1. One who argues against a cause or position, not as a committed opponent but simply for the sake of argument or to determine the validity of the cause or position.

2. Roman Catholic Church An official formerly appointed to present arguments against a proposed canonization or beatification.

[Translation of Medieval Latin advocātus diabolī, one arguing for the devil's plea against canonizing a saint : Latin advocātus, advocate + Late Latin diabolī, genitive of diabolus, devil.]

1. a person who advocates an opposing or unpopular view, often for the sake of argument

2. (Roman Catholic Church) RC Church the official appointed to put the case against the beatification or canonization of a candidate. Technical name: promotor fidei

1. a person who advocates an opposing view, as for the sake of argument.

2. an official of the Roman Catholic Church whose duty is to argue against a proposed beatification or canonization.

If I were to pick the single element that makes this movie work it would have to be its rare mood of authenticity. It's characters and environment convey a sense of people actually living in a remote rural region of 17th Century England. Credit goes to the filmmakers for trying to populate the story not with Hollywood's stale stock characters but with people recognizable as real, albeit living in a culture of a different time and place.
And in this time and place - where beliefs would figure more prominently than knowledge even in normal times - frightening inexplicable events become even more dreadful.
This isn't a strongly plot driven movie. For the first half of it we see more the consequences of the evil, without explanation of what it means or even exactly what it is that's happening. But because of that we are put into the same helpless position as the innocent and good characters in the movie. And people who turn to evil? A nice touch is that that the actors don't go over the top trying to be the most utterly evil of all possible screen characters. Rather, they are evil enough, but appropriately for who and when and where they are. And in a sense that is the REAL evil that happens in the movie, the people who become so.
And that's why the movie survives the murkiness of its presentation of the more overt evil. Since even after seeing the movie it may be unclear, here it is, with a mild ***SPOILER*** warning because the confusion actually creates some of the atmosphere in the early part of the film:
Various body parts of an evil being (called 'The Devil' by the locals, though we needn't take that too literally) begin turning up, occasionally found in places like a plow furrow, but most often through the transformation of body parts of the local people. These parts are then cut off either voluntarily (by those who become this 'devil's' followers) or involuntarily (from those who don't). The aim is to re-assemble them and actually create the body of this being.
But in truth this is only the motivation and background to the main focus of the movie, which is to produce an excellent period piece where the people act and react to a horror in character with their times and culture. And it's a pure pleasure that they succeeded in that. But as a movie and as a story would have been helped by running somewhat longer, so they could linger over some events and add more depth to the characters and their interactions. For as it is, sometimes a brief scene, or even just a few lines, are used to set up situations where a more extended treatment would have enhanced all the scenes that followed. That the story still held together using so little glue to stick the scenes into place shows commendable efficiency in the writing, but perhaps it was excessive efficiency. The ending is particularly hurt. A resolution should flow from the main body of the story and not from a relatively minor side-stream. Their ending came very close to being merely tacked on. Not quite, but they could have used more storytelling glue when they put it in place.
And I do have to mention the wonderful score. The melody of main theme sounds like it's based on an old English folk song, but it's arranged in a very 20th Century horror manner. The result is superb. Not only is it haunting, creepy and effective, where a mere switch in key can make it sweet or spooky, but the basic tune is also appealing and memorable.
From what I've written here, pointing out flaws and weakness, you probably won't pick up on just how extraordinarily fond I am of this movie. It's the kind that can stick in my mind for decades between viewings and I wish people would make more like it.
About the version I rented (under the title 'Blood of Satan's Claw', distributed by the Cannon Group)... though less edited than the TV version I saw some 30 years ago, still this video shows signs of being cut. Though by todays standards this movie's virtually sole scene of sex and violence would be exceptionally mild, evidently it was considered too much at some time in the past. I dislike this kind of editing in general and I find the choppy cuts and jumps in the music during this one scene to be irritating. If an original version exists on video, possibly under a different one of its several names, that would be the one to own, though feel free to rent any version... the edits are minor and shouldn't be cause for you to pass on this movie.

11 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

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.

