4/10
Hammer dies non-too impressively
31 August 2007
Warning: Spoilers
This one really could and should have worked. The usual ingenuity was employed to stretch a small budget a long way, lots of British talent was available at micro-cost, a Hollywood A-lister came on board, it was based on probably the best of Dennis Wheatley's black magic novels, and in an age when, thanks to THE EXORCIST, occult movies were in vogue, it might well have regenerated vital interest in the ailing studio.

But it didn't. Hammer folded shortly afterwards, and this movie contributed to that - even though it made a healthy profit. Nowadays it's seen as something of a curiosity: a well-intentioned but belated addition to the Satanic horror cycle, still distinctly Hammer but laced with tasteless moments that don't do anyone involved any credit at all, and at times so clumsily edited that you're never really sure what's going on.

The first problem is the script, which apparently was being constantly rewritten right up until the end of production. As a result, there's no clear narrative line for the audience to follow. What is the purpose of the hideously deformed baby? Is it the Devil incarnate? If so, why does it then get sacrificed? What's Nastassja Kinski's role in all this, apart from to lie alluringly on slabs and indulge in full-frontal nudity? Who are the lead-Satanist's urbane followers? We never really get to know them, or understand what functions they have, and we see no real sign that they're part of a larger cult. Why does one of them then bleed herself to death? Surely it isn't required that every drop be drained from her body just so that a small amount can be trickled around a magic circle? Why, right at the end, are we suddenly introduced to the mysterious properties of flint-stone, and why, when it's got the blood of one of Satan's acolytes on it, will flint automatically protect the hero from demonic attack (if this is a part of arcane lore, how on Earth were we supposed to know – because the impression this movie gives is that we should be blown away by this revelation and say: "Wow, why didn't I see that coming?")?

The most perplexing moment of all however, comes – unforgivably – right at the climax of the movie. Once Christopher Lee has been thwarted, he simply disappears – with no explanation given. Has he escaped? Is he dead? Has the Devil taken him? We simply don't know, we're not told. (In actual fact, the answer is that in the original version, Lee was struck by lightning and died in flames, much the way he did in SCARS OF Dracula, and this similarity worried the producers so much that in the end it was simply cut out and not replaced.

Another problem lies in what, ironically, should have been one of the movie's greatest strengths – Richard Widmark. His presence (which was purely to justify US funding) is initially surprising and intriguing, but he was allegedly very difficult for the crew to work with, and extremely high and mighty while on set. And, despite that, he doesn't give much of a performance. Stone-faced and unemotional throughout, he lacks any kind of charisma and is way too old to be the hero in a movie where 18-year-old Nastassja Kinski is the heroine. Kinski herself doesn't add much, apart from the aforementioned risqué moments, and this is a pity because the rest of the cast do a good job. Christopher Lee is at his most devilish as the excommunicated priest at the heart of the conspiracy, and is ably supported by Honor Blackman, Denholm Elliot and Anthony Valentine as innocents who get caught up in it.

Director Peter Sykes does a reasonable job considering the difficulties he supposedly had, and composes some very nice shots – check out the opening sequence in the church, all played out under beautiful stained-glass reflections – and makes very good use of authentic locations in and around London and Munich. But all this really does is remind you what a good movie this could have been.

New-fangled obscenity didn't help it much either. Throughout the age of permissiveness, Hammer had been pushing the envelope with regard to sex. But it really cuts loose in this one. The Satanic orgies are the most explicit and realistic the studio ever produced, and in addition to these there's a plethora of gratuitous female nudity, and then – yet again – we come to that ghastly, deformed baby. It seems to serve no purpose at all, and yet at one point is thrust up into Nastassja Kinski's womb, and at another has its throat cut on camera while it's still wriggling and crying. Christopher Lee was very unhappy with these scenes, while Dennis Wheatley was revolted and said afterwards that Hammer would never again adapt one of his stories – though neither Wheatley nor Hammer would live to see this defiance tested.

The film is certainly good enough to watch again. The mysterious nature of the rituals involved is quite convincing – the symbols, the ancient books, the dusty vaults – but it's too talkie and seems tediously slow by today's standards and, as I said before, the finale is truly the most disappointing in Hammer history.
17 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed