User Reviews

Time is 1960. On a jet, a man tells his friends a story about an inexplicable medical mystery that happened in Italy. Count Leopoldo Karnstein (Ferrer) is making preparations for a masked ball to celebrate his wedding to Georgia Monteverdi (Martinelli). His cousin, Carmilla Karnstein (Vadim) is in love with Leopoldo, and jealous of Georgia. The night of the ball, Carmilla wants to be alone and wanders the estate. Odd events follow.

Director Vadim seems more interested in following the erotic possibilities afforded by vampirism than by following vampire folklore. Ferrer is good as Leopoldo, who treats the whole story of his family's vampirism as a joke, until it's too late. Martinelli is fine as Georgia, who's the imperiled Gothic heroine in a modern setting. Annette Vadim is very good as Carmilla, who at first doesn't know what's happening to her, and then thinks she's possessed by an ancestor.

The photography is by Claude Renoir, and his playing with colors, light, and shadows alone make the film worth checking out.

Movie is worth seeing because of the dream-like tone it sets, early on, and for Renoir's stunning photography.

An art house horror movie. Probably missed by horror fans, the film depicts a vampiress as romantic. The music by Jean Prodromidès and the cinematography by Claude Renoir certainly add to the romantic feeling throughout. A Harlequin horror film? Even the long shots in this film have a grace seldom seen. It often looks as if one is viewing and Impressionistic painting.

Carmilla (Annette Vadim) visits an abbey where the vampiress is buried and we see an immediate change in her mood. Was she possessed? It isn't clear.

Don't look for blood and guts or lesbian scenes. Everything happens off screen, even in the original version. But, it was a beautiful love story.

Joseph Sheridan Le Fanu’s classic horror short story “Carmilla” (which I own and have read) spearheaded the trend for cinematic tales of lesbian vampires. This is the second film adaptation of it – the first, a very loose one, was Carl Theodor Dreyer’s magnificent VAMPYR (1931; soon to be regaled with two fully-loaded SE DVDs on both sides of the Atlantic) and it was followed in quick succession by the Spanish/Italian co-production CRYPT OF THE VAMPIRE (1963; starring Christopher Lee, a quite good version, of which I foolishly erased a VHS copy I had recorded off Italian TV – the only edition currently available is the Retromedia R1 DVD which, unfortunately, presents the film dubbed in English), the Amicus/Hammer collaboration THE VAMPIRE LOVERS (1970; starring Ingrid Pitt and Peter Cushing) and Vicente Aranda’s eerily erotic THE BLOOD-SPATTERED BRIDE (1972).

Director Vadim is better-known for having had great tastes in women (counting Brigitte Bardot, Catherine Deneuve and Jane Fonda among his discoveries/lovers) than for his film-making talents; I myself have only been truly impressed by one of his movies – THE GAME IS OVER (1966) – out of the seven that I’ve watched so far (including this one). BLOOD AND ROSES could well have been the second…were it not for the fact that the edited 74-minute version I watched – prepared for U.S. home video consumption and sporting the Anglicized original title AND DIE OF PLEASURE – is a bit of a mess (the full-length French version is 87 minutes long), English-dubbed (naturally), panned-and-scanned (of course), and preceded by one of the phoniest credit sequences I’ve ever witnessed (that said, a reasonable photo gallery was included with the DivX copy I acquired, which starts automatically soon after the main feature). Needless to say, I’d long wanted to watch this – but, bearing in mind the state of the edition I ended up with, in spite of its many pictorial rewards, it wasn’t an ideal viewing experience…and one can only hope that, given the amicable relationship between Paramount (who owns the U.S. rights for BLOOD AND ROSES) and Criterion, the film will turn up someday – in the original French language and uncut – on a decent official DVD (after all, the latter’s vast and considerable collection already numbers Vadim’s debut feature …AND GOD CREATED WOMAN [1956] among its releases).

