I’m not
sure that I would place Mark of the Devil
in the category of exploitation, though it certainly features a degree of
violence and torture that remains horrifying even by today’s standards. At the
same time, there is a certain level of respect given to the material which
seems to suggest filmmaker Michael Armstrong (and uncredited Adrian Hoven) had
no intention of exploiting, but instead shock the audience into a thoughtful
look at the horrifying historical treatment of alleged witches during the 17th
century (inaccurate as some details may be). Despite the bevy of attractive and
nubile women being tortured with a variety of gruesome methods, Mark of the Devil uses the treatment of
them to show the fear of female sexuality from within the Catholic Church.
A young Udo Kier
heads up the cast as Count Christian von Meruh, apprentice to a Catholic witch
hunter named Lord Cumberland (Herbert Lom). He faithfully follows along with
the despicable deeds with faith that it is God’s will to weed out the demonic
forces within the beautiful women, typically ending in death by fire. This view
is changed after Christian begins a relationship with an accused witch named
Vanessa (Olivera Katarina), and witnesses Lord Cumberland become violent after
being accused of impotence.
Despite being
based on real atrocities carried out by the Catholic Church in the 17th
century, it was the marketing and presentation of the film which lands it in
the category of exploitation. Though one could argue that it was the more enticing
and attractive women who would be most threatening to the puritanical sexuality
of the Catholic Church, it does seem as though a degree of the film’s spectacle
for the audience is reliant upon these women being exposed for the audience’s
titillation. The other aspect of the film which lands easily in the field of
exploitation is the violence.
While not as graphic by today’s
standards, one can imagine how shocking some of these sequences were in the
late 1960s. The creativity in the manner of torture used within the film keeps
each sequence uniquely impactful, though few moments are as memorable as the
tongue-removal scene. In an act that was more likely a marketing ploy than
practical necessity, barf bags were given out to the theater patrons attending
a showing of Mark of the Devil. This
was a practice that William Castle had perfected a decade earlier, proving that
getting audiences into the theater was often more significant than the content
they viewed once tickets were bought.
Along with the remastered 1.66:1
aspect ratio presentation on high definition Blu-ray, Mark of the Devil is also
given standard treatment on DVD. The special features are surprisingly
plentiful, including several featurettes and interviews. “Mark of the Times” is
a 47-minute documentary about the impact of Hammer horror and subsequent rise
in British exploitation directors. “Hallmark of the Devil” is a brief
featurette examining Hallmark Releasing, which was the company to distribute
the film in the United
States
Entertainment Value:
6.5/10
Quality of
Filmmaking: 6/10
Historical
Significance: 6.5/10
Special Features: 8.5/10
No comments:
Post a Comment