Walerian Borowczyk is best known for his 1975 sleaze flick 'The Beast', and with that film in mind; I don't think I was unjustified going into this one expecting some bizarre pornography. However, it turns out that isn't what this film is at all; it's actually 'erotica', which is unfortunately not so interesting. Sure there's plenty of hot female nudity, but it's all really slow and barely erotic in the slightest. As the title suggests, this film depicts 'tales' which are immoral; and there are four in total. The first is very simple but nicely put together. We follow a pair of cousins stuck on a beach together by the tide. The older and more sexually experienced of the pair sees it as an opportunity to teach the younger a thing or two. This story is not particularly impressive on the substance front; it's very short and not a lot happens, but it is really beautifully shot and anyone that appreciates good looking cinema will surely find something to like about it.I figured the first tale would be just a taster since it is so short, but unfortunately things go downhill from there and the second tale is the worst of the four. It takes on a period setting and basically just follows a young woman locked in her bedroom. Again, the cinematography is nice (though none of the locations are anything like as good as the beach in tale one) but the tale itself drags on too long to approaching anything like what I would call 'erotica'. The film is slightly redeemed by tale number three; which is by far the best of the bunch. Elizabeth Bathory has featured in cinema a few times; though not often enough. This tale again is slow and beautiful but the story actually holds some interest and Paloma Picasso's perfect naked figure emerging from a bath is blood is likely to be the only thing I will go on to remember about this film. I figured that if the fourth tale could match the third then the film would be a success overall; but unfortunately it's a turgid affair and doesn't compliment the penultimate story as well as I'd hoped. Split into four we have one good story, one decent one and two weak ones...not enough to recommend the film for unfortunately.

I had the opportunity to review this film when it was released on DVD about 9-10 years ago. Although the IMDb was in its infancy at the time, I read about the film before reviewing it. I found this to be an interesting guide to morals and values.Walerian Borowczyk is one of Europe's most controversial filmmakers. I had heard that Immoral Tales, the English title of Contes Immoraux or Unmoralische Geschichten, was not too much different than most of his other work. Borowczyk has also directed many sexually themed movies, including two parts of the erotically charged Emmanuelle series.Bordering on the thin line between hardcore and soft-core pornography, Immoral Tales is a film that leaves you guilty and shocked. Not many films include two forms of incest, masturbation with a vegetable, the killing of naked virgins for their blood, and sex at the Vatican. Interestingly enough, the last two parts of the movie are supposedly true! It is extremely hard to put a film like Immoral Tales into words. Shocking in some spots, yet artistically titillating in others, the movie is paced too slowly in spots. This could be Polish director's Walerian Borowczyk's preferred style, but the film drags on and on with excess. I was able to get over the two cousins having sex in the first act, but the English translation certainly could have been better worded. Eight minutes of a young girl doing odd things with a cucumber after reading the bible is just a little more than I needed to see.Even so, this film is a delight for anyone who has considered himself or herself voyeuristic. When the viewer sees over twenty underage naked teenage girls running around (Erzsébet Bathory)... Let's just say it is hard to describe. Lucrezia Borgia is almost ceremonious at times, and shows the baptism of Lucrezia's incestuous child. Unfortunately, some of the shots are gratuitous at best, and although this film can be great in spots, it fails in others.Definitely worth seeing, but certainly for those who are open minded and don't mind the various actions that happen on screen. Although I rated it lower when originally reviewing it, I rate it higher after multiple viewings.