Anyway, the cast is an interesting combination of international movie stars (Mel Ferrer – who, coincidentally, has just died aged 90 – and Elsa Martinelli), newcomers (Annette Vadim nee' Stroyberg) and even a director (Marc Allegret, who had given Vadim an early start when he engaged him as his assistant). The film makes a fair attempt to update the LeFanu original to contemporary times – though, rather than make Carmilla and Millarca one and the same, we get the former being possessed by the latter: this is quite subtly done (at least in this reduced form) as Millarca’s personality in Carmilla manifests itself in her suddenly knowing the steps to an ancient dance and her incongruous preference for a classical record! As a matter of fact, this medieval quality permeates the whole film – thanks also to Jean Prodromides’ haunting melancholy score (which is then effectively speeded-up during the ‘horror’ sequences). Incidentally, the film was clearly intended for the Art-house crowd (resulting in being fairly talky for the first two-thirds) – even if it’s not quite in the same league as Georges Franju’s EYES WITHOUT A FACE (1959), an altogether more accomplished and successful marriage of the highbrow and the exploitative.

That said, it contains any number of striking sequences: the costume party (with a fireworks display for backdrop) in which Ferrer dons a bat mask fitted with a pair of wings!; Stroyberg’s wraith-like pursuit of her first victim (her stilted performance is actually just right for the character) – despite its being obviously shot day-for-night; the wilted rose on Carmilla’s white dress turning to a huge blood stain (incidentally, this vampire registers in a mirror!); Stroyberg’s seduction of Martinelli on a rainy night inside the Karnstein family greenhouse (both women also love Ferrer, though he and Stroyberg are related!); Martinelli’s surreal, erotic and blood-spattered black-and-white dream sequence towards the end (in which, among other things, Stroyberg as Millarca operates on her naked self as Carmilla!) – which is the film’s undeniable tour-de-force; Carmilla’s demise as she gets staked during an explosion (the location being a cemetery holding remnant shells from WWII); and the very last image when another wilted rose betrays the fact to the audience, but not the oblivious Ferrer, that Martinelli has herself been turned into a vampire (the latter starts off as an ingénue but slowly, and believably, matures through her attachment to Carmilla).

By the way, some weeks back I happened upon a recent TV interview with Martinelli; she seemed deservedly proud of her cinematic legacy (including a successful stint in Hollywood) but, unsurprisingly, this film – or another good one where she was also involved in lesbianism, Lucio Fulci’s giallo ONE ON TOP OF THE OTHER aka PERVERSION STORY (1969) – wasn’t mentioned at all…

I saw this film a long time ago in the television. I can still remember the atmosphere and gentle horror that permeate the film. "Et mourir de plaisir" is based on "Carmilla", an horror tale written by Sheridan Le Fanu. I had already read the book as a child and had liked it very much. Later on I saw this film on television and I was deeply impressed - the atmosphere, the castle and landscape surrounding it, the two girlfriends running together and laughing (one of them will die because the other one is in reality a vampire), beautiful flowers ... weave together a delicate tapestry.

Contrary to the Hammer film "The Vampire Lovers" in which the girls relationship is explored very briefly and superficially, "Et Mourir de Plaisir" shows in more detail the delicate love story between two girls lived until death did them part.

I don't remember so well the film after such a long time, but some images remained with me, and those images dictate the words I'm writing now.

Young Carmilla (Annette Vadim) is jealous of her friend's engagement, and her obsession leads her to the tomb of a female vampire.

Critical reviews of this film seem overall negative. Mike Mayo says the "story makes less than complete sense", calls Vadim a "Bardot wannabe" who is "not nearly as frightening as" intended. He calls the performances as a whole "anemic". I think this is overly harsh. The story made sense to me, and Vadim has no control over who she resembles (I think she comes across as both talented an beautiful). Was the film supposed to be frightening? The acting is not terribly strong, but I have seen much worse.

Ivan Butler is also not a fan, but seems more sympathetic. He calls the film "somewhat pretentious" and criticizes the dubbing. He does say that the movie has "some effective and beautiful moments", though. I did not find the dubbing that intrusive, though I am in general agreement that subtitles would be better (but it seems like not everyone was speaking the same language).

