Imperial Venus (1962)

First all l found Lolo miscating for this role if consider a worldwide market,in this case will be more appropiate a native french actress,sounds bad to hear Pauline Bonaparte in a hard italian accent,looks like weird unconscionable at all,therefore the picture was made for italian marketplace,the butcher's sister certanly was more concerned to find a better lover among so many choices,she was frivolous in extreme way putting down Bonaparte's name as already did by Napoleon,an interesting piece of history until now unknown for me,the official release in Brazil needs an upmost restoration to face Lolobrigida's beauty!!!Resume:First watch: 2018 / How many: 1 / Source: DVD / Rating: 6.25

"Imperial Venus" has three major problems. The most important one is its lack of narrative thrust; the viewer gets the feeling that nothing is happening for most of the running time. The second is the choppy continuity (despite the film's overlength); large sections of the story (what little story there is) and entire time periods appear to be missing. The third problem is the low budget; virtually all of the battles and any other action scenes occur off the screen - what we do get on the screen is 90% talk. To be fair, Gina Lollobrigida and Stephen Boyd make a handsome couple, but this is not the lighthearted romp you might except based on the plot summary, and Gina is deliberately made to look tired and unhappy at times. *1/2 out of 4.

Turgid historical saga, a semi-biopic of Napoleon Bonaparte's courtesan sister(!); the overall effect is as improbable as the Hollywood version, DESIREE' (1954), which had focused on the life of the famed French leader's 'girlfriend'.Gina Lollobrigida is monotonous in the title role (not to mention unconvincing when it comes to the dramatic passages of the plot); incidentally, she had previously worked for the director on THE HUNCHBACK OF NOTRE DAME (1957). In support of the star are the likes of Stephen Boyd (who would fare much better playing alongside the Italian sex symbol's rival, Sophia Loren, in THE FALL OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE [1964]), Raymond Pellegrin (making for a pretty good Napoleon) and Massimo Girotti – while Micheline Presle (playing Josephine) and Gabriele Ferzetti put in 'guest appearances'.At an interminable length of almost 2½ hours, for what amounts to a largely unexciting narrative, the film – which, at least, has the virtue of expansive locations and attractive widescreen photography – understandably adopts an episodic structure throughout. In fact, the heroine is seen being involved with various lovers (including officer Ferzetti and roguish Hussar Boyd) and husbands (General-turned-Viceroy Girotti and a wimpish Italian Prince)…apart from facing such calamities as war, plague, deaths in the family and, finally, the humiliating abdication of Napoleon himself!

The correlations between this movie and "Queen Margot" are unmistakable. Yet these are different historic episodes with related themes. The royal princess figure who makes sexual conquests and in the thick of it all, remains faithful to virtues outside the bedroom. This film skips over the exciting parts, focusing on bedroom scenes and non action sequences. The action sequences are merely explained, or brought into being without being shown. For instance, the battle scenes are never shown, but the death and destruction that follows is filmed. There are a few shots of carnage after the battle is over. This does make for some boring cinema, but directors want to keep under budget, and battle scenes are costly. However, the action could easily have been implied in a more passionate way, and more carnage scenes would have helped move the movie along. Napoleon's sister, who is the "Imperial Venus" here, is a reasonably likable character, and lets not forget how beautiful the legendary actress is, so she does bear watching. The affairs are usually with handsome men, which makes it hard to relate to with sexually active American women of today, who instead prefer homelier guys they think they can use and have power over. Still, it is amusing to see Stephen Boyd's smirkish face as he romps through this film. All the actors do a fine job, which is all that keeps this film from severe boredom. Not an exciting movie, but there are a variety of characters well portrayed. Could be a movie to watch with a romantic interest.