Succubus
Jesús Franco's Necronomicon
Lorna, a "stage performer", her act typically involves sex and pain, is lost to what seems like a dream, where she carries on conversations that could lead to something sexual, but these events lead to violent ends. She seems to be under the command of another, her violence to others at the urging of an outside source.
***½
*Review features nudity*
It wasn’t too long ago that I watched Jess Franco’s Exorcism and it opens with the late Lina Romay tied to an X-crucifix getting sexually and physically tormented. It was in front of a live audience, a staged show for a bourgeoisie crowd seeking out a particular kind of entertainment that involves sexual deviancy and a darker kind of kink. To me, Exorcism just mines what Franco had already done (not so explicitly but just as erotic) in Succubus. Succubus has a similarly staged DeSadian violently sexual act with the film’s lead actress, a knife and two tied up victims, (one male, one female), performed for a small audience of the same kind of stature, a wealthy, aristocratic clientele. At home, she isn’t satisfied sexually by her lover (Franco vet, Jack Taylor), and this desire will build as the film continues. It isn’t uncommon for us to see Lorna (Janine Reynaud) , her companion, William (Taylor), and his gaggle of bourgeoisie friends gathered at a flat/hang-out, lots of liquor/booze at their disposal (you know the stocked bar handy for them), with them all seemingly spaced out or bored.
I have read that some apply a more supernatural angle to the film, but I'm inclined to go in a more realistic way. I look at the Adrian Hoven character as a hypnotist who uses his power at the favor of Taylor, applied to Reynaud to do his bidding, like killing off certain characters for whatever reason. I didn't really know what motivated Taylor's rage but whatever it is, Reynaud gets the job done. You do read all the time how critics or writers use the description hypnotic but, in this case, I think it does apply in more ways than one. Through the idea of hypnotist, director Franco can in fact go in any direction he so chooses. He can fool around with mannequins, have Howard Vernon and Reynaud toy with magnifying glasses that warp their faces (especially lips) while playing the "name dropping game" (including what each name relates to the next one speaking after dropped name), and have various characters interact with Reynaud (as Vernon, already mentioned) in a dreamlike state (Franco uses soft-focus lens to invite this effect of the unreal within the real settings of Berlin) before she dutifully dispatches them on command. Franco even juxtaposes Hoven's face slightly over Reynaud's sometimes to establish his association with her acts of violence to the victims. Vernon especially gets it rather horribly with a pin in the eye. Long-ass steak knives seem to be her specialty, though. Hoven's place in the grand scheme of things was left rather ambiguous (or, to me, at least); he calls her Faustiine. You get a lot of that "selling soul to the devil". She's a menace who will spill blood. Hoven feeds this to us, but he's the architect behind all that happens.
Trying to emphasize a plot in my review for this film is pointless as I felt that this film was all about the leading lady and how to compose her against whatever backdrop (or in whatever scenario) Franco so chooses. This really is the beginning of a fully Franco film. Its jazz seems organic when scored to Reynaud and her movements, her actions on screen. I can't actually imagine this film without the jazz soundtrack. Its timing seemed right as Franco captured the swinging 60s as the sexual revolution was blooming into an uproar, a cast of "beatnik" types congregating as books are read, sex is in the air, a collection of "eccentrics" ready for whatever the night could bring. There's a scene in a flat where Reynaud crawls across a floor, a bottle of J&B sitting right nearby, as she seems to invite the group in attendance to kiss and fondle her en masse.