Which film is better, this one or Dreyer's "Vampyr"? Both are based off the same story, but tell it in their own way, so it is hard to compare. While the Dreyer version is a true classic and should be the better film by default, I do not think this version can be written off completely. It is unique, more accessible and shares some style aspects with the Hammer films, which may appeal to people who are not interested in old German cinema.

Who makes a better male lead, Mel Ferrer or Christopher Lee? The story is that Lee was supposed to be Leopold but he turned it down and it went to Ferrer (a friend of his). While Lee would have gotten the film more star power (and added to the Hammer style), I think Ferrer does a fine job (no "anemic" acting here) and should not be ruled out. He might not have the name recognition of Lee or Cushing or Price, but Ferrer is a fantastic horror actor just the same.

BLOOD AND ROSES, or ET MOURIR DE PLAISIR (to die of pleasure), is a spotty Eurocult horror film directed by Roger Vadim that works better as an experimental film than an actual movie that's supposed to entertain. I enjoyed watching this movie for the amazing atmosphere, some of the great visuals and the truly beautiful score. It's truly unique in this case. I also enjoyed the narration, which from what I've heard is not included in the original French version. Personally, I cannot imagine this film without narration. There would be extremely long moments with nothing going on.

But BLOOD AND ROSES falls flat when it plays like a movie, with characters too sketchy for anyone to care about or moments which now look positively dated, like the drive through the country with the two men and the two little girls. That scene stands out for all the wrong reasons. Or the discussion in the kitchen, with the maid and all. Those moments are dated and clash with the modern, almost ahead of its times dream or horror sequences. On one hand, BLOOD AND ROSES feels hopelessly outdated and yet on the other hand it feels very contemporary, with the dream sequence being the highlight. I can't imagine what people thought of this scene when they saw it back in 1960.

If you watch BLOOD AND ROSES for the Goth moments and the music, you won't be disappointed but if you expect some sort of Hammer style horror film, with lotsa action, this film won't be your cup of tea.

I give it 7 stars for the atmosphere and music.

Are all French women bisexual? I know from watching Italian vampire films that getting bitten also gives the ladies a fondness for comfortable shoes and listening to that Horse McDonald guy, but French women just seem to be into everything, without exception. This is what gets Carmilla into so much trouble in this film, Blood and Roses aka Carmilla, The Grumpy French Vampire.

Like George Romero's later vampire film Martin, you're never quite sure if Carmilla has just gone insane due to her uncontrollable jealousy or if the actual spirit of her vampire ancestor has returned to take over her body. You see, Carmilla seems to be both in love with her friend George and her cousin Leopoldo (a young Mel Ferrer), who are engaged to be married. This cause Carmilla to have a bit of a French hissy fit and stomp off into the graveyard of her ancestors, where fireworks set off a cache of hidden WW2 explosives, revealing the grave of her ancestor.

Carmilla then of course starts dressing like her ancestor and generally putting the moves on Georgia, putting the bite on the locals and scaring the crap out of everyone else. The question is whether or not she is a genuine vampire or it's just that time of the month. That was subtle.

The whole thing was filmed at the Roman ruin of Hadrian's Villa and every frame of the film looks like it was personally painted by Michaelangelo. The Emperor Hadrian was like a Roman Elton John and would often retreat to his villa when he was in some sort of huff about something. It's not far from Rome but it is not, as I thought, located in the town of Tivoli, but rather confusingly situated just outside of a town called Villa Adriano. When we went there I suspect that the bus driver told us to get off early as my son wouldn't stop screaming. It's worth a visit though - a huge estate of Roman ruins. It was November when we visited and we practically had the place to ourselves. I don't have much to say about this film.

It's not the most action-packed but looks amazing, even drifting into black and white for a surreal dream sequence near the end. If you're a fan of vampire films this one will stand out a bit. Bof!

Mourir et plaisir or Blood and Roses is a very slow paced romantic story about a couple which is going to be married and another woman who is secretly in love with the groom.

Visually this is a great movie and so are the scores. The story however feels very dated and is paced so slow it was hard to pay attention, especially in the second half of the movie.

