NOTE IMDb
6,4/10
8,5 k
MA NOTE
Thriller d'horreur se déroulant dans l'Angleterre du XVIIe siècle où les enfants d'un village se convertissent lentement en un clan d'adorateurs du diable.Thriller d'horreur se déroulant dans l'Angleterre du XVIIe siècle où les enfants d'un village se convertissent lentement en un clan d'adorateurs du diable.Thriller d'horreur se déroulant dans l'Angleterre du XVIIe siècle où les enfants d'un village se convertissent lentement en un clan d'adorateurs du diable.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
Avice Landone
- Isobel Banham
- (as Avice Landon)
Peter Ardran
- The Devil
- (non crédité)
John Ash
- Coven member
- (non crédité)
Peter Avella
- Villager
- (non crédité)
John Clifford
- Villager
- (non crédité)
Les Conrad
- Villager
- (non crédité)
Avis à la une
It's a bit like Never Let Me Go, but instead of donating parts for others, it's Diablo's parts you grow, as you're young and quite untainted, the beast takes hold and gets acquainted, growing on you as you grow, the parts he needs to take a hold, having been ploughed up all broken, he's not much more than a token, but his powers of persuasion, quite soon leads to a pervasion, of youths rising up in rage, against traditions that have caged, all perpetually conditioned, brainwashed, pressured and conditioned. Alas, the patriarchy of middle aged men cannot allow this to take place and the rebellion is curtailed and quelled, sadly, but not for the first time and definitely not the last.
Set in 17th century Britain, this severely under-rated horror yarn fairly drips with a thick, creepy atmosphere that is hard to shake. The incredibly sexy Linda Hayden (here sporting bizarre, wicked eyebrows) stars as the sluttish leader of a group of children who discover, then worship, the remnants of what appears to be a demon in a farmer's field; they soon begin to perform sacrifices of other children to it. Patrick Wymark, in a fine, subtle performance, plays a Matthew Hopkins-type who puts a stop to the group's murderous shenanigans. The plot is presented in a somewhat disjointed, vague manner, especially during the disappointingly incoherent, anti-climactic finale. But the film's great strength is its amazingly real sense of place and time. Set during a remarkably superstitious period, the vividly presented characters (the acting is uniformly excellent) are in constant fear of an evil presence that palpably lurks everywhere; the film is so extremely well made that the viewer comes to share their constant dread. The end result is a stylish horror movie that is very uncomfortable to watch.
In 17th Century England a man ploughs a field and comes across the skeletal remains of something . Summoning a judge he tells him that the remains belonged to a fiend and takes the judge to the field only to find the remains have disappeared
This acquired a cult following in DOCTOR WHO fandom circa 1990 when the fan press revealed it contained a scene where Wendy Padbury ( 60s companion Zoe ) appeared topless in a scene . Knowing this no one bothered to ask about the rest of the film but the major problem was trying to track it down . It was a time before the internet and Britain was confined to four TV channels and despite Hammer horror movies being broadcast on a fairly regular basis BLOOD ON SATAN'S CLAW was made by an entirely different film company and no one could recall it being broadcast or released on video . In other words it became something of a cult film and a cult film no one had seen but it eventually turned up on Channel 4 a couple of times along with the occasional screening on satellite channels
It'd be all too easy to dismiss this a Hammer clone full of lowbrow thrills and historical hokum featuring witchcraft but this would be slightly unfair to the film whose central idea revolves around Satan trying to reassert himself on Earth by using a 17th Century English village as his bridgehead . Realistic ? Of course not but my disbelief was totally suspended for the entire running time . There's quite a few themes going on at the same time such as the abuse of authority , of scapegoating , sexual repression and sexual awakening and the hypnotic power of sexuality
Piers Haggard doesn't have a massive budget to work with but he does the absolute best with what he's got . Where he succeeds best is in the production design . This isn't the expensive looking interiors you'd find in a big budget historical movie but far more cramped and drab interiors befitting of the times which comes over as being totally realistic . The cast too are very good especially when you compare to these all too good looking and sassy teens we've seen over the decades in American horror movies . Their accents might be a bit too cod regional but this is a minor flaw . The ending itself might be a too silly for its own good where the supernatural comes to the fore but this is always the problem featuring the supernatural . Up until then the human aspects is enough to keep the story going in a horror film that remains something of a cult but perhaps deserves to be better regarded in horror circles
This acquired a cult following in DOCTOR WHO fandom circa 1990 when the fan press revealed it contained a scene where Wendy Padbury ( 60s companion Zoe ) appeared topless in a scene . Knowing this no one bothered to ask about the rest of the film but the major problem was trying to track it down . It was a time before the internet and Britain was confined to four TV channels and despite Hammer horror movies being broadcast on a fairly regular basis BLOOD ON SATAN'S CLAW was made by an entirely different film company and no one could recall it being broadcast or released on video . In other words it became something of a cult film and a cult film no one had seen but it eventually turned up on Channel 4 a couple of times along with the occasional screening on satellite channels
