Vashirdfel Simply A Masterpiece

PodBill Just what I expected

ChanBot i must have seen a different film!!

Mathilde the Guild Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

ryan-10075 Christopher Lee plays Welsh Judge Jeffries (who was in fact a real judge back in the 17th Century in England) in this Jesus Franco directed horror-biography from 1970. He has known as "The Hanging Judge" and would convict with a heavy strike from his gavel. Lee does quite a fine job in the lead role and almost all on his own leans me toward recommending this one, but alas it is close, but no cigar on this one. As I mentioned earlier directed by the late Jesus Franco and over his career I would commend him on the amount of work he ended up directed and writing, even though at the time of writing this review I have seen 3 of his pictures and none of them I really liked or would recommend to anyone. This one was the best as his I have seen to date. The personal problem I had with this movie was at times (always happens when Lee was not on screen) I would get bored. It became too talky and not enough action for me. Although to me the 3rd act was the best and does pick up, but wasn't enough for me.

lonchaney20 In observance of Christopher Lee's passing, I decided to rewatch this Jess Franco film - one of several Franco made for the lovably shady Harry Alan Towers. I last saw it ten years ago, and all I remembered was a then shocking scene in which Lee's hand-double molests an accused witch in exchange for her lover's life. The film is set during and after the Monmouth Rebellion, during which the Duke of Monmouth, the illegitimate son of Charles II, attempted to depose James II and claim the English crown. The real life conflict is pretty interesting, and parallels modern events in several ways, but the film follows a different path. In the wake of the surprisingly successful Witchfinder General (1968), producers scrambled to cash in on it by making increasingly sleazy and violent witch-hunting films. Thus a legitimately interesting historical figure and his political dealings are sidelined by fictitious nonsense about torturing and executing witches. The film is sumptuously photographed by Manuel Merino, features a typically great soundtrack by Bruno Nicolai, and is skillfully directed by Jess Franco (who was reaping the benefits of the bigger budgets that Towers afforded him), but the pedestrian script (derived from a story by Towers) lets the film down. The scenes of torture lack the disturbing authenticity of their equivalents in Witchfinder General, and they're certainly not sleazy enough to compete with other "classics" of this sub-genre; Franco would explore similar ground to far greater success with The Demons (1973). Thankfully Lee is in fine form here, bringing his usual presence and professionalism. While the dolled up women fail to convince as Restoration-era witches, Lee's diligent research and attention to detail result in a frighteningly plausible human monster: Lord Chief Justice Jeffreys, the "Bloody Judge" of the title. In an interview included on my DVD, he talks about how much of his performance is based around the painful kidney ailments Jeffreys suffered in real life. This is never directly referenced in the film, but it demonstrates the thoughtfulness and dedication that Lee brought to the table, even when the producer was more interested in making money than exploring history.In short, I would mostly recommend this only to die-hard fans of Lee or Franco. There are several more interesting movies of this type, and certainly better ones to explore from either man's oeuvre, including the several projects they made together. On that note, skip this one and watch Eugenie...the Story of Her Journey Into Perversion (1970) instead.

Spikeopath Il trono di fuoco (AKA: The Bloody Judge) is directed by Jesus Franco and written by Anthony Scott Veitch and Peter Welbeck. It stars Christopher Lee, Maria Schell, Leo Genn, Hans Hass Jr., Maria Rohm and Margaret Lee. Music is by Bruno Nicolai and cinematography by Manuel Merino.Based on the real life Judge Jeffreys, the so called Hanging Judge who presided over what became known as The Bloody Assizes in Winchester 1685.Spaghetti horror with plenty of blood but nothing else. Christopher Lee was known to say this performance as the cruel Judge Jeffries was one of his best, you have to think he was bluffing by way of trying to be on the same planet as Vincent Price's turn as Matthew Hopkins in Witchfinder General two years earlier. Not that Lee is bad, far from it, he's the reason to watch this, it's just that he is planted in the picture for a number of scenes and everything else is spliced around him in hap-hazard fashion; and that's the uncut version as well!Ponderously paced and done on the cheap, it also comes off as tacky exploitation, where sex and glimpses of flesh serve for titillation, while exposition rules the day. It's a real hack job, aimlessly directed even. A battle scene stands out, but is at odds with the film, the costuming is smart, the set design equally so, and the colour photography decent. Yet the over riding sense of boredom and amateurism strips the film of any real entertainment factor. Apart from Chris of course, but even then we don't really get a great deal of him! 3/10

culmo80 ...Spoilers hereI generally like anything Christopher Lee is in (as a main character and mostly as a supporter actor) but this movie is just a mess.The movie gets confused about what it is supposed to be: historical re- telling of the "Hanging Judge," a horror film, a romantic story, or a porno?All those elements are present in this film, and despite best attempts, the film cannot weave it all together.Lee plays the Hanging Judge, known as Judge George Jeffreys. Jeffreys, by historical account was a severe issuer of justice in the wake of Monmouth's rebellion and up until the Glorious Revolution. His portrayal as the stern, lustful judge is well-done but the rest of the film is just mixed up.While I always appreciate a nice nude scene, there were some in this film that were just there to keep the audience interested. Some of the torture scenes are heavily erotic in terms of the BDSM aspect. Including a scene where the main female character licks the body of a chained and tortured (and nude) woman. It is a rather long scene and really makes no sense...The jailers had been ordered to bring this woman to the judge, but instead they strip her down and she voluntarily decides to give another woman a tongue-bath while they eagerly watch. It was a bad porno intro scene if you ask me.Anyway...there is some history here...Monmouth's Rebellion and the politics of the Glorious Revolution play a role, but not enough of one to make this an interesting film.The horror aspect is really not there...the torture scenes are not horrifying; scantily clad beauties being randomly tortured isn't enough to classify this as a horror film.The love story is odd as well...highly unlikely that a nobleborn man would fall in love with a 'wench' from the town. And that story is interspersed with everything else, not giving it enough room to grow, even if it were plausible.You can probably go without seeing this movie...also the version I saw had a couple of sections where the dialogue went German with English subtitles. This occurred at the especially graphic sex and sex/torture scenes leading me to believe that the original of this movie had those edited out to avoid a XXX rating or a ban by some nations. Just odd.