Although many point this movie out as being a vampire movie, the horror/ vampire aspects are very minimal as the movie keeps on focusing on the love story.

I really like vampire story's, especially those before the 80s. I really missed the mystery and Gothic atmosphere I am used to see in those movies. The moments which might have meant to build up tension did fail and therefor this movie ended up as a boring experience.

I like the way his movie went in more for atmosphere than action, implication rather than overt scenes, and used lighting and music to set the proper tone, with a minimum of blood and horror, and these in dream or imagined sequences.

I also like the centuries old family curse intruding on the modern day, with Leopoldo and Carmilla possible reincarnations of Ludwig and Millarca, doomed to repeat the past. Or is this just the wistful/wishful thinking of a young woman, hopelessly in love with her cousin, who can't accept his engagement to another woman, whom she also finds herself drawn to? What's more complex, an actual family curse or the workings of the mind?

The photography's compelling, the music's haunting, the atmosphere makes the movie worth watching, as you draw your own conclusion to the story.

I'm mad about this film...might just be my favorite vampire film of all. It's not straight LeFanu, but it has an elegiac air that is. Doing LeFanu 'straight'--as in VAMPIRE LOVERS-- does not necessarily make for a better film as Hammer proved.

When I first saw B&R 15 years ago, I was disappointed because I wanted it to be a direct telling of the source material. Later, I saw the film, again, and it seared in to my consciousness. For no explicable reason, it suddenly "made sense" and "glammed" me; and, in particular, Annette Stroyberg's performance suddenly "clicked in." The combination of her detachment, passivity, out bursts of passion, child-like felicity, and, of course, beauty recall her literary namesake. Her profound sorrow and knowledge of being pushed aside from all that she loves--not just Leopoldo but her whole life, really--is heart-rending.

Vadim's Carmilla is always described as "jealous" or "bitter," though I don't see that. I do see deep disappointment and despair. It's refreshing, too, to see two women, rivals for one man's affection, treat each other so civilly, so kindly. Worse, Carmilla is slowly ostracized from people that she has grown up with and loved all because of her love of Leopoldo and, then, Georgia. Top that off with being possessed by a vampire, and I think dismissing her as "jealous" or "bitter" is a bit heavy-handed and easy.

I'm not quite sure why this film is considered "exploitive"--was Vadim "exploiting" Annette and his divorce from BB? Was LeFanu's "Carmilla" exploitive? It actually had far more explicit descriptions of Carmilla's breast-centric vampirism of young woman, but I don't recall the novella ever being described as "exploitive."

There are a couple of jarring moments in the film that don't sit right with me, for instance, Carmilla and Leopold doing the comic piano duet about fishing, and some parts of the celebrated "dream sequence"--just too "art house," even Bergman-esquire, and certainly screaming Cocteau.

But, in the end, the film is enchanting, ravishing, and harrowing. As others have noted, the score is exquisite and sets just the right tone, and makes me think of "pavane" and "dead princess" at the same time. Definitely in my top 10.

Just hoping that the delay in releasing BLOOD AND ROSES on DVD has to do with a pains- taking restoration and accumulation of extras on Paramount's part--this film is long overdue on DVD.

When one thinks of an influential vampire story, obviously it will always be Bram Stoker's Dracula that springs to mind; but much less well known is Joseph Sheridan Le Fanu's novella 'Carmilla', which was published in 1872 and has influenced a whole host of films - everything in the 'lesbian vampire' sub-genre owes itself to this story. Aside from rubbish such as most of the films made by French director Jean Rollin, there are some very notable lesbian vampire movies; Daughters of Darkness, The Blood-Splattered Bride and Vampyres being the best among them. Blood and Roses is apparently the first 'faithful' film to be based on the novel. The plot focuses on the Karnstein family, who live in a big castle. We find out pretty early that there is a history of vampirism in the family. The main character is the beautiful young Carmilla; who is attracted to her cousin Leopold. However, Leopold is engaged to be married, leaving Carmilla bitter and jealous. Her jealousy leads her to an old tomb; apparently the resting place of her vampire relative, and soon the young girl is possessed by the vampire.

