The Devonsville Terror

As much as the horror genre at large tends to victimize women, some titles particularly zero in on misogyny to the point that it can be hard to convince oneself to watch them. Rarely is that more true than when the tale on hand is one of witchcraft, and the appalling, bogus violence of "witch trials," with clear indication of pitting female characters against men. Suffice to say that I've held off for awhile on watching 'The Devonsville terror' for just this reason. Then again, maybe there are more specific reasons to have had reservations about this. One can't fault a production for being on the more indie and low-budget end of the spectrum, though without especial points of brilliance for counterbalance, the evident shortcomings will be foremost. On that note, while stunts and practical effects look great, the more grandiose visuals show their limits. Ulli Lommel's direction feels kind of limpid, or at least highly variable, with the result of some stilted acting and pacing. Even Donald Pleasence, a legend in and of himself and the highlight of no few otherwise tepid features, seems to struggle some in a role that is distinctly small and limited. Suffice to say this falls well short of perfect by any measure, and I can understand how it hasn't been regarded well.

The acting isn't all bad, not by any means, and some actors come off better on average than others despite the weak direction. True, maybe they're aided by having their characters spotlighted as sympathetic figures, but I think this goes primarily for star Suzanna Love, and co-stars Mary Walden and Deanna Haas. Paul Willson makes an unexpected impression with the nervous energy he carries as Mr. Gibbs, reminding of Philip Seymour Hoffman in 'Synecdoche, New York.' Meanwhile, there is some directness in the writing that comes across as a result of inexperience (or to be less kind, plain amateurism) - though even with definite rough edges, I'm pleased to say that more than not the screenplay whipped up between Lommel, Love, and George T. Lindsey is kind of terrific, or at least strikes some major chords. The primary thrust is undeniable as three women, fresh faces around the sleepy backwoods town of Devonsville, raise the hackles of the almost uniformly provincial and reactionary residents. The newcomers' progressive and free-thinking values concerning religion, the environment, education, feminism, gender equality, and more are met by staunch, stubborn, and aggressive conservativism, selfishness, antiquated values, and outright ignorance, not to mention attitudes of patriarchy, male entitlement to women's bodies, homophobia, and that simple-minded misogyny. Such notions could surely be utilized to greater effect, and have been elsewhere, but 'The Devonsville terror' nevertheless boasts firm foundations with the themes and Big Ideas with which it plays.

From that foundation is built a tale of curses, superstition, and the past repeating itself - not to mention genuinely disturbing violence, specifically male violence against women, and the all too real and dangerous ideas and beliefs that precipitate that violence. And it must surely be said that there are some fantastic thoughts in play in terms of the characters, scene writing, and overall narrative, even setting aside the most substantial themes on and. Unfortunately, here is where the picture meets with its biggest problems of all, because when it comes to the fundamentals of storytelling, the writing is possibly the weakest part of all. When events come to a head in third act we trust that, as per conventions of the genre, the principal women will exact sweet revenge, or even if that is not true, then at least the outcome will be hugely horrifying and satisfying for we viewers. What happens instead is that the climax seems to come from out of nowhere, a climax during which one supporting character who has been no more than a footnote all this time plays a large part. That climax is followed by an exceptionally curt ending that is deeply unsatisfying and begs the question of what purpose there was to the plot in the first place. There is no true resolution for two of three crucial figures. In the meantime, I repeat that the practical effects are splendid, but Lommel makes the regrettable choice of holding one shot so long during the climax that the artifice of those effects is betrayed, and this follows on the most tawdry and unconvincing use of all of those would-be grandiose post-production special effects. Right where it matters the most, 'The Devonsville terror' falls apart and leaves a bad taste in our mouths.

It's a shame, because there was enormous potential here. Other movies have played with like-minded material, and the same themes and ideas, to tremendous profit. In too many ways, however, this one flounders, and squanders the best possibilities. Lommel's direction is unreliable, with some discrete bad decisions, and other facets are subsequently lowered. And beyond the admirable core notions of the screenplay the team of writers had no more than very mixed success in summoning forth a workable story, or even just workable individual scenes. So much of the tale that has been presented to us is just left hanging when all is said and done, with even those underlying themes left somewhat unused; in generosity I assume Lommel, Love, and Lindsey recognized the deficiency, but hadn't the time or budget to rewrite, let alone shoot and edit more footage. In one manner or another the final product is the same, and for all that 'The Devonsville terror' could have been - and from the outside looking in, sounds like it should be - the film is less than one might hope or expect. There is value here, and I'm glad for those who like it more than I do, but I'm just disappointed. I anticipated a viewing experience that would be unpleasant, but ultimately rewarding, and when all is said and done only one of those descriptors holds true. There are worse things you could watch, but the sad fact of the matter is that there are much better things, too, and there's not much reason to spend time with this.

