us torturers in the world.

legersky-randy Many reviews here find the monks' humor out of place, inappropriate, or they just didn't see the purpose of it. It's my opinion that if you didn't find it amusing, then its most likely more of a cultural difference than a matter of taste. This type of humor is very common in Slovakia and Romania. I'm saying this as a Slovak-American, someone married to a Romanian, and who lived in Romania for five years.I also agree with the reviewers who point out this is a post-modernist historical fiction. It's more of a fantasy than either a horror tale or historical biography.Yes, there are some flaws with the point-of-view at the beginning. The first part was disjointed because it kept switching plot lines and character focus, but the second and third parts worked magically. I'm sure it also seemed complex or confusing if you are not familiar with the inner struggles and politics of the Hungarians, Slovaks, and Romanians at that time. But, I find it interesting and even amusing that the conflicts still continue within these reviews about whose version of history is right (or best) -- the Hungarian Catholics, the Lutherans, the Slovaks, the Romanians in Transylvania, etc. That's basically the point of the movie! We'll never know the "truth" unless we could have had some spies there writing it all down in a record that also verified the other evidence. Every noble family and religion in that space has always had political power motives in presenting their own versions of history. It gets so crazy and sad at a point that all you can do is make a joke (like the monks) and try to laugh so you don't go crazy too.

amesmonde This story follows the rise and fall of one of history's most prolific serial killers, Countess Báthory who supposedly bathed in virgins blood to stay youthful. This is a comprehensive fictionalised TV version directed and written by Juraj Jakubisko with mixed production values in both tone and atmosphere. The setting is fantastic and breathtaking, however, the exterior scenes lack the Gothic feel that the interiors have. As a TV film, in several parts, the Monks narration and involvement arguably fits, however, as a film it may have benefited from the omission of the character entirely. You'll also either love or hate the involvement of painter Caravaggio. Historical inaccuracies aside and the unnecessary humour injected usually by the monk, this incarnation of the legend is very interesting and adds food for thought to the tale of Báthory. In addition, it gives an interesting portrayal of politics, religion and royalty of the time.Anna Friel is fantastic as the miss-judged Erzsébet Báthory and gives a wonderful performance, full of range and emotional depth. It's not all out horror, a possible nod to Ingrid Pitt in Countess Dracula (1970). Co-Star Karel Roden is on top form as Juraj Thurzo and  Vincent Regan is notable. The supporting cast do just that. The principle characters have strong motivations for their actions and the morale choices are at times shades of grey. It's not without its faults but there's a handful of interesting dream and hallucination sequences and enough twists on the tale to keep you watching. This coupled with some fine locations, costumes and performances makes Bathory worth your time.