I always felt as I watched Succubus that Franco felt liberated as a filmmaker with no pressures to direct a clearly-explained, coherently narrated, typically straightforward film. It seemed as if he had freedom to dictate pace and allow his actress to go to wherever place she needed to. It did seem like a "storyboard" type film (even if it was just shoot-from-the-hip in reality) in that we see composed shots of Lorna and her body in various poses. Even if some of the character's behavior seemed spontaneous and of the moment, I often felt Franco had planned and pictured how to shoot Lorna. Maybe he let her do her thing, but I think too often there's these distanced shots of Germany and of Reynaud (or Taylor) that seem to be constructed by Franco's artistic eye. Visually, aesthetically, photographically, Succubus was Franco's means to move into an energized, highly-stylized, and uninhibited stage of his career. Nudity, eroticism, unexpected developments of a sexual nature; violence seems to be a strange bedfellow with all of these elements in the cinematic world of Jess Franco.
I do think, however, that Succubus was actually preparing us for Venus in Furs, considered by Franco's fans as his masterpiece, this particular film more of a "sign of things to come", so to speak, a precursor to the films that would define him over the coming years. How he shoots his women and their willingness to nakedly be open and free to explore in sexual frankness whatever the film lays out for the female characters within the loosely plotted stories (particularly blurring what is real and fantasy in regards to the lead actresses and the situations that confront them), Succubus is truly, to me, the first film to feature the Franco touch that his vocal admirers/defenders consider so worthwhile and exhilarating. Reynaud's attractiveness will perhaps be either the drawback or appeal for Succubus. I have read some consider her a dog while others are totally under her spell. I'm in the latter camp. There are lots of compositions and certain movements featuring her that held my attention, no doubt. She's not Soledad, or Maria Rohm, but Reynaud certainly kept my eyes on her throughout her time on the screen. Captivating is what I'd describe her. Some magic spell she had. I do think Franco had a part to play in the film's appeal, capturing Berlin and the attitudes/atmosphere of its rich inhabitants quite well. I also think its unwillingness to give us easy answers just might give it a rewatchability.
I did find Taylor's motivations for "freeing himself" rather odd considering the lady he had "in his possession". It was as if he felt smothered by her; perhaps that is why he wanted her caught in a crime and put away (or, perhaps more importantly put down..) so he would no longer have her "stealing his thunder". Maybe he wanted to be unattached and her power over him was too great to resist, that he would need an outside influence--Hoven's skills--to release him. It was the best I could come up with for an explanation as to why Taylor wanted her out of his life. He even talked about changing around his flat now that he was free of her.
There's no doubt Franco is an acquired taste. Some simply prefer a clear and concise narrative that has a plot that is easy to follow, with characters easily defined. Franco's period from the late 60s and early 70s weren't so mainstream and often didn't follow the traditional filmmaking approach. I guess that is partially why you often read "how boring" and "a slag" it is when watching Franco's movies. That and the surreal touches/flourishes his films had. This was the experimental period where filmmakers detonated traditional filmmaking in favor of pursuing the kinds of films they wanted to make. In turn, many weren't able to embrace Franco's work (or others that made such films), digest them, while a vocal following praise the surreal and blunt sexuality on screen. He's a polarizing director. Some hate him. Some love him. Some make fun of him. One thing's certain: he draws opinion and inspires all types of criticism. I like this period of his work. I lost my passion for most of his work once he connected with Romay until 1980s Macumba sexual which briefly (unless you do like his low budget work afterward which depended on lo-tech camerawork and production values) caused a resurgence before falling on the times where indulging one's creative/sexual visions are not as significant as the almighty dollar and more conservative material cashing in on the Hollywood Blockbuster movement so prevalent thanks to Spielberg and Jaws.
What is interesting about Succubus is that the woman herself is drawn the alluring dangers of sexual sadism. She might be a victim of hypnosis, killing on command, but Franco sets up the scenes as if she were pulling her victims into a web of seduction never to escape. I think it is at the end where we see others pulling the strings (Taylor and Hoven) as the final two victims (stage performers who were part of Lorna's stage act) are stabbed after Lorna gets nice and close, with Taylor actually in the room, running a turntable with a particular kind of music seemingly a part of the hypnosis process, soon even blowing cigarette smoke in one of the dead's face. He later returns to his pad after hearing what he thinks is Lorna being shot outside the club; soon Taylor, we see, is under the spell, soon to be yet another victim of the Succubus.
***½
It wasn’t too long ago that I watched Jess Franco’s Exorcism and it opens with the late Lina Romay tied to an X-crucifix getting sexually and physically tormented. It was in front of a live audience, a staged show for a bourgeoisie crowd seeking out a particular kind of entertainment that involves sexual deviancy and a darker kind of kink. To me, Exorcism just mines what Franco had already done (not so explicitly but just as erotic) in Succubus. Succubus has a similarly staged DeSadian violently sexual act with the film’s lead actress, a knife and two tied up victims, (one male, one female), performed for a small audience of the same kind of stature, a wealthy, aristocratic clientele. At home, she isn’t satisfied sexually by her lover (Franco vet, Jack Taylor), and this desire will build as the film continues. It isn’t uncommon for us to see Lorna (Janine Reynaud) , her companion, William (Taylor), and his gaggle of bourgeoisie friends gathered at a flat/hang-out, lots of liquor/booze at their disposal (you know the stocked bar handy for them), with them all seemingly spaced out or bored.
I have read that some apply a more supernatural angle to the film, but I'm inclined to go in a more realistic way. I look at the Adrian Hoven character as a hypnotist who uses his power at the favor of Taylor, applied to Reynaud to do his bidding, like killing off certain characters for whatever reason. I didn't really know what motivated Taylor's rage but whatever it is, Reynaud gets the job done. You do read all the time how critics or writers use the description hypnotic but, in this case, I think it does apply in more ways than one. Through the idea of hypnotist, director Franco can in fact go in any direction he so chooses. He can fool around with mannequins, have Howard Vernon and Reynaud toy with magnifying glasses that warp their faces (especially lips) while playing the "name dropping game" (including what each name relates to the next one speaking after dropped name), and have various characters interact with Reynaud (as Vernon, already mentioned) in a dreamlike state (Franco uses soft-focus lens to invite this effect of the unreal within the real settings of Berlin) before she dutifully dispatches them on command. Franco even juxtaposes Hoven's face slightly over Reynaud's sometimes to establish his association with her acts of violence to the victims. Vernon especially gets it rather horribly with a pin in the eye. Long-ass steak knives seem to be her specialty, though. Hoven's place in the grand scheme of things was left rather ambiguous (or, to me, at least); he calls her Faustiine. You get a lot of that "selling soul to the devil". She's a menace who will spill blood. Hoven feeds this to us, but he's the architect behind all that happens.
Trying to emphasize a plot in my review for this film is pointless as I felt that this film was all about the leading lady and how to compose her against whatever backdrop (or in whatever scenario) Franco so chooses. This really is the beginning of a fully Franco film. Its jazz seems organic when scored to Reynaud and her movements, her actions on screen. I can't actually imagine this film without the jazz soundtrack. Its timing seemed right as Franco captured the swinging 60s as the sexual revolution was blooming into an uproar, a cast of "beatnik" types congregating as books are read, sex is in the air, a collection of "eccentrics" ready for whatever the night could bring. There's a scene in a flat where Reynaud crawls across a floor, a bottle of J&B sitting right nearby, as she seems to invite the group in attendance to kiss and fondle her en masse.
I always felt as I watched Succubus that Franco felt liberated as a filmmaker with no pressures to direct a clearly-explained, coherently narrated, typically straightforward film. It seemed as if he had freedom to dictate pace and allow his actress to go to wherever place she needed to. It did seem like a "storyboard" type film (even if it was just shoot-from-the-hip in reality) in that we see composed shots of Lorna and her body in various poses. Even if some of the character's behavior seemed spontaneous and of the moment, I often felt Franco had planned and pictured how to shoot Lorna. Maybe he let her do her thing, but I think too often there's these distanced shots of Germany and of Reynaud (or Taylor) that seem to be constructed by Franco's artistic eye. Visually, aesthetically, photographically, Succubus was Franco's means to move into an energized, highly-stylized, and uninhibited stage of his career. Nudity, eroticism, unexpected developments of a sexual nature; violence seems to be a strange bedfellow with all of these elements in the cinematic world of Jess Franco.