Before seeing this film, I was surprised that there aren't more films based directly on this classic book; but after seeing it, I'm actually not all that surprised. I haven't read the original source material, but I know that the story is not very long and as such there is not much to it. The result of that is a film that feels like it could have been more. I don't doubt that director Roger Vadim could have added more had he wanted to; there is certainly scope for a vaster story and the gap left by the fact that there isn't a lot of blood and lesbian activity is a real shame. The film does have its positive elements, however. The director succeeds in giving the film a surreal dreamlike atmosphere that compliments the story very well indeed. The acting is good enough, although the film does feature far too much talking. Annette Vadim (wife of the director) is striking in the lead role. Overall, this is an obscure film and while hardcore lesbian vampire fans may want to track it down for completion purposes; I really wouldn't recommend that anyone goes too far out of their way to get it as there are a lot of better films that are similar to this one.

Carmilla (Annette Stroyberg) fancies her cousin Leopoldo De Karnstein (Mel Ferrer), so she is mightily upset when he announces his engagement to her friend Georgia Monteverdi (Elsa Martinelli). Carmilla's emotional turmoil causes her to believe that she is her ancestor Millarca, who was rumoured to be a vampire. Or perhaps Millarca has returned from the grave and replaced Carmilla...

Roger Vadim's Blood and Roses, based on Sheridan Le Fanu's 1872 novella Carmilla, is artfully executed, with excellent use of colour and beautifully shot compositions, but it's also incredibly boring, the glacial pacing and uneventful story making this the cinematic equivalent of Zolpidem. It's hard to believe that a vampire story with lesbian undertones, made by a Frenchman known for his ways with beautiful women, could be so dull and soporific. The film spends most of its time teetering on the brink of arthouse, before going full on surreal for a wholly pretentious dream sequence towards the end.

Hammer would do the sexy premise justice the following decade with the entertaining Lust For A Vampire.

N. B. I watched the subtitled French language version of the film. The US version eliminates several scenes and features a different ending, although I doubt that makes much of a difference.

I recently had the opportunity to see the French version of this film ("And Die of Pleasure")and propose two things of note: firstly, the controversy over the omission of the dream sequence- regarding the official running time of 84 minutes, I believe it was actually included in the French version but this print was either damaged or censored, the cutting is way too abrupt and the scene rendered senseless. If the scene was included in the French version then the running time would match official sources. Excellent source materials such as Silver & Ursini's The Vampire Film seem to back this up. The other point of interest that no one has noted so far is perhaps even more controversial. Although there is a brief nude scene included in the dream sequence, there is one nude scene in the French version clipped out of the American prints- before Annette Vadim breaks the mirror she tears her dress away and reveals her blood smeared breast. Yes, we DO see it! This ten years before Yutte Stensgaard's bloody topless resurrection in Lust for a Vampire!

In a way this movie is in the vein of an earlier film 'Dracula's Daughter (1936)' with what maybe the first hint at vampire's lesbianism and bi-sexuality captured on film. But the story of 'Blood and Roses' is loosely based on the novella Carmilla (1872).

It's about a woman, Carmilla, that has revealed her family's past concerning vampirism. There is a costume party with large fireworks in the family's cemetery which opens up the vampire into a new world that is different from the old world she is used to. The spirit of the vampire over takes Carmilla or has Camilla been overtaken by the stories of her family's past?

Interesting film, it's not as good as I was anticipating but it's certainly not a bad watch. It starts out great, hits a lull about midway then picks back up for an interesting ending.

7.5/10

This film is one that I first heard about when I was working through my lists of horror films to see in order to round out my viewing. I decided to give this a rewatch as part of my Journey through the Aughts and Italian Horror month synced up. The synopsis here is a lonely and bitter young heiress - jealous of her cousin's engagement to another woman - becomes dangerously obsessed with legends surrounding a vampire ancestor, who supposedly murder the young brides of the man she loved.

We start off with a voice-over narration telling us that we are in a modern world and that no one believes in the supernatural anymore. The woman states that despite this, vampires are still alive. They are lying dormant, including herself. The voice we are hearing is that of Annette Stroyberg.

We then meet the cast. The patriarch of the family is Leopoldo De Karnstein (Mel Ferrer). His fiancé is Georgia Monteverdi (Elsa Martinelli). A man who is going to do fireworks for the engagement party has arrived and that is where the introduction to everyone is coming from. He is Carlo Ruggieri (Alberto Bonucci). He has arrived to go over with Leopolod the final preparations. Also here is his cousin who is from a different line, Carmilla (Annette Stroyberg). The two of them were quite close grouping up. There is also a Dr. Verari (René-Jean Chauffard) and a servant named Giuseppe (Serge Marquand). Georgia's father is also there, Judge Monteverdi (Marc Allégret)

Carlo wants to set up his fireworks in the abbey behind the house and it is then revealed that it is an old cemetery. It used to house the ancestors of the family, but they are no longer there. We then learn that the family was actually vampires back until 1765. They were supposed to be wiped out, all except one. There is a painting of Milanka who is the vampire in question and she looks a lot like Carmilla. She tells the story of this vampire who loved her cousin and that she would kill all of his fiancés since she could not be with him.

The party that we were seeing the prep for goes on, but Carmilla is being anti-social. We see that Leopoldo truly loves Georgia while also has a close connection with his cousin. Carmilla decides to join the party, but she puts on the wedding dress of her ancestor. During this we're getting more of the voice-over as it seems she's being drawn there. This makes those at the party uncomfortable. The fireworks start, but it causes an explosion. Carlo talks about how this has never happened and he is ashamed. An investigation starts to see what happened.

The voice-over narration continues and it is calling to Carmilla. She goes into the crypt and finds the tomb of the woman from the painting. Giuseppe sees Carmilla dressed in white and thinks that she is a phantom. She becomes even weirder, almost going into a psychosis of a sort. Animals become afraid of her and she doesn't remember how to use more modern things like a record player. Leopoldo thinks she is just being herself while Georgia is worried. When Lisa (Gabrillea Frainon), another servant, dies nearby, there are weird marks found on her neck. Has Carmilla become a vampire like her ancestor or has she just lost it due to the grief of her love marrying someone else?

I will say that I didn't know much about this film coming in that first time, but I did see that it was version of the novel Carmilla, which I knew to be a famous vampire novel. Coming in for that second viewing, I didn't necessarily remember a lot about this other than this same information. It did look quite familiar as I got back into it though.

What I did learn is that this movie is taking that novel and putting it in a modern setting. I think that makes for an interesting piece of cinema here. Carmilla, much like her ancestor who is thought to be a vampire, loves Leopoldo. He doesn't love her though like that. They were close as children, but grew apart and he does love Georgia. She wants to be friends with Carmilla, which to an extent they are. Carmilla though will always have that jealous there.

I feel I should really go into if there are really vampires here or not. The voice-over narration is interesting. The beginning and the ending for that is for us. I almost feel that when it is drawing Carmilla to things, she is hearing it. It is interesting to have this in the modern setting as we know vampires aren't real. There is someone who is mentally unstable like Carmilla to fall into thinking she might have become one. I take that she is doing that though because Milanka and her are in a similar situation so by taking this on, she can do what her ancestor was supposedly doing. I think this is really a film of mental illness and there really is no vampire.

Another thing that I feel this movie is exploring that comes from the novel is lesbianism. It isn't as prevalent here though as the 'vampire' wants to be with Leopoldo. She does target women though and by eliminating them, it would put her in the position to get what she wants.

What I will say from here, this movie actually has some interesting arthouse aspects to it. When get this scene where Carmilla thinks she has blood on her dress. She sees this when she's looking in the mirror. It drives her mad to break the mirror and break down. We also get another with a nightmare that Georgia is having. I thought that was cool, especially since most of it is in black and white, but there is red that is popping. Aside from that there aren't a lot of effects, but what we get is good along with the cinematography.

