This film is an unusual "police" film. It was called Modern Electra but, in order to explain the term "police film", I will refer to another tragedy: Oedipus Rex, one of the first police films. In Oedipus Rex, the culprit is the least suspect (Oedipus who, at the beginning of the story, calls himself "the only stranger".)
Perhaps the ancient audience would leave the theatre convinced that the real culprit is not Oedipus but Fate; however, this convenient explanation is not sufficient for the contemporary audience. The audience dismisses the charges against Oedipus and makes him feel guilty only to the extent that the story affects him personally.
Therefore, in my film there are deaths and some possible culprits, however, nowhere are they indicated as the real culprits and the real victims. Hence, my reference to Oresteia is nothing more than a simple reference. LetΥs consider Sandra and Gilardini, for instance: she seems like Electra due to the events determining her behaviour; he seems like Aegisthus, because of his place in the family. Yet, these analogies are just an outline. Sandra has the characteristics of a judge and Gilardini those of the defendant but, in fact, their roles could be reversed. The ambiguity consists in the genuine appearance of all heroes except for one: Andrew. Andrew would like a more reasonable explanation for everything, but he collides with a world ruled by the deepest, most contradictory and inexplicable passions. Andrew is the closest character to the audienceΥs conscience because it, too, fails to logically explain the events. Consequently, the audience may feel responsible for the events and wonder Π not if Gilardini and the mother are responsible for the fatherΥs death or if Sandra is responsible for GianniΥs death, but if there is a mistake and whether we all bear in us a Sandra, a Gianni and a Gilardini.
Hence, it is a "police story" where everything is clear at the beginning and vague towards the end Π just like every time someone attempts to comprehend his/herself; at the beginning s/he is convinced there is nothing to discover, but, later, s/he faces the distressing problem of non-existence.
[Ι] All of my attention is focused on SandraΥs conscience, on her judgement, on the same theme that encouraged Doni, Livia, Rocco or Prince Di Salina. Although in other films I used a dance, a battle, domestic immigration or the procurement of daily bread. Now my motivation is the female personality, the superiority complex of the Jews, the ancient Etruscan enigma ΠVolterra is its perfect representation of this. These are the basic and, to a certain extent, the important "historical" elements that, together with the psychological ones: the demand for justice and truth, the emotionally and sexually unsatisfied heroine, the crisis of her marriage, the family tragedy: (dealt with in my other films as well). These determined the birth of my film.
SandraΥs conscience, motivated by the "event" (return to the family home), starts searching for the truth: a truth completely different to the one Sandra believed was ingrained in herself; a painful truth that a character like her might never manage to learn entirely.
Therefore, Sandra and her victims (or her persecutors) find their position in modern society or, rather, they discover that they no longer belong there and, through their own drama, help us to better comprehend the reality and the meaning of our historical condition.
If I am allowed to work again on a theme I loved at the beginning of my career, I would say that today, more than ever, I am interested in anthropocentric cinema. The film Sandra of a Thousand Delights is a verification Π and not an exception Π of this dominant interest. ThatΥs why I made this film.

Luchino Visconti
Introduction to the publication of the screenplay, Capelli, 1965