Analysis
I looked forward to watching and reviewing this film. Vampires, I love ‘em. I’m getting quite a collection of vampire films, books and other bits and pieces, and I consider myself somewhat of an expert (I’ve watched almost every episode of Buffy). I’m pretty sure that I know some of the rules that every vampire related piece of entertainment has to follow, and I’m sure that you know them too. But, for those of you that are reading this review having only just discovered the joys of electricity and civilisation, I’ll explain a couple of simple truths:

1) All vampires drink Blood. This is rule number 1. The BIG one. A vampire that doesn’t drink blood is just a person with a busy dentist and a fetish for high SPF sun tan lotion. Which leads me to….
2) All vampires hate the sun. They avoid the sun like we avoid Great Aunt Ethel and her pet bottle of scotch at family gatherings. The sun is fatal to the bloodsuckers, and depending which source you quote, they may explode, melt, burst into flames or just collapse, when exposed.

There are other less well-adopted ideas about them turning into bats or mist, or using mind control, but the two above are universal.

Now write down these rules on a piece of paper. Take a match. Hold the wooden end of the match and light the other end. Hold the burning end of the match to the paper. Watch the paper burn. Throw away the ashes.
This is the EXACT course of events (Note – this may not have actually happened) when the scriptwriter and director got together and decided to make a vampire film.

Let me explain. She sunbathes. Yes, you read correctly, the vampire sunbathes. This struck me as somewhat unusual, but I let it go, waiting for some ‘it’s all just a dream…’ or similar. It didn’t happen.
She doesn’t drink blood, (is this really a vampire film? Let me check the box again….yup, it says it is.) She kills men, and I’m pretty sure she drinks something, but it certainly isn’t blood, and, unless all the men have some freakish anatomical anomaly, the jugular is not involved at all.

But enough of the minor irregularities (maybe it’s just me being over critical), what’s the film actually like?
Well, I have to say that there isn’t very much going for it. The plot is not very well structured; it flits from one thing to another without much explanation. It’s basically a collection of deaths and nude shots of the countess, linked by either a seemingly random event, or a wavering plot point about the poet or the doctors. The ONLY blood in the entire film is found in just such a scene, at an S&M club that she visits. Why? I don’t know. Watch the film and see if you can figure it out. I think that maybe something was lost in the translation (the film is Spanish). Talking of the translation – the countess has no lines in the film, except for a voice over explaining her eternal torment, as she is mute. This is a godsend as the other voice over actors are terrible.

I’m convinced it’s not meant to be, but I found a lot of the scenes (especially the ‘erotic’) funny. The people involved are quite obviously not enjoying themselves and just going through the motions. Being actors (although the debate is still out on that one) you would think that they would have tried to be a little more convincing. Maybe things have just changed too much since the early 1970’s and we expect more from our thespians these days.

There really is little else to say about the film. If you are into this Erotic EuroHorror you may enjoy it. I admit that I’ve not seen a great deal (OK, any), but that will change as someone has to review them. If you want to see a lot of naked ladies, then you will not be disappointed. If you want to see a well thought out film about the ‘children of the night’ then you will.

In my opinion the most interesting part of the DVD I saw were the extras. You get a number of deleted scenes a couple of which involve what most of us think of traditional vampirism: the neck biting and blood. These scenes were replaced with the erotic death scenes, but I think that the film has suffered for it.

This film could have been quite good. I just felt that there was too much emphasis on the bare flesh (why did the countess walk around for most of the film in nothing more than boots, a cape and a belt?) and not enough on the story. But maybe I’m missing the point. This has, after all, been billed as Erotic Horror. Unfortunately it does neither very well.

Key Area	Rating (out of 5)	Comment
Action		A quick fight, not very exciting.
Thrills/ Tension	None	No thrills (unless you are a 15 year old boy).
Violence/ Gore		A very disappointing 1. The only blood is found in the S&M scene.
Bare Flesh		Lots. All the time.
Plot		Very poor, fragmented and seemingly quite random.

Verdict The cover of the DVD box is wrong. It shows, in vivid colour, the Countess Iriana, fangs bared over a recent victim, with blood around her mouth. This never happens (in the finalised film at least). This upsets me. I like a good Vampire film to have its share of blood, and frights, but this film has neither. The scariest part of this erotic-horror film is the music. Every time there is an upcoming rude bit a piece of music kicks in. In fact, as far as I can remember it is the only piece of music used in the film. Think the ‘duh duh, duh duh…’ from Jaws, change it for some really cheesy lift music and you get the idea. Basically, I would suggest that you watch this film if you want to see lots of women who have obviously never heard of the word ‘topiary’. There is no other reason, unless there is a bet involved somewhere. I think that the alternative beginning, found in the deleted scenes, sums up this film perfectly: the alternate title for this film was: ‘The Bare Breasted Countess’

Drugs and filmmaking do not mix