Bezenby This is further evidence that Lucio Fulci was a man of many talents before becoming bitter at diminishing budgets and the pigeonholing of his skills into gory horror. Here, Fulci gives us a historical drama about the corruption of the Catholic church (and not for the last time!) as well as the hypocrisy of Roman nobility, It's gory and horrible too, but in a dramatic, historical way!Beatrice Cenci is the daughter of Francesco Cenci, a Roman nobleman whom we first see feeding a man to a pack of dogs. He's a nasty bastard all right, and has done something to offend the current Pope and now has to make amends by giving up a third of his wealth. His children all hate him, even Beatrice, who has petitioned the Pope behind his back in order to enter the church as a nun. This breaks the heart of her lover, Vassal Tomas Milian, but he still remains loyal and goes with her wishes. However, while celebrating the death by smallpox of his two eldest sons(!), Francesco finds out about Beatrice wanting to join the church and arranges instead to keep her captive in the basement of his tower until he dies…which seems to happen almost immediately after he says that. As the film jumps back and forth on the timeline, we don't get to see what happened right away, which allows the Catholic Church to hire medieval Colombo to sort the mystery out! Should that be D'catolic choich?Yes, the film is gory and full of violence and torture, but I think this only goes to show how awful human beings actually are and how corrupt the Catholic Church were back then. Folks are put on racks, burned with tongs, and one character foreshadows many a future Fulci film by having a huge nail rammed into his eye. That said, the film is not cheap looking and it's all deadly serious. Everything looks exactly like a Fulci film too – no matter how cheap his films became in the late eighties, they still retained that certain look. Tomas Milian stands out here as the repressed, subdued servant which had me worrying if he would ever do his 'covered in filth, screaming' bit (it happens about an hour in). It's depressing stuff, but it's also interesting to see these directors working in different fields. I'm not watching any of his comedies however, although I do like the title The Senator Liked Woman's Bottoms.

Woodyanders Lucio Fulci achieved his greatest enduring cult popularity with his gruesome and moody horror splatter pictures, but was actually a much more versatile and accomplished director than he usually gets credit for being. This historical drama stands out as a sterling example of Fulci's remarkable cinematic talents: Lavishly mounted on a substantial budget, it manages to be genuinely poignant and gripping without ever becoming too sappy or melodramatic. Fulci handles the stark and unsentimental telling of this shocking real life tragedy with admirable skill and assurance; he delivers a thoroughly convincing and unromantic evocation of the harsh 16th century period setting along with a properly grim'n'gritty atmosphere and trademark startling moments of brutal violence and sadistic torture. Adrienne Larussa gives a strong and touching performance as Beatrice Cenci, a gentle, yet proud and resilient teenager who plotted with her faithful servant lover Olimpio (the always excellent Tomas Milian) to kill her cruel and abusive nobleman father Don Francesco Cenci (superbly played to the hateful hilt by Georges Wilson). Mavie is likewise sound as Beatrice's long-suffering stepmother Lucrezia and Ignazio Spalla contributes an amusing turn as gross fat slob bandit Catalano. Erco Menczer's sumptuous cinematography gives the movie an impressively lush and expansive look. The grand and melodic score by Angelo Francesco Lavagnino and Silvano Spadaccino rates as another major asset. But it's Fulci's inspired direction and the bold vehement anti-Catholic stance that really brings a certain raw and direct power to the film. Well worth seeing.

lastliberal Those expecting a typical horror movie will be disappointed, as the horror depicted here is the Catholic Church's use of torture in the Middle Ages, and their greed. Fulci doesn't flinch from presenting the evil that was the church in that time.Those who do not like period pieces may find this film dull, but Fulci does a great job producing a work that is both beautiful and interesting.Adrienne Larussa was beautiful and did a very good job as the title character. Her father, played by Georges Wilson, was an evil man who kept her locked up. Wilson does a very good job portraying someone you really want to see die.You have to love a strong determined woman. Even in the face of torture by the church, she remained strong.Definitely not a movie for faithful Catholics.

marquis de cinema A terrificly executed period piece from the Godfather of Gore, Beatrice Cenci(1969) is a masterpiece of tragic beauty. This movie is a contradiction to the accusation of Fulci as a misogynist from his later films. Adrienne LaRussa does a nice job in conveying the almost gentle nature of the female protagonist. George Wilson as the father does a good job in portraying someone truly evil. Cries of death to the director were shouted in a theatre due to the film's anti-catholic nature.The Catholic church is presented in the film with absolute disdain. In fact, they are seen as greedy and hypocritical. Beatrice Cenci(1969), along with The Witchfinder General(1968) are probably the best films dealing with the late middle ages. The direction is nearly perfect, and the story is well done. The film revolves around a labyrinth of flashbacks in the style of Reservoir Dogs(1992). The main source of influence seems to been The play version of The Cenci by Artoud, Antonin as well as the five act play by Percelly Shelly.There are two films that Beatrice Cenci(1969) compares with. One film is Don't Torture A Duckling(1972) which also deals with Catholic repression. Another film is The Devil's Honey(1986) which deals deals with a woman's urge to be an independant woman. Beatrice Cenci(1969) is not only overlooked by Fulci supporters but by Fulci distractors as well. This movie shows that Fulci was capable of more ambigious and personal films then the many ones that he direct in his career(Its too bad as he had the talent that would have made him one of the best directors of his generation in Italy).