It'd be all too easy to dismiss this a Hammer clone full of lowbrow thrills and historical hokum featuring witchcraft but this would be slightly unfair to the film whose central idea revolves around Satan trying to reassert himself on Earth by using a 17th Century English village as his bridgehead . Realistic ? Of course not but my disbelief was totally suspended for the entire running time . There's quite a few themes going on at the same time such as the abuse of authority , of scapegoating , sexual repression and sexual awakening and the hypnotic power of sexuality
Piers Haggard doesn't have a massive budget to work with but he does the absolute best with what he's got . Where he succeeds best is in the production design . This isn't the expensive looking interiors you'd find in a big budget historical movie but far more cramped and drab interiors befitting of the times which comes over as being totally realistic . The cast too are very good especially when you compare to these all too good looking and sassy teens we've seen over the decades in American horror movies . Their accents might be a bit too cod regional but this is a minor flaw . The ending itself might be a too silly for its own good where the supernatural comes to the fore but this is always the problem featuring the supernatural . Up until then the human aspects is enough to keep the story going in a horror film that remains something of a cult but perhaps deserves to be better regarded in horror circles
The British horror boom of the 60s and 70s was dominated by Hammer, but a couple of other studios, Amicus and Tigon, tried their best to make their mark. Amicus are probably the better remembered of the two, with a few well loved anthologies to their credit (e.g. 'Asylum'), but Tigon actually made the better movies, especially the now classic 'Witchfinder General', directed by doomed cult figure Michael Reeves, as well as 'The Creeping Flesh', and 'The Blood On Satan's Claw', which is what 'Satan's Skin' is best known as. This movie frequently gets compared to 'Witchfinder General', but apart from being set in a similar era, and even having one actor in common (Patrick Wymark who plays The Judge here had a small cameo as Oliver Cromwell in 'Witchfinder General') they are quite different in approach and execution. Piers Haggard is no Michael Reeves but he's had an interesting career which has included the underrated final 'Quatermass' series (which starred Sir John Mills) and the entertaining Oliver Reed/Klaus Kinski exploitation thriller 'Venom', as well as working with Dennis Potter on 'Pennies From Heaven'. I still don't think 'Blood On Satan's Claw' is as good as 'Witchfinder General', but it's an excellent chiller nevertheless, and one of the most underrated British horror movies of all time. Like Reeves Haggard knows how to make the most of a small budget, and he manages to create an unsettling and creepy atmosphere. Also like Reeves he makes brilliant use of the English countryside. Patrick Wymark sadly died shortly after completing this movie, but it's a good testament to his talent. He gives a terrific performance. Also look out for his work in 'Repulsion' and 'Journey To The Far Side Of The Sun'. Seventies sex siren Linda Hayden ('Baby Doll', 'Madhouse', 'House On Straw Hill') is also memorable as Angel Blake, the leader of a Satanic group of young villagers. She looks absolutely stunning, and has one unforgettable nude scene. The supporting cast includes a few familiar faces, most notably Michelle Dotrice ('Some Mothers Do 'Ave 'Em') who plays Margaret, and Wendy Padbury (Zoe from 'Dr Who') who plays Cathy. The only thing I can really fault with this movie is the ending, which is a bit rushed and anti-climactic, but apart from that it's one of the best British horror movies of the early 70s, and highly recommended viewing.
This film is just as bonkers as it sounds. Another Tigon production, it was massively influenced by Witchfinder General and is just as unflinching if not the depraved masterpiece that its predecessor is.
All the ingredients of a great 'folk horror' staple are here- witch trials, a country setting, Olde English magick and buxom wenches showing off their voluptuous delights.
Joe Dante says this is one of the best horror films of the 70's. I agree with him.
All the ingredients of a great 'folk horror' staple are here- witch trials, a country setting, Olde English magick and buxom wenches showing off their voluptuous delights.
Joe Dante says this is one of the best horror films of the 70's. I agree with him.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesThe film was originally conceived as three stories that would play out separately, but all have the unearthed remains of Satan being the linking factor between them. The stories of Peter Edmonton and his mad fiance, the possessed village children, and the Judge's battle with evil were all at first supposed to take place independently. However, when the script was rewritten, it was decided that the plots should be combined to create one central story.
- GaffesThere are two spelling errors in the opening titles: the production company is called Tigron instead of Tigon (in the copyright notice beneath the main title), and screen veteran James Hayter is billed as James Hoyter.
- Crédits fousThe date on the opening credits is 1970, despite the 1971 release.
- Versions alternativesThe UK cinema version was cut by the BBFC to edit the rape scene and shots of a naked girl dancing in front of a knife-wielding boy. The cuts were fully restored in the 2003 Anchor Bay DVD release.
- ConnexionsFeatured in Movie Macabre: Blood on Satan's Claw (1982)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is The Blood on Satan's Claw?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- La Nuit des maléfices
- Lieux de tournage
- St James's old church, Bix Bottom, Henley-on-Thames, Oxfordshire, Royaume-Uni (RU)(the worshippers' meeting place)
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 82 000 £GB (estimé)
- Durée1 heure 37 minutes
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant