Satan's Blade

Wow, this is like a class reunion. Hello! yeah, we know about the film, we were there when it was made. but the previous posters are right about it being a great experience, though I can't imagine it was so great for the producer. did this make a dime? I know I didn't see any money. Did anyone get paid anything? I have to get a copy. Have you (cast members) seen it? I haven't seen it since the night Scott rented out that theater and we saw it at midnight, after Carrie.

I'm tickled to know some of you who were not connected to the production saw it--thank you. Appreciate you letting us have our 15 minutes in your living room, even if it was just YOUR living room.

Hope to hear from you.

Take care, Elisa

A lot of movies try to replicate that 80s horror schlock aesthetic, but they never quite capture it. If you want the real thing, you have to go to actual 80s horror schlock, and this movie is it.

The visual style is so alluring. The film stock, the framing choices, the fashion, the sets, the hair styles. It's also aided by the really haunting soundtrack. The acting is appropriately horrible.

What I like most about this movie is its tone. It may sag at times, but once it gets going, things are just so grim and nihilistic. The combination moved me way more than most bigger budget productions.

I was there when this horrible nightmare began. I'd known Scott for years when he was given the opportunity to produce a horror film ala Halloween when someone (I think his name was Pat???) fronted the money. It was too bad Scott's experiences had been in 8 mm home-style and not in reality because he spent more on looking like a producer than being one and putting out a quality film.

But I was a young innocent in my mid-twenties, like most of the people involved. We were all promised a percentage of the film (which we never received even though I have my contract somewhere) and I was promised an assistant and a writing credit which, you can see, doesn't exist. Tom Cue and I sat for many nights trying to put together a script that was constantly being changed. And like the actor Tom Bongiorno said, the film was doomed from the start and is one of the worst ever made.

As bad as the film was I will say it was one of the most fun times I'd ever had. It was the closest I'd ever get to Hollywood and I knew it. It was like an ongoing cast party. The only people that really seemed to know what they were doing was Terry Kempf, the cinematographer, and Paul Batson, the makeup artist.

It was so unorganized everyone did everything. Not only was I the assistant and a scriptwriter, I ran errands, changed lighting, was in charge of props (and so many other things I can't remember). I dropped off the production staff shortly after the film was in the can because I didn't agree with the way the money was being spent - which is probably why I'm not in the credits anywhere (ya think?).

I didn't walk out of the "premier" but I spent the entire time laughing, it was so damn bad. They'd called it Satan's Blade but I wanted to call it Ski Bunny Blood Bath because that's what it was . . .

Thanks to the enormous success of rudimentary teen slasher flicks like "Friday the 13th", and low-budget gore movies like "The Evil Dead", many horror-crazed amateurs during the first half of the 1980s thought it was also their true calling to become directors. This resulted in several titles written, directed, edited, and produced by one single person. Mostly, though, that one movie remained their sole effort. This review is a tribute to all those "one-hit-wonder" horror directors.

In fact, "wonder" is a wrong term to use, since practically all the titles I'll mention are terribly bad and poorly accomplished movies. Still, though, they are great fun. The one-hitters I spontaneously think of are Joe Giannone's "Madman" (1981), Buddy Cooper's "The Mutilator", Fabrice-Ange Zaphiratos "Blood Beat" (1983), Skip Schoolnik's "Hide and Go Shriek" (1988), and - of course - our mean feature for today, L. Scott Castillo Jr. And his 1984 masterwork "Satan's Blade".

L. Scott Castillo Jr. Didn't necessarily have any bright or innovative ideas, nor did he have any money, but he assumed it was his duty to make a slasher movie anyway. And believe it or not, but the first ten minutes are even quite enjoyable. Two female bank robbers run off with their loot (after gratuitously killing a few bank employees) to a cabin resort in the snowy mountains. They strip off their clothes, obviously, but don't live very long after that. The next day, while the local-yokel police officers are still cleaning up the bloody mess, two groups of tourists arrive at the same holiday resort. My favorite part of the entire film is how, after hearing the bloody details of the murders that occurred the previous night and a disturbing local legend, both groups still carelessly (and unanimously) indicate they want to stay.

It's mainly pointless padding footage after that. One of the males receives the opportunity to cheat on his wife with a woman ten times more beautiful, but he resists. The men drink. The single women strip. The married women complain. 40% of "Satan's Blade" is composed of footage of people randomly walking through the snowy landscape whilst wannabe ominous piano music is playing. Suddenly, the assailant from the opening sequences returns and eliminates everybody quite quickly with a blade. Is he a supernatural creature, like hinted at by the elderly resort owner's mother, or an ordinary flesh & blood killer?

Yes, it's one of the most pitiable slasher movies of the decade, but I have a weakness for this film (and other sole-effort-slashers of the aforementioned directors) and enjoyed the amateurism and pointlessness a lot!

One of the most obscure horror films out there, 'Satan's Blade' offers a very cool premise - whomever wields the Devil's knife becomes possessed and commits murder - and then just shambles along unimaginatively. This is a very lacklustre affair, with somnambulist performances and very little blood.

A violent bank heist opens the film, after which the perpetrators of said robbery flee to a remote mountain resort to kick back and count the loot. But then a double cross has the red, red kroovy flowing once again. Shortly after this, the titular weapon is plunged into flesh, cueing a series of formulaic stalk 'n' slash dispatches. It is kind of a pity to watch this film deteriorate into dull routine after quite a promising start.

One of the best things about 'Satan's Blade' is the poster art - a frightening, not-to-messed-with Lucifer clasping a nasty-looking dagger, holding it up as though about to bring it down and through the heart of a young virgin upon a sacrificial altar. But, as any experienced horror viewer knows, one must never judge a flick by its poster art. This is especially true in the case of 'Satan's Blade' because the artwork promises great things, but the movie itself cheats us out of any real blood and gore. It kind of reminds me of another horror outing entitled 'A Name for Evil', in that both films offer excellent cover art but deliver very little when it comes to the crunch... or should I say the squish?!