From here I should go to the acting. I would say that we have really two stars in Ferrer and Stroyberg. The former is good as someone who does love his cousin Carmilla. He thinks that they can still be close where she knows that is no longer possible. I don't think he is doing anything wrong though. Stroyberg does a great job at playing this mentally disturb woman who doesn't know who she is or what she should do. Martinelli and the rest of the cast do round this out for what is needed.

The last thing that I briefly wanted to go over would be the soundtrack. I really like the music selections, especially the harp that is used. It really just fits the timeless vibe this movie is trying to give off. We're in a modern world, but exploring things from the past and I think that the sound design really helps there.

So now with that said I'm glad that I gave this a second watch. I think that we have an interesting concept here to modernize this novel while exploring some interesting things. I do think they toned down some of the themes and ideas from the story though, bringing more of a look at mental illness here that does keep me interested. The story is lacking a bit. It does fly by with its 75 minute runtime. I think the acting is good and there's a bit of arthouse flair to it with the soundtrack helping there as well. After this second viewing, my rating here is still as an above average movie overall. Just really lacking some things for me to go higher, but I do still enjoy this one.

This is beautiful and poetic. If you see this movie on English dialogue, you must see French version. English version has terrible narration. And this movie filmed in TECHNIRAMA, you must see this on letter box. If you don't, you have seen nothing yet.

Twisted and reshaped as it may be in adaptation, Joseph Sheridan Le Fanu's 1872 novel 'Carmilla' is a classic of horror, a tale ripe for exploring in many new ways. From Hammer essentials, to exploitative lesbian vampire flicks, to much-celebrated modern web series of a "PG-13" slant, the work has served as inspiration for countless titles in film and TV production. Whatever else is true of Roger Vadim's 'Et mourir de plaisir,' also known as 'Blood and roses,' as it draws in part from Le Fanu's story, the feature is lovely in particular ways. Exceptional care was taken, above all including grand filming locations, smart production design and art direction, gorgeous costume design, immaculate hair and makeup, and splendid cinematography. I think the cast are wonderfully charming and give swell performances across the board.

The storytelling is a bit harder to pin down, for the screenplay Vadim co-wrote with Claude Brulé and Claude Martin takes a different approach on every level than I anticipated. The scene writing is wonderfully strong, commanding one's attention, with dialogue not far behind; the narrative and its development are strangely much more unbothered, seeming loose and almost lackadaisical as the minutes tick away. The story does play with facets of horror, but the infusion often seems more thematic than actual, or at least deeply understated - nearer the genre sensibilities of the 40s or even the 30s than the 60s, save for passing nudity and more significant visualization of blood or death. The tale does borrow from 'Carmilla,' but generally of aspects that are very discreet rather than readily apparent. 'Et mourir de plaisir' almost comes off as a straight drama or even an art film more than it does a horror movie, even with discussions of vampirism and a slight psychological element.

For all this, I think the picture is well made and enjoyable, and its plot engaging and compelling. It's also simply not what I expected, or was led to expect. I don't mean to say this is bad - far from it! - but what is drawn from 'Carmilla' seems to be more a single vague concept instead of concrete themes or ideas. It was oversold on that basis, and absolutely oversold in the suggestion of any measure of eroticism. I understand that the version one may find available to watch perhaps suffered from cuts in that specific regard, but if so this is a major illustration of how censorship can all but kill a movie - and even if not, the movie would struggle even with that advantage in hand. Because above all, the tale in 'Et mourir de plaisir' is not what I have seen described; it is a vampire flick by only the thinnest of margins, to such a slim extent that I'm unsure if the label meaningfully applies.

The end result of all this is that while I like this feature, I don't know who I would recommend it to, or how. I think I would have liked it more than I do had I entered without any foreknowledge whatsoever, and therefore without any expectations. Yet how can one suggest a title to another person without speaking of its content or value in at least some indefinite terms? No one is likely to come across this in 2022 without seeing it mentioned in connection with 'Carmilla,' or more indirectly with Roger Vadim and therefore the genres and styles it plays with - yet to discover it at all in such a way is to change the subsequent viewing experience. It's the Heisenberg principle of uncertainty, applied to cinema. Even writing these words is frankly a betrayal.

