The Devils (1971)

This film, this magnificent work of art, is madness and lunacy poured straight onto the screen. Impossible to tear your eyes away. A lot of what I see in these reviews is that this movie should get more recognition and respect than it does, and I will gladly through my hat into the ring in support of that view.

Director, Ken Russell's historical drama about womanizing priests, sex-crazed nuns, hypocrisy and hysteria in 17th-century France is a mixed bag for me. I find this nunspolitation film, somewhat smart and sophistical to watch, yet I didn't find it, that enjoyable, due to how much of a joke, it makes the historical events seem to be. It's really hard to watch. Based on the historical essay by author Aldous Huxley's "The Devils of Loudon." and the play, 'The Devils' by playwright, John Whiting, the movie tells the story of Father Urbain Grandier (Oliver Reed) who hopes to clean the city from the exploitation of the Church, only to find himself, accursed of witchcraft by a sexually repressed nun, Sister Jeanne des Anges (Vanessa Redgrave), whom under the control of the very corrupt, local Cardinal, Cardinal Richelieu (Christopher Logue). Without spoiling the movie, too much, one of the film, biggest faults is the fact that this movie is a very loose adaptation of the real-life bygone era. The movie get some of the dates, wrong, like the The movie really made the historical characters of the past, seem a little too outlandish, flamboyant, and cartoony than realistic, both in costumes and the use of language. In many ways, the movie feels more art-house performance gimmicky, than a deep and gritty, genuine depiction of real events. Its extreme use of shock value material like nudity and extreme violence, come out, looking more like a desperate attention ploy, than a great storytelling tool. A good example of this, is how they portray the nuns. I really doubt, the majority of the nuns at that time, went that crazy. There are 12 minutes of footage consisting of naked nuns acting nutty and exposing their genitalia to the cameras, and there are several nuns masturbating themselves on a giant crucifix. One naked woman sits on Christ's face, with Vanessa Redgrave masturbates herself with a candle, and later with the late Father Grandier's fire-blackened and phallic-shaped bone. None of this scenes seem to really happen. After all, in most accounts, the nuns for the most part, shriek for a little bit, did a few violence body convulsions and only a few, make sexual motions toward the priests. There wasn't a nun-orgy, as of what I have, research. Because of that, in my opinion, the film depiction of those events, were feeding too much to the fan service of being a Nunsploitation film. After all, those women in the film, were way too attraction, non-disable and young not to be, unmarriageable. Yet, I give the movie, some credit. The use of the absurd does leave a strong impression of the feeling of hysteria and confusion during the witch craze scenes. However, it was a little too jarring, when you compare, what happening on screen to what really happen. Plus, the music and the bad camera shots that went along with these scenes, are just ear-bleeding and eye-gouging annoying. It's one of the reason, why I didn't really like this movie, so much. Then, there are the bizarre add-ons; that the film added to the Grandier events that never did happen, until years later, such as the demolitions of the city walls to make way for the Catholicism over Protestants. One thing, I wish, the film mention more, was how this case, was just one of many similar witchcraft trials that occurred in the 17th century throughout Western Europe. It would give, this film, a lot more subtext on how hysteria was so easily made at the time. One thing, I kinda wish, this movie had, was a full-length version of the final product. It's really sad to say, that in the time of its release, this rated X movie was cut up, really badly, due to issues with its controversy taboo subject matter. It provoked protest and outrage from Christian groups and viewing audiences everywhere. It was banned outright in Italy and its stars (Redgrave and Reed) were threatened with three years' jail time if they entered the country. Even, some feminist hatred the film for it's over use of nudity, and violence toward women. Indeed, a lot of the explicit scenes were indeed taken out, from both the US & UK film versions and presumed lost or destroyed, because of that. It wasn't until critic Mark Kermode found the majority of the cuts scenes in 2002 and piece it all, together. Although, some material may have been lost forever. Despite that, the acting in the version, I got, was pretty good, somewhat. Speak of the Devil. Oliver Reed as Father Urbain Grandier was compelling. Vanessa Redgrave, while campy in some scenes, was majority, worthy to watch. It's the supporting characters that I really couldn't get, behind. None of them, were good. They play their characters, way too excessive and overdone. I would have nun of them. Check out, 1961's polish film, also based on the Loudon possessions, call, 'Mother Joan of the Angels' for a better depiction. It's a lot better than this film. Overall: This movie will not appeal to mainstream viewers. Even as a niche viewer. This movie has a lukewarm one time watch ability. Not worthy for a second time. It's a film, I really can't recommended.

I loved this film, greatly enjoyed itIt's got a good story, beautiful sets, great dialogue, amazing acting by the majority of the actors, especially by leads Oliver Reed and Vanessa Redgrave. It's the kind of film that draws in and doesn't let go until its inevitable endingHaving said that, what surprises me most about this film is that it almost escaped my radar. It doesn't pop up in any of the disturbing movie sites I've seen or lists I've read of similar matter. If it wasn't for this random guy I came across surfing YT that briefly recommended this film to his viewers, I fear I would have never seen it, in my entire life, and that, to me, would've been a shame; yep, this film is that goodThough the moment the torture starts on Oliver's Grandier the movie slowly but surely descends into such savagery that may only appeal to psychos and very open-minded people (I'm one of the latter) from that point on. I mean, what was the point of seeing his blistering face as he burns to death? And his genitals getting crushed moments before this scene takes place. The only reason: to shock the audience, should've made do without it. It's not really a complaint, though, I'm open- minded, but it does make you feel like you're watching a completely different movie Still, the movie's solid, well made and enjoyable. It's actually funny, some of the stuff I found in this movie could compete with and even surpass that of Cannibal Holocaust's brutality. Yet CH's widely known, due to said brutality, and The Devils has almost sunk into oblivion, except to those that already know where it is!So try and become one of these and take a look at this powerful movieJaime A. De la Garza https://www.amazon.com/author/jaimeadlagarza

At a Uni reunion a while ago talk got around over a red wine or two to talk about movies we had collectively seen in the early 70s.One guy, a staunch creationist, put the boot into Ken Russell. Two of his movies, The Devils and Woman in Love, came up, both of which I had seen, enjoyed, even if I found them disturbing.I have a large DVD collection and decided to source The Devils which proved very hard.I believe I might have sourced one of the last copies available.I watched it the other night and was awe struck by the boundaries that it took on. Like Clockwork Orange, I can't see such movies being made in 2012.It is not a perfect movie, and I will not repeat comments about the historical background which others have made, and in the end I had little sympathy for Grandier, but the film does ask some profound questions about religious purity and moral right, and the separation of the church and politics. I wonder if there is a good degree of cross-over with Arthur Miller's 'Crucible' and note others have asked the same question.Oliver Reed is very good as Grandier but I think Vanessa Redgrave steals the show. A rare, unique and controversial movie, but not for the faint hearted. Along with Marat/Sade one of the greater challenges in more recent film history IMHO. For enthusiasts, I think it is worth sourcing as I believe it may have been recently released on DVD.