User Reviews

Julie Delpy gives her own vision (through an innocent young man's eyes who would have been one of her numerous -male and female-lovers)of a nefarious figure of history .her direction is icily impersonal but effective .Her hieratic cold look gives the jitters for her acting is restrained.Unlike Walerian Borowczyk's segment of "Les Heroines Du Mal"(1979) in which Paloma Picasso played an "erotic " countess with nudity galore,"the countess" has few bed scenes and few gore clichés -and with THAT subject,it is much to Delpy's credit.Her directing is not feminine at all (as Agnès Varda's or Jane Campion's are) and her character has the mind of a man :political power,women and men treated -with one exception- as sexual objects .She wouldn't sacrifice a virgin lad cause ,she says , God created man in his own image .She remained pious even in living in the most awful sin!

The atmosphere which is depicted does not square with reality,if you read one of her biographies:she lived in a lugubrious castle ,in a cold area,and she suffered from chronic migraines which almost never gave her any respite.

This movie rocks because it manages to be both a lavish, complex period movie and a psychological horror movie at the same time. Julie Delpy does a fantastic job in the role of a complex woman from a brutal period in European history, and her performance somehow gracefully manages to be both sympathetic and monstrous. Bathory is one of history's most prolific and sadistic mass murderers, but historians are ultimately unsure of who she really was, and to what extent she was responsible for the atrocities for which she is credited. Most agree that the whole "beauty treatment bloodbath" thing is a myth made up by later generations to spice up the story, so I was surprised that a telling supposedly rooted in fact ended up going that route, but I loved the idea of a Bathory who is a real person and not just a 2-dimensional fiend. Great sets, costumes, and performances from a well-written script make The Countess an engaging and informative portrait of a woman whose vanity and blood lust have become the stuff of legend.

Wonderful costumes and great sceneries. The plot - acceptable. The acting - poor and dull. All actors have the same tone in all situations, the same mimic, no gestures. They're like robots. No body language, no voice inflections at all. Like a drawled song. In the second half I managed to get used to those dialogues, but at the beginning they sound quite ridiculous. And fake. Not one natural reaction or conversation in the entire movie. Maybe this is because of the way people were back then - very calculated and calm. But there are several ways of being calculated and I think the characters chose the wrong one.

I really wanted to like this. Based on the true story of 17th century Countess Bathory, who grew obsessed with retaining her youth, and decided the best way to do this was by bathing in the blood of virgins. What could have been a disturbing descent into madness turns out to be a dull by the numbers bio-pic/period piece.

Julie Delpy does an alright job in the titular role, but the departure from her usual romantic roles doesn't really work, as Delpy just seems like she's on auto-pilot throughout most of the film. The script, written by Delpy, treats the Countess as some sort of feminist pioneer, and at other times, shows her to be a monster. The movie wants to have it both ways, but in the end it it just seems really confused and tiresome.

Well, actually, in the Little Carpathians, apparently, which are not part of Transylvania, or so Wikipedia tells me.

I really enjoyed this film (at home on pay-per-view)though I think it is intended for a pretty narrow audience. As others have noted, the dialogue is amazingly stilted (very literary, rather like a French novel of the 17th or 18th century) and delivered in near-monotone. I kept feeling that the whole movie had been dubbed into English. On the other hand, I found the acting very fine, and I admired the insistence on presenting these characters as not at all like you, me, or the folks in the latest TV drama. The Countess in particular is a strange, unique portrait--her piety, her desire for amorous adventure, her pride, her intelligence. And that's before you get to the blood-of-virgins part.

The film proposes that what we are seeing before our eyes is not the truth about the Countess. We are watching a fantasy of a noblewoman enacting a tale "told by the victors"--by the men who were enriched by her downfall and relieved, too, to be rid of the very possibility of an intelligent woman. The tale is told, too, by the peasants and others whose sons are fighting in her army. Yet the man who questions the gory story is her lover, and he too may be deceived. There is no simple answer to the question, what really happened?--no resolution.

In short, it's an intellectual (and visual) treat, but it won't affect your blood sugar.

