Dr. Gore *SPOILER ALERT* *SPOILER ALERT* My brother gave me this DVD about a year ago. I finally got around to watching it. A movie called "Immoral Tales" demands that the viewer be in the proper frame of mind before viewing its immorality. Something inside me told me that today was the day for an art house erotic tale. So now I've seen it. Hmmmm. Maybe I should have waited a couple more years.I always wondered why he would give up a perfectly good softcore flick. Now I know. Actually, to call this movie a softcore flick is erroneous. This movie is not interested in sex, softcore or otherwise. It is interested in being immoral in the artiest way possible."Immoral Tales" is divided into four segments. They've got cousin games, zucchini loving, bathing and church debauchery. The first two tales are boring and uneventful. The cousins are boring and the zucchini is uneventful. The second two stories start to give the movie a much needed lift. In the third tale, the Countess brings a truckload of naked women to her castle and watches them bathe. These women scrub themselves super, squeaky clean. It all ends in blood, hysteria and more cleaning. The last tale has some horny priests getting it on. It's all immoral and it's all scandalous but is it erotic? No. I've seen music videos that have turned me on more.On the plus side, there are a ton of naked women in this movie. But the third tale is the only one worth watching. It's basically an exercise in watching naked women bathe. Hey, whatever works. The only thing that I found shocking was the scene where the soldier holds up the naked baby girl for the Countess. I really don't need to see that. Of all the Immoral Tales, that just might be a little too immoral.

