The Bloody Judge (1972)

Don't listen to the negative reviews

It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties.

There are moments that feel comical, some horrific, and some downright inspiring but the tonal shifts hardly matter as the end results come to a film that's perfect for this time.

Great story, amazing characters, superb action, enthralling cinematography. Yes, this is something I am glad I spent money on.

...Spoilers hereI generally like anything Christopher Lee is in (as a main character and mostly as a supporter actor) but this movie is just a mess.The movie gets confused about what it is supposed to be: historical re- telling of the "Hanging Judge," a horror film, a romantic story, or a porno?All those elements are present in this film, and despite best attempts, the film cannot weave it all together.Lee plays the Hanging Judge, known as Judge George Jeffreys. Jeffreys, by historical account was a severe issuer of justice in the wake of Monmouth's rebellion and up until the Glorious Revolution. His portrayal as the stern, lustful judge is well-done but the rest of the film is just mixed up.While I always appreciate a nice nude scene, there were some in this film that were just there to keep the audience interested. Some of the torture scenes are heavily erotic in terms of the BDSM aspect. Including a scene where the main female character licks the body of a chained and tortured (and nude) woman. It is a rather long scene and really makes no sense...The jailers had been ordered to bring this woman to the judge, but instead they strip her down and she voluntarily decides to give another woman a tongue-bath while they eagerly watch. It was a bad porno intro scene if you ask me.Anyway...there is some history here...Monmouth's Rebellion and the politics of the Glorious Revolution play a role, but not enough of one to make this an interesting film.The horror aspect is really not there...the torture scenes are not horrifying; scantily clad beauties being randomly tortured isn't enough to classify this as a horror film.The love story is odd as well...highly unlikely that a nobleborn man would fall in love with a 'wench' from the town. And that story is interspersed with everything else, not giving it enough room to grow, even if it were plausible.You can probably go without seeing this movie...also the version I saw had a couple of sections where the dialogue went German with English subtitles. This occurred at the especially graphic sex and sex/torture scenes leading me to believe that the original of this movie had those edited out to avoid a XXX rating or a ban by some nations. Just odd.

The Bloody Judge is set in England during the year 1685 under the rule of King James II, loyal James supporter Judge George Jeffreys (Christopher Lee) is the Lord Chancellor & is feared for his harsh sentences or torture & execution. Judge Jeffreys sentences Alicia Gray (Maragret Lee) to death for Witchcraft, Jeffreys then speaks with Lord Wessex (Leo Genn) & discovers that his son Harry Selton (Hans Hass Jr.) has been having an affair with Alicia's sister Mary (Maria Rohm) & is known to be in contact with rebels. Mary & Harry help the upcoming invasion by Monmouth in hope of overthrowing King James II & William of Orange taking his place, Jeffreys suspects that Harry is a traitor & fears for his own position if King James was ever defeated but Jeffreys falls for Mary. As the fighting across England intensifies & the rebels gain in strength & number & start winning Jeffreys orders the execution of 500 known traitors in a sign of defiance including Harry & Mary...This Liechtenstein, Spanish, German & Italian co-production was directed by the prolific exploitation & sleaze merchant Jess Franco, now I have never hid the fact that I think Jess Franco is one of the two worst director's ever along with Jim Wynorski but with a resume totaling two hundred odd films even Franco was going to make one or two good ones & The Bloody Judge is definitely one of his best films. Obviously made to cash-in on the success of Witchfinder General (1968) the central figure here is Judge George Jeffreys who was a real person, he was apparently nicknamed 'The Hanging Judge' & was widely know for the cruelty of his sentences. Even if the central character is somewhat historically accurate the film itself isn't which is unsurprising given that Franco is a talentless hack (I just love insulting the guy, sorry). For instance the Monmouth rebellion actually failed & I seriously doubt he fell in love with a young girl. Anyway, The Bloody Judge is a real mixed bag of genres with large doses of costume drama, historic epic, biography, horror, sleaze, sex & war film with none particularly gelling together that well. The torture scenes look out of place between the rather dull historical dramatics & none of the character's come across that well, for instance Judge Jeffreys is fairly one dimensional as the script never tries to dig into his psyche or flesh him out as a person. Why was he the way he was? Was he just a sadistic & cruel man who hid behind the law to satisfy his brutal fantasies & desires? Did he genuinely believe that what he was doing was right? The script never even tries to answer this. Lasting for about 100 minutes & although perfectly watchable the majority of The Bloody Judge is quite dull, sure there are occasional scenes of torture, nudity & execution to spice things up a bit but The Bloody Judge is largely a fairly slow moving historic period drama with blackmail, betrayal, treason, rebellions, secret love affairs, corruption & abuse of power & lots of people riding around on horseback.Released under a plethora of titles including Night of the Blood Monster, Throne of the Blood Monster, Trial of the Witches, Witch Killer of Broadmoor & Witches' Trial among other's. As well as various different titles there are a couple of different versions floating around, go for the US release which is a composite uncut version featuring some scenes in German only rather than the softer & shorter UK release. Although there's a fair amount of torture & sleaze The Bloody Judge isn't that explicit, women are chained up & lashed, branded & stabbed, hands are cut off & tongues ripped out while Rohm is forced to lick the blood of another female prisoners legs & body. There's also a very awkward scene in which Jeffreys gropes the naked Rohm but we never see Christopher Lee's face, only a pair of anonymous hands. Apparently Lee never knew about the harder stuff that Franco shot & wasn't involved in it. There's a bit of sex & nudity as well but not that much.Filmed in Europe this looks surprisingly good, Franco must have actually had a budget on this. The sets & real period locations look very nice & give the film an authentic look. There are a couple of decent battle scenes involving lots of extra's on horseback & firing cannons, The Bloody Judge is maybe Franco's best looking & most lavish film complete with an orchestral score & colourful photography although he directs things in a rather dull & plodding fashion with plenty of static camera zooms & the like. The acting is quite good, Christopher Lee is great in a role he clearly liked & his booming voice & presence add a great deal of authority to the role.The Bloody Judge is easily one of Franco's better films, it's quite well made, it's nice to look at with decent amounts of violence, torture, sleaze & sex with an actual attempt to tell a compelling story even if it does plod on at a sedate pace. Not bad at all to be fair, not as good as the other Witchfinder General cash-in Mark of the Devil (1970) but still pretty good all the same.