Film lovers and connoisseurs looking for a significant example of an auteur film from the first decade of the 3rd millennium can choose 'The Countess' without hesitation. Made in 2009 as a Franco-German co-production with international distribution, the film is written and directed by Julie Delpy, who also plays the title role. On top of that, she is also a co-producer and the composer of the film's music. The screenplay picks up a story that has already been told in dozens of books and films that adapt those books or invent original versions - the story of the bloody Countess Elisabeth (Erzsébet) Báthori, alleged serial killer and mother of all the heroes and heroines of 'Gothic' horror books and of vampire movies. She was a genuine character from Hungarian history of the 16th and 17th centuries, a woman whose real life has long been amplified and distorted by the legends built around her. Screenwriter Julie Delpy's version questions the historical accounts and the legends developed around them and focuses on the heroine's evolution and the origin of the deeds attributed to her. Without denying them, the story we see on the screen proposes a reading in a feminist key, in the political context of Central Europe of that historical period, superimposed on an unfortunate love story.

Erzsébet Báthori - whose name is spelled out in the film as Erzebet - is born in the 16th century in a small Hungary, which was desperately struggling to survive on the map of Europe. It is also a time of witches and of the Inquisition and an era in which women have few rights, even if they belong to the nobility. Destined from birth to a forced marriage, the heroine of the film goes through a childhood traumatized by violence followed by adolescence in which an unexpected pregnancy ends with the death penalty in terrible tortures of the lover (a boy from the peasants class). The husband is one of Hungary's great warriors, and upon his death (possibly poisoned by the king who owed him considerable fortunes, it is suggested) the countess takes over the husband's affairs with no intention of remarrying, as social conventions required. A love affair with a nobleman 18 years her junior has no chance, as he belongs to the Thurzo family, the Báthori clan's competitors in dominating what was left of Hungary. Erzsébet blames the failure of the relationship on the age difference, and is ready to do anything to erase it. A random incident makes her believe that the blood of young women, necessarily virgins, can at least physically restore the appearance of youth. Is it her decision, is this about a personality warped to murder, or because the encouragement she received from her enemies? Doom is inevitable, but is she alone responsible? Hell has many nuances, the director and screenwriter seems to say.

Julie Delpy tries to keep the balance between horror cinema and feminist drama, both in historical context. Scenes depicting the brutality and violence of the era are sprinkled throughout the film and generally consist of very brief flashes of seconds or less. Without denying the crimes attributed to the heroine, Julie Delpy avoids some details that have become common in legends (such as the bloodbaths) and questions the judgment applied to the heroine by contemporaries and history. She does it, unfortunately, using voice-over, a procedure that I like less and which seems to me unjustified considering the talent of the director in visually creating the relationships between the characters and reconstructing the era in its spirit and not necessarily in details . The team of actors is select. Delpy casts herself in the copious lead role, one of the best of her career. William Hurt as Thurzo the father is charismatic as always and Daniel Brühl is a perfect fit as the son. In my opinion, however, the most memorable role belongs to Anamaria Marinca, who embodies Darvulia - the servant, confidante, mistress and the only being who seems to have true and steadfast feelings for Erzsébet. The balance between romance, horror and drama is successful, perhaps a little too successful, and therefore the film gives the impression (and has been criticized) of a certain coolness. I personally liked this middle ground solution, which makes this version of Countess Báthori's story avoid cinematographic genre categorizations and let the audience decide.

I must admit that I had expected a bit more from this movie, especially given the story that it was portraying and telling. I just had expected something grander than what director Julie Delphy dished out here.

Everyone should be fairly familiar with the bloody story of Countess Bathory, well at least if you have just an ounce of interesting in World history. So I am not going to delve into details about the storyline.

What worked for this movie was the acting. Julie Delphy, who both directed and starred in the movie, did a great job in her portrayal of the Countess Erzebet Bathory. There was something very raw and emotional about her acting in "The Countess" and she really carried the movie all by herself.

Julie Delphy seems rather talented, doing acting, directing, producing and even writing the music for this 2009 movie.

But the movie was just too slow paced for my liking, but it was an interesting portrayal of the infamous Countess Erzebet Bathory.

So I've had this movie for about some time, and had the time to watch it a couple of weeks ago. And the truth is I didn't like it very much. I've thoroughly enjoyed Julie Delpy's acting in Linklater's Before trilogy and in her own directorial efforts such as 2 Days in Paris and 2 Days in New York. But The Countess didn't do enough to grab me. The premise was enough to interest me, but there was something about its execution, the pacing of the film and how the story was presented that just didn't make it for me. The acting was good, nothing spectacular but passable. No standouts, everyone did just okay.

