A Lizard in a Woman’s Skin (1971) Review

Plot: A troubled woman (Florinda Bolkan) dreams her sexy, wild child neighbour (Anita Strindberg) is murdered, only to find out her dream comes true a few days later.

Review: Having watched quite a few Dario Argento films but not really being exposed greatly to the work of Lucio Fulci, I wasn’t sure what to expect when viewing A Lizard in a Woman’s Skin. I knew from the only other movie of Fulci’s I viewed, Conquest, that he liked his weirdness. If you haven’t seen the movie, the hazy, dream-like quality of the film sometimes makes it seem like he smeared mayonnaise on the camera lenses. So, I knew A Lizard in a Woman’s Skin would be unusual (look at the title, for heaven’s sake), but I wasn’t sure if it would be coherent.

So, was it? More or less, yes. I mean, was I lost at times? Yeah, I was, but that was because of all the loose threads in the movie. This movie has a bunch of characters, and in true whodunit fashion, you suspect almost every character is the murderer at some point. That leads to all kinds of theories by the police characters in the film, and it can all get a little muddled. However, the end of the movie is satisfying, and while the film can get a little loose with the plot at times, it’s clever and manages to subvert the expectations of the seasoned movie viewer.

But what about the weirdness? Oh, don’t worry, it’s in there. The beginnings of the film are a dreamy, surreal orgy, and there’s nudity all over the place. Gratuitous? Perhaps. But Fulci does seem to love the female form. There’s also a jarring and, in my opinion, utterly unnecessary part in the middle of the movie that almost landed Fulci in jail. I won’t spoil it, but it was a very crazy sequence that has to be seen to be believed.

What you have to say about the movie is it’s very stylish. There’s a definite artsy feel to it, the movie is very bright and very interesting to look at. There are references to paintings throughout the set direction. The score is extremely memorable. The framing of the movie, how characters are shown on camera, how shots are set up, it’s technically a very beautiful film. The sets are elaborate at times (there’s a church set that seems like it should be in a Bond film), and overall, the look and feel of the movie are grand. Also, for those gore lovers, the blood runs freely at times in this flick.

The characters are serviceable in their roles. I felt bad for the Florinda Bolkan character; she seemed to spend most of the film getting a raw deal from the story events, and she played the long-suffering, troubled character perfectly. Stanley Baker was steady as the detective trying to solve the murder. Everyone else was fine in their roles, though obviously, character was not the focal point of Fulci’s storytelling; the style and the twists and turns of the plot were the calling cards of the movie. The film was paced well at a little over 100 minutes, and there were few dead spots.

Would I recommend this movie? Yes, I would, especially if you don’t mind bizarre parts throughout what turned out to be a solid whodunit. While some may nettle at the movie’s unusual method of storytelling and the sometimes dizzying turns the movie takes, this film will definitely reward those adventurous enough to give this flick a try.