Lady Hyde

I watched LADY HYDE on Tubi, free w/ ads.

The opening of this is pretty slow and looks like it was shot on Super 8 w/o audio. Which might be to match some vintage home movies stock footage.

Little of the dialog matches the lips. A lot of the framing feels off, and people are uncomfortably close to walls.

It's really easy to write this off as a bad, low budget film, but there's a lot of interesting choices. Which has been my mantra, if you can't make it good, make it weird.

Also helping make this more interesting is actress Liz Clare getting naked. A lot. She plays the titular Lady Hyde, Jane Graham. She seduces the people she hold responsible for her husband's death, before murdering them.

The one Tweet currently about the film comes from the director/writer/editor/male lead, Jason Rudy, "My latest film, Lady Hyde is now on Tubi for everyone to watch for free!

I filmed it using the Franco list and is a modern update on She Killed in Ecstasy."

In addition to writing, directing, editing and staring as the male lead, which includes sex scenes, Jason Rudy apparently did the "artwork" hanging on the walls, in some of the scenes.

This is only 78 minutes and interesting enough.

I saw this movie as a new release on Tubi. If you're familiar with Jesse Franco movies, you'll find Lady Hyde a faithful tribute. It's made to look like a Euro-1970s exploitation/erotic thriller/horror/quirky Franco movie with lots of handheld camera, zooms, long shots, mirrors etc. It's definitely a super low-budget indie with the limitations of these films. When you have no funds for sets, costume and crew, you make do with what's at hand. The acting is uneven and some scenes are too long. Still, there is something mesmerizing about this movie that holds your attention. Liz Clare plays the lead character and she really carries the movie. She brings not only beauty and a genuine, natural eroticism, but plays the "mad woman" part with subtle nuance. And that's a good thing since she is in just about every scene. I particularly liked the flickering emotions running across her face after she's done someone in. The sound editing is great too. Fitting the genre, there is lots of blood and nudity.

And that reason is Liz Clare, who is on-camera for most of the running time. Thankfully. The lens lingers lovingly on her face and breasts, often in closeups, and occasionally with a gimmick or two. She bears the load of the production quite well.

Apart from the titillation, and a face that any camera would love, there's not much to recommend. The opening scene of "scientists" condemning the work of Liz's hubby couldn't be more poorly written or spoken than it was, unless in a parody, which this, alas, was not. That sets a low bar that most of the rest lives down to. Low-budget films come with low expectations, but this doesn't meet them.

Despite its many flaws, it did introduce me to Ms. Clare, who should be getting plenty of offers for worthier productions.

This film nails the porno exploitation genre (short of actually being porn). The dialog and acting are completely forgettable, and the actors are obviously only given one shot not unlike the cheap soap operas. The aesthetic and filmography are on point but an improved musical score (not just classical piano solos) would do so much to pull this together make this a real work of art.

There are many scenes long and lingering on the female body. I don't think I've ever watch a movie before of this type that had as much female nudity for such long scenes without actually being a porn film and I'm still not sure if this was intentional of the artist.