Devils of Darkness

Despite being a longtime fan of the British horror film, it was only recently that I learned of the existence of 1965's "Devils of Darkness," and now that I have seen it, I know why. This product of Pinewood Studios is a fairly undistinguished effort that just barely manages to entertain and is never even remotely chilling. In it, William Sylvester (who psychotronic-film fans will recall from such genre favorites as "Gorgo," "The Devil Doll" and "2001") runs afoul of a French vampire called Count Sinistre (born in 1588) and his immortal gypsy bride, Tania, while on holiday in Brittany. The filmmakers apparently felt that a vampire wasn't enough for this picture, so threw in a pack of devil worshippers as well, plus some voodoo trimming. Unfortunately, the resultant stew never quite comes together, and the fact that Hubert Noel as the Count is hardly a threatening presence only compounds the problem. A subplot that has him endeavoring to recover a missing talisman simply peters out by the film's end, and the picture's resolution is waaay too rushed and abrupt, I feel. On the plus side, Sylvester is as sturdy and dependable as ever, and the film's production values are fairly high. The picture contains a couple of strange British beatnik party sequences showcasing some subtly suggested marijuana consumption and lesbianism, and an energetic and atmospheric gypsy camp intro opens the film promisingly. Ultimately, however, "Devils of Darkness" turns out to be a rather tame, blah picture; not bad, but certainly nothing great. If you've seen all the horror films put out by Hammer and Amicus Studios, do by all means give it a try. This picture really is for British horror film completists only.

I enjoyed the movie immensely. I had wanted to see it since I was a kid having read about it in SHRIEK! a short lived British horror movie mag.

so, 35 years later I finally get to see it and I was not disappointed. It's not a great film, but it certainly shines above many of the horror films that were churned out during the same era (a la Blood of the Vampire 1958). The atmosphere and mood of the film is just right.

The only truly annoying thing about the film to me was the beatnik-style music.

Yes, it is a Hammer knockoff, but it was one of the better ones. (Even the later Hammer films were "Hammer knockoffs.")

I say give it a chance! If you don't you will not know what you are missing.

Armond du Moliere is really a 400 year old vampire called Count Sinistre and he heads a coven of Satanists in Brittany, France, with the story then moving to England. British horror movie from Planet Film Productions, I can remember being very excited by the prospect of vampires and Satanists (I love Hammer's The Satanic Rites of Dracula - 1973) but I also recall being rather disappointed with the film. I have just watched it for the second time (on a 41 year old VHS tape) and again it failed to impress. French actor Huber Noel plays the Count, he is very suave but also quite lame compared to Christopher Lee's menacing Dracula. I do not remember seeing one set of fangs and there is barely a drop of blood to be seen. The night scenes were obviously filmed in daylight (though Hammer did this too), the film is quite slow, the ending looks rushed and cheap but Tracy Reed does give some sex appeal and the Swinging Sixties party is quite entertaining. This movie was never going to Hammer a run for their money, it simply lacks bite, however it is still a reasonable watch.

This film is not grand but it's not down right horrible either - it's an in-between film - one of those movies you don't mind watching if there is not a lot on TV or you are just in the mood for something different to watch.

You can easily pass this one by without missing anything but if you do decide to watch it don't expect a lot from it. It's mildly entertaining. Watch it if you really want to see another film on the occult / witchcraft - otherwise you can pass it by.

I'm not downing this film - I found it a a bit enjoyable but there are much better films to watch and re-watch on the market.

5/10

Devils of Darkness has a promising sounding title, it's British and it has the typical 60's gothic theme. Yet, it quickly got ignored over the years and it's rarely ever mentioned. Probably because it wasn't made by either of the 3 biggest production companies in that time. The Brit horror industry was ruled by Hammer, Amicus or Tigon and (almost) all their production received cult followings and critics attention. Of course, that can't be the only reason because a good film would be remembered no matter who produced it. Devils of Darkness is anonymous in all fields… Not one aspect in the entire film is worth remembering. It mixes vampirism with other occult elements. A satanic cult, led by Count Sinistre, kidnaps innocent people in order to sacrifice them. An author tries to reveal the secrets and comes into contact with the leader. Devils of Darkness has an extremely promising opening sequence (even before the credits are presented) and the hope you'll see a intriguing occult horror film is falsely raised. After the atmospheric opening, the film quickly falls into boredom with endless speeches and tedious characters. The tension is pretty much non-existent and the few promising horror sequences are too succinct. The beautifully shot cult rites seem to be inspired by Roger Corman's the Masque of the Red Death, but still they're the only sequences worth mentioning. The cast isn't very spectacular, neither. Carol Gray is worth a mention since her beauty reminded me about the typical Hammer sirens. Hubert Noël, the bad guy with a dreadful French accent, is too untalented to make the film memorable and so is director Lance Comfort.