As said, I just witnessed the full uncut version of the Bloody Judge. Like you could see IMDb never made notice of this version so I thought it must be wrong on the DVD but no, it clocked in at exactly 103 minutes. It's English spoken until the extra minutes appear, they are in German but the subtitles stays intact. The extra minutes are no more then a torture scene with full nudity, the others include all nudity with a love scene between the bloody judge and the witch, the last extra is a lesbian scene in the torture room with frontal bush nudity. Thinking of the year it was made, 1970, it was normal that it was cut out. Anyway, the storyline does refer to the real history but the movie is way too long. There is a lot of blah blah and the torture scenes are really laughable. You only see blood but it never runs or you never see cuts made by the executioner. A shame, could have done better by Franco. The performances are really good but the suspense isn't there due the lack of storyline, they really refer to much to history. It is nice to see how they made you say you are a witch. There are better witch hunt movies out there, I guess would Lee never appeared in it it would be a forgotten flick. It's not for the geeks of horror, just one of the Jess Franco flicks with the usual T&A features. It's available in his 103 minutes in Belgium with the German pieces in it, judge it for yourselves

This film is an unique thing. Being possibly the best of B-category Franco's movies, this one is very hard to find in Russia. And I guess only Franco's true fans and the lovers of the costume movies (like me)really have any reason to search for it.Nevertheless, this film could be worse if not Christopher Lee. The man destined to play fantastic villains all his life now was playing a real historic villain (was the real Judge Jeffreys a villain? I think not but Jess Franco used another version). But Lee was ready to play in a HISTORIC movie, and instead of it he was to perform a horror show. Although his performance in this role was a very good one, he was disappointed and detested and told later he doesn't want any credits for this film. There are some very rough mistakes (or special changes) in the movie: 1) The date is missed. The year 1685 was the real time of Monmouth rebellion, but the events destroying James II' and Jeffreys' power, has happened only 4 years later, in 1688-89, and called "Glorious Revolution". 2) Sir George Jeffreys really has died in the Tower of London - but of stone, not of a heart-attack as it's shown. 3) Jeffreys, how good or bad he was, has never been neither womanizer nor witch-hunter. Moreover he did all he could to prevent death sentences to alleged witches. And there was nothing to suggest that he had a mistress or used the arrested women for his lust. It is nothing but a profanation. 4) There were NO witch hunt in later 1680's in England. Even the few who was charged were mostly acquitted. The horrible things shown in film as Ketch's work were used normally in Scotland, not England.