Three hundred years ago the citizens of Devonsville accused three women of witchcraft and killed them using pretty crude (but at least in one case kind of effective) special effects. In the present day (or the early 80's at least), Suzanna Love (the film's co-writer and wife of director Ulli Lommel) comes to Devonsville to be the new school teacher.

Things don't go too well. She pretty early on tells the kids that God could be a woman, which doesn't go over too well with many of the rural folk. Paul Willson (from "Cheers"!) develops an unrequited crush on her ... and so on. Wilson and other local troublemakers decide that Love and two other young women who are new to town (a radio DJ and an environmental scientist) are reincarnations of the witches and decide to kill them.

It's hard to know what to say about this film. In fairly objective terms, it's real junk. But the ways in which it's junky start to work in it's favour. It's shot in rural Wisconsin under circumstances that are so low tech it ends up looking a bit like a home movie. Robert Walker Jr. Is on hand as one of the nice guys in town, but his presence barely registers. Donald Pleasance has a much bigger role as the town doctor, but he seems to have been available for one day. All of his scenes are shot in the same cramped edge of the same room.

The film kind of gestures at feminist themes (string independent young women persecuted by closed minded men), but kind of undoes that in a climax that suggests that they were right. Basically, I think it's an oddly watchable film that has no right to be.

Willson's head melts like that creepy Nazi in "Raiders of the Lost Ark" during the climax and that's basically worth the price of admission.

This movie had a nice old feeling to it as the commentator before me said, but that's it. The story is stupid, the acting is mediocre, and the effects are horrible. And the whole arm/worm thing is disgusting might I add. And many of the things just look fake....I love horror movies, and on a scale of 1-10 compared to Children of the Corn (which was made just a year after this;1984)...I'd give it a 1.5 for the lonely feeling, and the .5 for effort.

Ulli Lommel was like the Rainer Werner Fassbinder of horror movies. He must have learned Fassbinder's exhaustive work ethic first hand. I mean 66 directoral credits. Ridiculous amount.

To me, this film is a large budget companion to The Demons of Ludlow directed by Bill Rebane in the same location. Both have similar plots, but this one is derivited of the Demons movie. This movie gets better remembered because it clearly has a larger budget and some Hollywood acting talent which Demons lacks. You'll see the same actors in smaller roles because they are still pretty good but they aren't Donald Pleasance, Paul Willson or Robert Walker Jr either.

The production values are better too making for better effects. Lommel no doubt had better financial backing but he also had loads of experience making these films.

Generally, the story is a bit slow and some of it doesn't quite make sense to me like why what starts the revenge push does it? Surely other things happened over the course of 300 years.

The.most unsettling thing about this movie is the actions of the locals and how vague they are in dropping hints of what's to come. Their intended victims never had a chance. If the point of view were switched to one of the victims, this would be as intense as the Wicker Man.

Typically I dislike films about witches (with the exception of Dario Argento's horror classic Suspiria), but The Devonsville Terror is quite amusing. The script is disastrous, the performances are over-acted, and the special effects are anything but special. The plot is devoid of any significant twists or surprises. The audience anticipates the impending events faster than do the characters, and the conclusion is accomplished suddenly and sloppily. However, I can't deny that this film makes me curiously happy when I watch it. Something about the lighting and overall appearance of the film. The soundtrack is also quite good, and gives the film an eerie quality. I particularly like the scene where Walter Gibbs' face melts (the special effects are primitive but cleverly done using wax melting in time-lapse). That scene always gives me the creeps. The storyline, despite its uncreative, allows the characters to really show their true colors. Walter Gibbs' character specifically is quite gross, and almost matches with his looks. A film worth trying, and for those who are skeptical, Donald Pleasence of John Carpenter's Halloween also stars.