Una lucertola con la pelle di donna (1971)

Director:

Lucio Fulci

Writers:

Lucio Fulci (screenplay)
Lucio Fulci (story)

Release Date:

20 March 1973 (USA)

Genre:

Horror | Mystery | Thriller

Tagline:

Biting, Gnawing TERROR Claws At Your Brain!

Plot:

A young woman is accused of murdering her debauched neighbor after dreaming it. Was she set up, or did she really do it?

Plot Keywords:

Murder | Dream | Letter Opener | Orgy | Dream Sequence

Cast

Florinda Bolkan	...	Carol Hammond
Stanley Baker	...	Inspector Corvin
Jean Sorel	...	Frank Hammond
Silvia Monti	...	Deborah
Alberto de Mendoza	...	Sgt. Brandon
Penny Brown	...	Jenny (hippie girl)
Mike Kennedy	...	Hubert (hippie guy)
Ely Galleani	...	Joan Hammond (as Edy Gall)
George Rigaud	...	Dr. Kerr
Ezio Marano	...	Lowell (scientific squad)
Franco Balducci	...	McKenna
Luigi Antonio Guerra	...	Policeman
Erzsi Paál	...	Mrs. Gordon (as Ersi Pond)
Gaetano Imbró	...	Policeman
Leo Genn	...	Edmond Brighton

Also Known As:

Carole (France)
Le venin de la peur (France) (alternative title)
Les salopes vont en enfer (France)
Lizard in a Woman's Skin (USA) (dubbed version)
Schizoid (USA) (reissue title)
Una lagartija con piel de mujer (Spain)
Una lucertola dalla pelle di donna (Italy) (informal title)

Runtime:

France:101 min | Italy:98 min | Spain:89 min | USA:95 min | USA:103 min (DVD version)

Country:

Italy | Spain | France

Language:

Italian

Color:

Color (Technicolor)

Aspect Ratio:

2.35 : 1

Sound Mix:

Mono

Certification:

Canada:13+ (Quebec) | Iceland:16 | USA:Unrated (DVD) | France:-18 | Italy:VM18 | Norway:16 | Spain:18 | USA:R

Filming Locations:

Dear Studios, Rome, Lazio, Italy

Company:

Apollo Films

Trivia:

The scene in which Carol encounters the disemboweled dogs in the clinic became quite controversial because of the startlingly realistic (and graphic) appearance of the fake prop dogs. Director Lucio Fulci was nearly sent to prison because it was believed that the dogs were real and Fulci had allowed animal cruelty on the film. However crew members were able to testify in court that the "dogs" were indeed fake and no animals had ever been harmed. Special effects artist Carlo Rambaldi even presented the dog props in court to convince the jury. This was the first time that an effects artist had to testify in court that their work were fake.

Goofs:

Revealing mistakes: When people are taking pictures of Julia Durer's body, her eyebrow moves.

Movie Connections:

Referenced in Dressed to Kill (1980)

I'm not really a big fan of Lucio Fulci, but this wasn't a bad little murder mystery

I'm not really a big fan of Lucio Fulci, but this wasn't a bad little murder mystery. For once, the film concentrates on the actual mystery as opposed to the murders. There is a minimum of gore which may disappoint fans of European schlock, but adds to the credibility of the film. The mystery itself is cleverly setup and the use of red herrings was quite good. It contains one of those endings which is unpredictable but makes us feel we should have known all along. Also, Fulci proves to be a stylish and atmospheric director. The love scenes towards the beginning are surprisingly erotic. He is particularly good in the surreal scenes involving the hippie orgies. Its odd how a film could seem to be so against the Hallucination Generation yet carry such a psychedelic style. This dates the film poorly but also adds to the appeal for cult fans. Special mention also goes to a typically atmospheric score by Ennio Morrecone.

Still, this is no masterpiece. While the setup and mystery itself is reasonably clever, the dialog is dumb as all hell. Lucio Fulci is a director often accused of showing more interest in set pieces than in character development and script writing, and that is all too apparent here. Also, I was confused by Stanley Baker's character. I get the feeling that Baker, who could be a good actor (just see "Zulu"), was supposed to be a quirky scene-stealing inspector stock character (Jess Franco did this very well in "Diabolical Dr. Z"). He just came across as alternatively annoying and puzzling. Also, the film is too leisurely paced for my liking. I can deal with a slow pace if something interesting is taking place on screen, but there's too much talk and filler in this one. An enjoyable film, but not one I see myself watching more than once. (6/10)