The best I can say is that for the patient and open-minded viewer, they who are receptive to all the wide variety that the medium has to offer, this will be suitably entertaining in one capacity or another. If you're seeking or anticipating anything specific, let alone instant gratification of any kind, maybe you're best served looking elsewhere. I think 'Et mourir de plaisir' is worthy on its own merits; I also think it's flatly misrepresented, or arguably misrepresents itself, to its detriment.

I saw Vadim's "Blood and Roses" in Germany while stationed there in the 1960's. I was captivated by its ethereal, romantic quality. The actresses were beautiful and the mixture of romance and vampires was unusual and hauntingly lovely. In my view, it is a classic. I particularly loved the musical score, which was outstanding. I cannot seem to find this musical score other than by ordering the VHS video.

I am particularly disappointed that I cannot find this film in DVD today, since I would like to have it in my library.

I thought that Mel Ferrar was perfect for his role since he was seemingly oblivious as one might expect a country gentleman to be to what was going on with the girls.

The film reveals a poignant story of unrequited love, with a fatalistic tone. It will be long remembered by those who have seen it. It does not get the popularity that it deserves.

A school chum and I saw this film only one time - when it was first released in 1960. During a recent reunion we realized that neither of us has ever forgotten the spellbinding qualities of the movie as a whole! I very clearly remember the impression of having walked into a renaissance-era painting accompanied by a musical score that along with the visuals, created an almost hypnotic state. Elsa Martinelli was a familiar face at that time, but the mysteriously beautiful other actress was not. I now realize she has to have been Annette Vadim. I clearly remember the undercurrent she portrayed with such seemingly effortless skill that it almost felt like watching two separate characters. The other actors and characters seemed to be almost like props in comparison to these two players in the story. I do hope I can see it again.

In a world where films such as "Twilight" are considered great vampire flicks, a little unknown gem like "Blood and Roses" comes as a extremely pleasant surprise as it is one of those films that you expect nothing from and turn out to be real cinematic works of art. Unfairly underrated director Roger Vadim creates a dark, tragic love story, filled with beautiful landscapes, terrifying Gothic atmosphere, surrealistic feel, a lovely soundtrack and a suspenseful build up to a shocking and heartbreaking finale. Vadim adapts Sheridan La Fanu's "Carmilla" with a modern twist, whilst keeping the poetry and the eroticism that so many other, more "faithful" adaptations lack. Making "Carmilla" a much more human character was a clever choice and makes you feel sympathy for her character, so therefore you actually feel bad for both the victims and the killer, which is something that usually lacks in horror films, at least in such an intelligent way. Annette Vadim helps bringing the character to life, and is here in one of her best performances. Mel Ferrer and Elsa Martinelli have a wonderful chemistry together and are perfect choices for the supporting roles. Another of the film's highlights is the cinematography, that unfortunately doesn't show it's full Technicolor glory in the film's bad VHS print. Hopefully, one day Paramount will release this masterpiece in DVD or Blu-Ray with it's gorgeous visuals as Vadim intended. 10/10 - a masterpiece. One of the best vampire movies ever made.

I was a teenager, that movie was rated +16 and I was 14. I don't remember why I wanted so much to watch this movie, maybe the poster's picture, Annette Vadim and Elsa Martinelli kissing :). I borrowed the ID card of an older friend of mine, then I'd been allowed to go in.

That day, I've seen that movie 2 times, and I came back the day after and I stayed 2 more times watching it, fascinated. Not for the plot, the plot is cheesy. Not for some nudity, there's none. The beauty of Annette Vadim, oh yes! The magnificent cinematography? Even if I didn't know what "cinematography" was, I still remember the fascination I sensed for the colors and the lighting. And I still remember also the score of Jean Prodromidès (an underrated genius, his opera "The Persians" is a masterpiece!)

It was almost 50 years ago, thanks to Annette, Claude Renoir, Jean Prodromidès, Vadim, I was become a movie-goer. By the way, I've never seen that movie again from that time. I'm afraid to be disappointed.