I believe that so much more could have been done with such an interesting story, and this effort just fell short on its own feet. I know that we are not dealing with a horror movie but some horror elements could have been added to the mix, which would have made it much more appealing to me; because in some way, it's kinda like the story of Countess Bathory itself is asking for those elements.

Nevertheless, I felt mildly entertained in some small passages of the film. And I appreciate Delpy's intention and portrayal of the character. William Hurt and Daniel Brühl put on acceptable performances, the costumes and the sets are done very well.

I'm not sure if I would recommend this movie to anyone; if anything I would recommend Delpy's other feature films which are a lot better than The Countess.

As much as I wanted to like this film, I was left feeling unsatisfied after watching it.

It felt as if the writers were unsure of what direction they were taking, most of the time. It wasn't a horror, a psychological thriller, or an accurate historical flick... though it did have elements of all the aforementioned.

I was also disappointed to find that (since it's such a dark movie) there was virtually no suspense or build-up. I caught myself growing bored at many points throughout the film, which is really surprising given the subject material. It doesn't help that the acting seems forced most of the time (as if the actors are reading their lines off of cue cards), or that Delpy and Bruhl have about 0 chemistry...

I did, however, love the costumes and the sets, as well as Anamaria Marinca's unique character.

All in all, I was just hoping for a bit more. A bit more horror, a bit more suspense, a bit more passion. This movie left little to no impression on me... and I was sorely disappointed.

I haven't seen the film yet, I was thinking of seeing it this week, but given some of the things I've read in the reviews, I may not bother. The story recounted in the film is NOT a true story at all. Countess Elizabeth Bathory existed and she was indeed charged with a number of supposed murders, but the charges were never properly proved. In fact no evidence was properly presented - her 'trial' was a politically motivated set-up. She was an extremely rich and powerful woman living at a time when in most societies, but especially Eastern European ones, wealthy and powerful women were hugely resented by their male counterparts.

Once she was widowed Countess Bathory chose not to remarry as she did not want another man to take control of her lands. She wanted to rule her estates herself - and she was a very capable ruler. Unfortunately powerful men in Hungary (and the Austro-Hungarian Empire) were greedy for her lands. They could not dispossess her legally, so they hatched a plot to have her charged with terrible crimes. Her servants were tortured and forced to accuse her, however, no credible evidence was ever presented. It was enough however, for her lands to be confiscated.

As for punishment, she was NOT bricked up in a room and fed through a hole in the wall. That is fantasy. She was confined to a few rooms in one of her castles, a kind of house arrest. Sadly films like this perpetuate the myth and falsehoods about a woman who, although tough and sometimes hard on her servants, was never guilty of the horrendous crimes of which she has been accused. I am so sick and tired of seeing history re-written and fabricated that I probably won't go and see it now - and I would warn anyone who thinks they are going to see something 'historical' that it just isn't.

This is an interesting story, particularly because it is supposed to be based on real people. The matter-of-fact, almost casual way that the story tells belies the rather gruesome events that seem to unfold in slow motion. This certainly cannot be called a horror film in the true sense of the word, despite the horrific things that occur. What sticks with me most is the final monologue given by the Countess herself. It says a lot about that period of time, which is actually not that much different than attitudes today. Very worthwhile film to watch overall.

Very interesting plot. I love historical movies. I was really excited when I found out, that there is a movie about a Hungarian countess. As I am Hungarian i was really looking forward to watching it.Bit disappointing. At least if you make a movie try and be true to the country you are showing. Pronunciation of the names if terrible. The characters were not even similar to Hungarians. So basically if I didn't know she was Hungarian, I wouldn't even have recognised the place or country it related to. Apart from that, the story is unusual, the movie is an art. But if you watch it, do not think this is the real 17th century in Hungary:).

this is very well made, true to the history, geography and atmosphere of the place where the story takes place. also very well played, esp by Julie Delpy who already is known for her convincing but modest acting. Costumes and art decoration were superior. The story was told well too, considering it's telling a rather controversial story and that the main character is an anti-hero.Still it's very successful in reflecting the controversies in history telling and discussions about historians, heroes and storytellers by saying they're the real devil. Watch it definitely and compare it to other historic movies, you'll sense the difference...