Thorsten_B This film, french in language but hungarian by production, depicts artistic nudity at it's greatest degree of explicitness. What we see are four episodes, one roughly taking place at present (the date of production is 1974), the other three being new interpretations of historic events and anecdotes. It is quite a 'slow' film that tries to capture it's erotic contents in an objective, unromantic manner, while being honest in portraying the sexual energy that a naked body alone offers. There are obviously a couple of common themes among the four tales, and it's not necessarily their erotic content alone that fits them together.Let's take an – spoiler full – look at the four stories.The first episode shows a young girl, maybe 16, and a boy, few years older, on a bicycle-trip. They stop nearby the beach and climb on the shores cliffs. He seems to be in power; she talks about her innocent kissing experiences on parties, while he openly explains to attend prostitutes weekly. The difference, as is seems, is his greater experience and her virginity, and, since this film is called 'immoral' and since there are some 'visual innuendos', it seems pretty clear where it all leads to. While exclaiming pseudo-philosophical remarks on the sea and nature, he leads her into oral sex, which is introduced by his precise description of what he and she will do, think and expect. After finishing that, and while the tide approaches the two connected bodies (hers nude, his still dressed), she asks for more of that pleasure – but he replies that it was never intended to be pleasure, but rather a teaching for her. One wonders: Was he really in power over her, or is it vice versa? He's the one that tries to manipulate her, only to see that she doesn't bother his wishes, but remains her own. Even though the viewer feels she's very devote, she remains a 'straighter', more open position towards sexuality than he does. He needs a cover story for getting what we wanted, and he builds a sort of ritual around it – whereas she only seems to agree because she wants the same thing as well.The second episode is about 'Thérèse Philosophe'. It takes place at around 1900. A young girl is locked into a room by her mother(?) because she disappeared after the last church session. The viewer knows that she simply remained in the church, but her mother doesn't believe that. In order to punish her for her suspected in obedience, she is locked for three days and three nights. As we already know from the church sequence, she regularly imagines to hear the voice of the Holy Spirit, introduced by organ clusters, who explains that he will take of her and will do his best to serve her wishes, whatever they may be. In fact, this voice is her own voice, the voice of her own secret desires that demand to be set free. While locked and restricted to concentrate on herself, that voice leads her into sexual phantasy's also supported by her finding pornographic photos and finally a book by de Sade, 'Thérèse Philosophe', of which the etchings receive more interest than the text. By reading her prayer book at one point and de Sade at another, her sexuality and belief are brought into connection. Other than usual, she finds a way to combine these two – which leads to a fairly explicit masturbation scene. Were it not done in a openly artistic manner, the idea would rather fit into cheap pornography (it involves a cucumber). In the end, on the climax of both physical exhaustion and spiritual experience, she pushes de Sade aside and gets hold of her prayer book – only to reveal that the important thing about it is the picture of a man, kept alongside the pictures of the holy figures and religious processions.Episode three is just as 'de Sadian' as the previous one. It deals with the 17th century hungarian Comtesse Barthory, played by Paloma Picasso, who abducts attractive girls from the small villages nearby her castle. We – and the people of the villages – can expect that the purpose for that is a criminal one. The girls, on the other hand, behave self-conscious and open when bathing themselves in the castle while being watched at by the Comtesse and her servant. At this point, about two dozen girls in full front nudity can been seen on the screen constantly. They are given a poisoned liquor and then the Comtesse steps among them. Turned frenzy by the drink, the girls start to rip off her famed dress of jewelry, therefore undressing her, while attacking themselves to get hold of more jewels. It gets bloody here, but these screens are quite reluctantly filmed if compared to the erotic part. The surviving girls, one can read between the lines, are killed by the servant, and then finally the Comtesse can take her bath in their blood – and it's a bloodbath as literally as one has ever been. Following that, the servant turns out to be a girl himself, and she and the Comtesse share a very erotic, none-bizarre sexual act. It ends with the servant secretly calling the Kings Men to get hold of the Comtesse; while she is taken away, it is revealed that the servant is in love with one to them, and they kiss each other while the scene fades out.And finally we are taken in the life of Lucrezia Borgia. She visits her father, Pope Alexander VI, and her brother, a cardinal, in Rome. Her husband, himself a Count and faithful Christian, is confronted with an incestuous family situation. Upon being shocked by what he sees he suspects to be killed, which happens not shortly after. Then the path is free for the family connection, and the unite in an orgy than is very likely to hurt some peoples religious beliefs. And the same time, as a visual counterpart, we see excerpts of Savonarola preaching against the decadence of church. He is killed and burned, while Lucrezias happily gives birth to a child whose father is her father as well – thereby symbolizing the perversion dominating the papacy at this time. Lucrezias and the child smile at each other, a scene that produces an uneasy feeling in the viewer. And it's not the only scene with that quality. This highly controversial film is immoral because that is a lack of critical comment about what we see. We see people stepping over barriers because they are overwhelmed by their sexual energies. Especially the last two tales present a world in which power and sexuality are combined and used for dominance and destruction without remorse. It all takes place in uncivilized worlds that pretends to be rich of culture. How different is that from today? Since this, like all films, is a piece of art – and it's more art than most –, there is no need for the producers to make a distancing statement. You decide what the pictures do to you: Be they erotic or repulsive, what you see in them is part of yourself and probably part of your own perspective towards sexuality.

gray4 This is Borowczyk at his worst, even worse than the other two Borowczyk films I've seen. It is astonishing that the four tales can be packed with beautiful, naked women and still be so boring. Borowczyk does have the ability to portray graphic scenes beautifully, and the tale about Elizabeth Bathory is particularly beautifully shot - and it is the only one with a recognizable story.The other three tales are just very, very boring, with discreet and unerotic sex scenes and no real characters, only stereotypes. The first tale, set in the present day, involves some indulgent rubbish linking tides and fellatio. The second links cucumbers and saintliness (I think!)and I lost the point of the last completely, other than that it involved Lucrezia Borgia and the pope. Give it a miss.

rlcsljo With another round of Roman Catholic sex scandals making the headlines, this movie seems as timely as ever. It very graphically, although rarely explicitly, details the facade of piety that hides the sexual debauchery of the Holy Roman Empire.The lavish sets and excellent cinematography also heighten the overall sensuousness of these "immoral" tales.Many gorgeous, supermodel types going completely nude also adds the needed touch of licentiousness to the proceedings.No doubt, this is a seventies classic.