I do think, however, that Succubus was actually preparing us for Venus in Furs, considered by Franco's fans as his masterpiece, this particular film more of a "sign of things to come", so to speak, a precursor to the films that would define him over the coming years. How he shoots his women and their willingness to nakedly be open and free to explore in sexual frankness whatever the film lays out for the female characters within the loosely plotted stories (particularly blurring what is real and fantasy in regards to the lead actresses and the situations that confront them), Succubus is truly, to me, the first film to feature the Franco touch that his vocal admirers/defenders consider so worthwhile and exhilarating. Reynaud's attractiveness will perhaps be either the drawback or appeal for Succubus. I have read some consider her a dog while others are totally under her spell. I'm in the latter camp. There are lots of compositions and certain movements featuring her that held my attention, no doubt. She's not Soledad, or Maria Rohm, but Reynaud certainly kept my eyes on her throughout her time on the screen. Captivating is what I'd describe her. Some magic spell she had. I do think Franco had a part to play in the film's appeal, capturing Berlin and the attitudes/atmosphere of its rich inhabitants quite well. I also think its unwillingness to give us easy answers just might give it a rewatchability.
I did find Taylor's motivations for "freeing himself" rather odd considering the lady he had "in his possession". It was as if he felt smothered by her; perhaps that is why he wanted her caught in a crime and put away (or, perhaps more importantly put down..) so he would no longer have her "stealing his thunder". Maybe he wanted to be unattached and her power over him was too great to resist, that he would need an outside influence--Hoven's skills--to release him. It was the best I could come up with for an explanation as to why Taylor wanted her out of his life. He even talked about changing around his flat now that he was free of her.
There's no doubt Franco is an acquired taste. Some simply prefer a clear and concise narrative that has a plot that is easy to follow, with characters easily defined. Franco's period from the late 60s and early 70s weren't so mainstream and often didn't follow the traditional filmmaking approach. I guess that is partially why you often read "how boring" and "a slag" it is when watching Franco's movies. That and the surreal touches/flourishes his films had. This was the experimental period where filmmakers detonated traditional filmmaking in favor of pursuing the kinds of films they wanted to make. In turn, many weren't able to embrace Franco's work (or others that made such films), digest them, while a vocal following praise the surreal and blunt sexuality on screen. He's a polarizing director. Some hate him. Some love him. Some make fun of him. One thing's certain: he draws opinion and inspires all types of criticism. I like this period of his work. I lost my passion for most of his work once he connected with Romay until 1980s Macumba sexual which briefly (unless you do like his low budget work afterward which depended on lo-tech camerawork and production values) caused a resurgence before falling on the times where indulging one's creative/sexual visions are not as significant as the almighty dollar and more conservative material cashing in on the Hollywood Blockbuster movement so prevalent thanks to Spielberg and Jaws.
What is interesting about Succubus is that the woman herself is drawn the alluring dangers of sexual sadism. She might be a victim of hypnosis, killing on command, but Franco sets up the scenes as if she were pulling her victims into a web of seduction never to escape. I think it is at the end where we see others pulling the strings (Taylor and Hoven) as the final two victims (stage performers who were part of Lorna's stage act) are stabbed after Lorna gets nice and close, with Taylor actually in the room, running a turntable with a particular kind of music seemingly a part of the hypnosis process, soon even blowing cigarette smoke in one of the dead's face. He later returns to his pad after hearing what he thinks is Lorna being shot outside the club; soon Taylor, we see, is under the spell, soon to be yet another victim of the Succubus.
Comments
Post a Comment