"The Vengeance of She" is a 1968 Hammer film (British), a a sequel to 1965's "She" with Ursula Andress. Whereas the events of the first film took place in 1918, this sequel takes place 50 years later in the modern day (1967).
THE STORY: A beautiful blond named Carol (Olinka Berova) is plagued by voices calling her "Ayesha" and is drawn by a mysterious force toward the Southeast. During her journey she meets Dr. Phillip Smith (Edward Judd) who decides to accompany her, likely because he wants to attain boyfriend status (even though he's obviously old enough to be her father). They travel through the desert with Philip (Edward Judd) and eventually reach a lost city in the mountains. John Richardson is back as Killikrates while Derek Godfrey and Danièle Noël play Men-Hari and Sharna.
Although the storyline is sometimes kinda lazy you'll no doubt enjoy this film to some degree if appreciate Hammer films. What's it have going for it? Well, it's a serious adventure for one thing; don't expect any goofiness or camp here. It's got great locations including breathtaking shots of the Mediterranean coast. It also has one beautiful leading lady in Olinka Berova. Yes, Ursula Andress is gorgeous as well, but Olinka beats her out IMHO. Olinka may lack Ursula's looks-that-kill stunning-ness but she makes up for it in gentle, sweet innocence. Seriously, Olinka possesses a quality that's rare today. The film's worth watching or owning just to behold this.
As to the "G-rated" issue, an Amazon reviewer -- "A Customer" (May 27, 2002) -- spends his entire review ranting about how mediocre the film is because it's rated G. First of all, the DVD is not rated G; it clearly states that the film is "unrated." Secondly, even if it WAS rated G at some point (like when it was originally released in theaters) it would be at least a PG or PG-13 today. Want proof? - Olinka is shown for long shots in just her underwear. One scene shows her walking into the ocean where her panties are wet and clearly see-through. Does this sound G-rated? - There's a fairly long belly dancing scene where the girls are less than half-dressed. Does this sound G-rated? - There are quite a few violent fights that end in death. Plus a woman on a sacrificial altar has a sword dropped into her bosom and a man staked to a wall is speared in the chest. Does this sound G-rated? Suffice to say that reviewer doesn't know what he's talking about.
One last thing about this reviewer's piece. The guy appears obsessed with film ratings. Personally I never pay attention to these ratings. Why? Simply because a film is either great, good, mediocre or bad period. The rating is irrelevant. Does more gore, more nudity, more cussing, more overt sexual situations determine the worthiness of a film? Maybe for 13 year-olds. Is "The Wizard of OZ" a lousy film because it's rated G? How about the original "Planet of the Apes"?
BOTTOM LINE: Although "The Vengeance of She" is not a hard R-rated film, it's neither a tame G-rated film either. It's worth watching or owning for the breathtakingly beautiful Olinka Berova, the fine locations and the serious spirit of adventure. It's only real flaw is that it has a bit of a lazy vibe, but it makes up for it with an ethereal ambiance. Regardless, "The Vengeance of She" delivers the goods if you're in the mood for a serious adventure flick à la 60's James Bond, but without the goofy super-spy elements. If you appreciate Hammer films it's a must.
The film runs 101 minutes and was shot in Monte Carlo (Mediterranean coast), Spain (the desert) and England (the studio sets).
GRADE: B (6.5/10 Stars)
THE STORY: A beautiful blond named Carol (Olinka Berova) is plagued by voices calling her "Ayesha" and is drawn by a mysterious force toward the Southeast. During her journey she meets Dr. Phillip Smith (Edward Judd) who decides to accompany her, likely because he wants to attain boyfriend status (even though he's obviously old enough to be her father). They travel through the desert with Philip (Edward Judd) and eventually reach a lost city in the mountains. John Richardson is back as Killikrates while Derek Godfrey and Danièle Noël play Men-Hari and Sharna.
Although the storyline is sometimes kinda lazy you'll no doubt enjoy this film to some degree if appreciate Hammer films. What's it have going for it? Well, it's a serious adventure for one thing; don't expect any goofiness or camp here. It's got great locations including breathtaking shots of the Mediterranean coast. It also has one beautiful leading lady in Olinka Berova. Yes, Ursula Andress is gorgeous as well, but Olinka beats her out IMHO. Olinka may lack Ursula's looks-that-kill stunning-ness but she makes up for it in gentle, sweet innocence. Seriously, Olinka possesses a quality that's rare today. The film's worth watching or owning just to behold this.
As to the "G-rated" issue, an Amazon reviewer -- "A Customer" (May 27, 2002) -- spends his entire review ranting about how mediocre the film is because it's rated G. First of all, the DVD is not rated G; it clearly states that the film is "unrated." Secondly, even if it WAS rated G at some point (like when it was originally released in theaters) it would be at least a PG or PG-13 today. Want proof? - Olinka is shown for long shots in just her underwear. One scene shows her walking into the ocean where her panties are wet and clearly see-through. Does this sound G-rated? - There's a fairly long belly dancing scene where the girls are less than half-dressed. Does this sound G-rated? - There are quite a few violent fights that end in death. Plus a woman on a sacrificial altar has a sword dropped into her bosom and a man staked to a wall is speared in the chest. Does this sound G-rated? Suffice to say that reviewer doesn't know what he's talking about.
One last thing about this reviewer's piece. The guy appears obsessed with film ratings. Personally I never pay attention to these ratings. Why? Simply because a film is either great, good, mediocre or bad period. The rating is irrelevant. Does more gore, more nudity, more cussing, more overt sexual situations determine the worthiness of a film? Maybe for 13 year-olds. Is "The Wizard of OZ" a lousy film because it's rated G? How about the original "Planet of the Apes"?
BOTTOM LINE: Although "The Vengeance of She" is not a hard R-rated film, it's neither a tame G-rated film either. It's worth watching or owning for the breathtakingly beautiful Olinka Berova, the fine locations and the serious spirit of adventure. It's only real flaw is that it has a bit of a lazy vibe, but it makes up for it with an ethereal ambiance. Regardless, "The Vengeance of She" delivers the goods if you're in the mood for a serious adventure flick à la 60's James Bond, but without the goofy super-spy elements. If you appreciate Hammer films it's a must.
The film runs 101 minutes and was shot in Monte Carlo (Mediterranean coast), Spain (the desert) and England (the studio sets).
GRADE: B (6.5/10 Stars)