This film, french in language but hungarian by production, depicts artistic nudity at it's greatest degree of explicitness. What we see are four episodes, one roughly taking place at present (the date of production is 1974), the other three being new interpretations of historic events and anecdotes. It is quite a 'slow' film that tries to capture it's erotic contents in an objective, unromantic manner, while being honest in portraying the sexual energy that a naked body alone offers. There are obviously a couple of common themes among the four tales, and it's not necessarily their erotic content alone that fits them together.Let's take an – spoiler full – look at the four stories.The first episode shows a young girl, maybe 16, and a boy, few years older, on a bicycle-trip. They stop nearby the beach and climb on the shores cliffs. He seems to be in power; she talks about her innocent kissing experiences on parties, while he openly explains to attend prostitutes weekly. The difference, as is seems, is his greater experience and her virginity, and, since this film is called 'immoral' and since there are some 'visual innuendos', it seems pretty clear where it all leads to. While exclaiming pseudo-philosophical remarks on the sea and nature, he leads her into oral sex, which is introduced by his precise description of what he and she will do, think and expect. After finishing that, and while the tide approaches the two connected bodies (hers nude, his still dressed), she asks for more of that pleasure – but he replies that it was never intended to be pleasure, but rather a teaching for her. One wonders: Was he really in power over her, or is it vice versa? He's the one that tries to manipulate her, only to see that she doesn't bother his wishes, but remains her own. Even though the viewer feels she's very devote, she remains a 'straighter', more open position towards sexuality than he does. He needs a cover story for getting what we wanted, and he builds a sort of ritual around it – whereas she only seems to agree because she wants the same thing as well.The second episode is about 'Thérèse Philosophe'. It takes place at around 1900. A young girl is locked into a room by her mother(?) because she disappeared after the last church session. The viewer knows that she simply remained in the church, but her mother doesn't believe that. In order to punish her for her suspected in obedience, she is locked for three days and three nights. As we already know from the church sequence, she regularly imagines to hear the voice of the Holy Spirit, introduced by organ clusters, who explains that he will take of her and will do his best to serve her wishes, whatever they may be. In fact, this voice is her own voice, the voice of her own secret desires that demand to be set free. While locked and restricted to concentrate on herself, that voice leads her into sexual phantasy's also supported by her finding pornographic photos and finally a book by de Sade, 'Thérèse Philosophe', of which the etchings receive more interest than the text. By reading her prayer book at one point and de Sade at another, her sexuality and belief are brought into connection. Other than usual, she finds a way to combine these two – which leads to a fairly explicit masturbation scene. Were it not done in a openly artistic manner, the idea would rather fit into cheap pornography (it involves a cucumber). In the end, on the climax of both physical exhaustion and spiritual experience, she pushes de Sade aside and gets hold of her prayer book – only to reveal that the important thing about it is the picture of a man, kept alongside the pictures of the holy figures and religious processions.Episode three is just as 'de Sadian' as the previous one. It deals with the 17th century hungarian Comtesse Barthory, played by Paloma Picasso, who abducts attractive girls from the small villages nearby her castle. We – and the people of the villages – can expect that the purpose for that is a criminal one. The girls, on the other hand, behave self-conscious and open when bathing themselves in the castle while being watched at by the Comtesse and her servant. At this point, about two dozen girls in full front nudity can been seen on the screen constantly. They are given a poisoned liquor and then the Comtesse steps among them. Turned frenzy by the drink, the girls start to rip off her famed dress of jewelry, therefore undressing her, while attacking themselves to get hold of more jewels. It gets bloody here, but these screens are quite reluctantly filmed if compared to the erotic part. The surviving girls, one can read between the lines, are killed by the servant, and then finally the Comtesse can take her bath in their blood – and it's a bloodbath as literally as one has ever been. Following that, the servant turns out to be a girl himself, and she and the Comtesse share a very erotic, none-bizarre sexual act. It ends with the servant secretly calling the Kings Men to get hold of the Comtesse; while she is taken away, it is revealed that the servant is in love with one to them, and they kiss each other while the scene fades out.And finally we are taken in the life of Lucrezia Borgia. She visits her father, Pope Alexander VI, and her brother, a cardinal, in Rome. Her husband, himself a Count and faithful Christian, is confronted with an incestuous family situation. Upon being shocked by what he sees he suspects to be killed, which happens not shortly after. Then the path is free for the family connection, and the unite in an orgy than is very likely to hurt some peoples religious beliefs. And the same time, as a visual counterpart, we see excerpts of Savonarola preaching against the decadence of church. He is killed and burned, while Lucrezias happily gives birth to a child whose father is her father as well – thereby symbolizing the perversion dominating the papacy at this time. Lucrezias and the child smile at each other, a scene that produces an uneasy feeling in the viewer. And it's not the only scene with that quality. This highly controversial film is immoral because that is a lack of critical comment about what we see. We see people stepping over barriers because they are overwhelmed by their sexual energies. Especially the last two tales present a world in which power and sexuality are combined and used for dominance and destruction without remorse. It all takes place in uncivilized worlds that pretends to be rich of culture. How different is that from today? Since this, like all films, is a piece of art – and it's more art than most –, there is no need for the producers to make a distancing statement. You decide what the pictures do to you: Be they erotic or repulsive, what you see in them is part of yourself and probably part of your own perspective towards sexuality.

Interesting exploration on erotism, that tell four tales of 'immoralities', casually plenties of sex. However, it is interesting the focus on the corruption of governors and religious people. And visually is very well-done. I think that it has no dialogue at all. Interesting. How it could be better? Well, there are a lot of naked women, but i think that some women of a potential public would be interested in more naked men. Who knows? 7/10