Bathory: Countess of Blood

Redbox got rights to this 2008 reject from Czech TV, and melted it down into a 3 hour movie that they tried to pass off with a horror sub-title, "Countess of Blood".

Instead, what you get is a Hungarian History lesson that is about as clear as Goolash. They take the notorious Blood Countess of Hungary, Erzabet Bathory, who was one of the influences for Dracula, and actually try to spin her in a positive light (Namely, that if she was brutal at all, she was brutal for the time she lived in.) A tighter, shorter movie would have worked better, without the unneeded characters like the two monks who come up with wacky steam-punk inventions.

I think the movie looks great and puts you in that time period pretty well... and it quickly touches on the politics of feudal Austria-Hungary. But it's really just too long and unfocused.

Well first off, I have to say that this is a very difficult movie to follow. Too many characters, and too much stuff going on. I honestly can't tell you everything that happens in this movie, because there is a ton.

This movie did not need to be 2 hours long. It could have been shorter than its original run time. The movie is divided into three segments; First segment, where we learn about the painter, and our characters, is the most interesting best segment in the movie.

The second segment and third segments are about the witch and the king fighting with them. Erzsébet Bathory over land? (I think) which did not need to be long as it was. I can tell you that the Turk fighting scenes look amazing, and the movie is for the most part well shot. However, the story drags, it does get kinda dull after 1 hour passed. I was engaged and enjoyed the movie after the second hour started it just lost its sting for me it did. There are some beautifully shot scenes in this movie too, like the blood bath, and the blue flowers, which look incredible.

I can't see myself watching this thing again, but it was kinda fun. Also if you expect Gore in this, there's barely any gore in this at all, even the little bit of gore we see is incredibly tame.

There are films like the Girl with a Dragon Tattoo and Eyes of My Mother that are kinda tame in the start, but then snap you in the end. This movie was fun in the start but gets dull afterward.

A long, rambling, shambling, doddering, staggering chaos of a film, blighted by (amongst other things): (1) impenetrable Middle European accents, most of them genuine but three put on ~ by Miss Friel, her husband, and her lover; (2) a narrative style that was very much like listening to a boring drunk recounting a shaggy dog story; (3) a schizoid attitude toward the countess herself ~ ambiguity is all very well, but to switch sides several times in the course of one story just makes the storyteller appear 'flakey'; (4) a sub-plot about two spying monks which ... well, which beggared description in its absurdity; (5) visual imagery and editing which frequently resembled pop videos; (6) so on and so forth.

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.

Fields stained with Turkish blood. Villages and witches burned. High castles and deep catacombs. Bleak life full of vivid imagination. Such is the world Bathory, The Bloody Lady of Cachtice.

Elizabeth Bathory lets you see the film through the eyes of a mother, lover and ruler rather than the legendary serial killer. Throughout the film she strives to protect her children, love and land while ignoring her tainted reputation. The intrigues escalate. Blood is spilled. And a false myth is born.

Although there is a complex epic plot, the film feels more like a series of still pictures. There is a lot of symbolism and the plot slows down so that you can fully enjoy it. Apart from the story, the Bathory also takes some time to explain how myths are created and abused to serve one’s needs. The acting is outstanding but does not stand out as much as the Hungarian costumes that make the film look fresh.

Unfortunately the movie is significantly flawed by repetitive comic relief in which two monks use various inventions to spy on the countess. They seem to have come from another movie and make you question the taste of the writers. Should there be a version without those comedians a 9/10 rating would be appropriate.