Writer/director/producer/musical scorer/actress Julie Delpy brings to the screen a character from history that few know. The film is based on the true history of the woman known as The Blood Countess, but after viewing this film it is obvious that the actual figure on whom the story is based was a brilliant political mind, a woman of noble breeding who could read and write in four languages, who once widowed was able to successfully defend her lands from the warring Turks and exact control over the reigning Hungarian King Matthias. But back to the history of the character as written by Delpy. 'Countess Elizabeth Báthory de Ecsed (Báthory Erzsébet in Hungarian) (1560 - 1614) was a countess from the renowned Báthory family of Hungarian nobility. She is considered the most prolific female serial killer in history and possibly the most prolific of any gender. She and four collaborators were accused of torturing and killing hundreds of girls, with one witness attributing to them over 650 victims, though the number for which they were convicted was 80. Erzsébet herself was neither tried nor convicted. In 1610, however, she was imprisoned in the Csejte Castle, where she remained bricked in a set of rooms until her death four years later. Later writings about the case have led to legendary accounts of the Countess bathing in the blood of virgins in order to retain her youth.'

The film opens with voice over by István Thurzó (Daniel Brühl) who relates the story of his only love. We are privy to the strange behaviors of the young Erzsébet who had a sadistic streak and was at birth promised to be the bride of Ferenc Nádasdy (Charly Hübner). She became a beautiful woman and Erzsébet (Julie Delpy) married General Nádasdy, gave birth to children, and together they were the power couple of Hungary. When Nádasdy dies, Erzsébet meets and falls passionately in love with István Thurzó (Daniel Brühl), a many 19 years her junior, but Istvan's father György Thurzó (William Hurt) prevents Istvan from remaining with Erzsébet. Left alone Erzsébet remains a powerful warrior, dallies with the sadomasochistic Dominic Vizakna (Sebastian Blomberg), but fears her young lover will forget her if she ages. She discovers that the blood from virgins will restore her youth and thus begins the serial killings to support her vanity. As questions of debts owed to her by the King there is an investigation of her personal history led by György Thurzó and without proper trial she is condemned to house arrest in darkened sealed rooms in her own Csejte Castle where her fate is sealed.

The film is beautifully designed, costumed, photographed and scored, and Delpy manages to pace her story credibly and well. For this viewer there is an absence of gritty passion that would make the history more indelible: Delpy and the remainder of the cast fail to create fiery on-screen chemistry that would have brought a sense of stronger impetus to the heinous acts that occur. But as a piece of rarely known history it is a fascinating film about a strong woman of the past and the impact she had on her country ... and on legends!

Grady Harp

I normally quite enjoy period pieces. However, I'm unsure exactly where to begin with this film. The costumes and set decorations were lovely. That was the *only* thing I liked about this film. Julie Delpy's voice was often dubbed over and created quite a bit of confusion. The accents did not accurately reflect the region, and the manner of speaking did not accurately reflect the time period. I found all of these aspects to be very distracting. The acting between herself and her "lover" was cold, wooden and completely unbelievable. The acting itself is strictly 3rd rate, at best. The pace of the movie is very mechanical. I'm not sure if it's the acting itself or the storyline that makes it close to impossible to connect with or empathize with any character involved. Her lover's feeble declarations in and out of bed had me reaching for the fast-forward remote each and every time. Monotonous, tedious, poorly scripted and badly acted. I say skip the Countess and save your money.

The acting style and the fake accents are so stilted I had to double check it wasn't dubbed. I'm not sure how this movie got a 6. It's a 3.

Great cast and production, but the writing is super confused.

They didn't take the horror route and they didn't try to make it about feminism and how a king just took her stuff by claiming she was witch adjacent.

It's just a boring confused sorta love story that drags on for too long.

from an anglo-centric and a male-centric point of view, this movie sucks, of course...

from any other point of view, The Countess is a very well orchestrated piece of story-telling.

a dark portrait of a dark age. a tale of love and madness. but did our emotions evolved so much as our techniques?

as it starts: "history is the tale told by the victors. who are the victors? barbaric warriors, mad kings and greedy traitors. mainly most of our history is made of fables fabricated by those glorious victors."

as till today, history is male's victory... here you got a female's tale... see for yourself. i can only tell: i dove into it