26 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See this for Linda Hayden's sexually charged performance as Satan-loving teener Angel Blake, one of British Cinema's more memorable portrayals of pure evil in a petticoat.
Possessing a WITCHFINDER GENERAL-type atmosphere, helped immeasurably by Mark Wilkinson's truly beautiful score, this tale of superstition and a Satanic contagion that exhibits itself as an ugly, hairy patch on the skin (motivating alternate title SATAN'S SKIN) is evidence of solid horror-making afoot.
Patrick Wymark as the pseudo-Witchfinder anchors a mostly youthful cast who become victim to the spreading 'disease'.
The climax is a ballsy one for director Piers Haggard (who also helmed the taut VENOM) as he dares to portray Satan himself. It's always a risk serving up a visual absolute of a universal concept, but it works surprisingly well here because Haggard knows just how much to show.
As noted earlier, Linda Hayden is dynamite as the sexually provocative Angel and makes it easy to understand how many a fool would follow her to the depths of hell just for a taste of her own brand of heaven.
BLOOD ON SATAN'S CLAW, an evocative title if ever there was one, accomplishes everything it sets out to do.
It comes close to being delightfully lurid at times, and that's what gives it an edge.
Also worthy of applause is Dick Bush's striking, atmospheric cinematography.

48 out of 59 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Set in a small English country town in the 17th Century a farmer unearths inhuman remains that are covered with fur. So he gets the judge of the town to view it, but the evidence has strangely disappeared. After the discovery about the skull and fuss about, weird and horrific occurrences start developing with the appearance of the devil's claw. Also some of the children of the village led by Angel are committing unspeakable terror and performing satanic rituals in a desecrated church in the woods to restore their master.
Atmospheric brilliance on director Piers Haggard's part! Jeez, it was hard to shake off the powerfully foreboding and frantic awe that pierced the air. Mood is a very big key to this film's success in pulling you in with its pervasively chilling and subtle imprint. Visually, Haggard manages to create a beautifully staged period horror by capturing the times and making the most of it's brooding countryside and quiet rural life. What gave it such an embracing atmosphere was that it was mostly shot on location. The beautiful backdrop works rather well with the contrast to the devilishly acts occurring in the peaceful valley. Another thing that hit me and added more to building upon the feel, was the strikingly effective, fine tuned camera-work and the robust score that generates momentum with its unsteady vibe. Also the faintly placed sound effects really do scratch away and cause sudden chills! The classy performances are all strong from the British cast with some richly developed characters. But it's Linda Hayden (Taste the blood of Dracula) luminous performance as Angel Bleak the manipulative evil prowess who stands by the devil's right hand doing his work that makes the film very memorable. Also Patrick Wymark is exceptional as the Judge, the highly placed leader and hero of the town's folk. Maybe the film could have done with a star actor to give it an added boost, but those involved were more then perfect anyway. These provocative aspects took shape and simply completed the film.
The immensely original plot manages to incorporate a whole lot things ranging from folklore tales of witchcraft and Satanism practice to sexuality involving temptation, seduction and lust. This is all done with a serious face. I wouldn't call the plot flawless, as there are many unexplained and meaningless events associated within the material, but it does inject many unexpected turns. It plays around with idea that some sort of curse has hit the town with the devil's presence sinisterly lurking beneath the cracks. Although, it's not terribly all about the devil, but on the innocence of the children, to how the devil has preyed upon them to do his bidding and that's what makes this rather eerie to the bone. Since this is kind of sexually charged in a semi-way, it does provide nudity, but it's not overly graphic when it came to the violence. The gore is low. Though, saying that it does provide some disturbing, raw and perverse images that have the force to stun. It's terrifyingly unpleasant and malevolent in small patches. Like the intense ferocity of the rape scene. Now onto the make-up. Well, the devil design stays mostly hidden in a black cloak, well that's up until the end were we get a clear shot. It's not so bad for the budget. Like so many have pointed out - the only real disappointment in my eyes was the under-whelming conclusion, after being squeezed real tight with tension it just fizzles out without a bang.
Obviously there was profound talent involved, they put their heart into this low-budget production and it all came together perfectly to be highly regarded by those who've seen it. I for one agree. Highly recommended.
By the way I love the original movie poster artwork for this flick. It's damn creepy!

28 out of 33 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

In the XVIII Century, in the countryside of England, the landsman Ralph Gower (Barry Andrews) finds a skull with one eye and fur on the field. He summons the local judge (Patrick Wymark) to see his finding but it has disappeared. Meanwhile the local Peter Edmonton (Simon Williams) brings his fiancée Rosalind Barton (Tamara Ustinov) to his aunt's house to marry her on the next day. However during the night Rosalind becomes insane and in the morning she is sent to an asylum and Peter sees a claw that has replaced her hand. Then Peter wakes up with a claw attacking him and he cuts it out, but he finds that he has hacked down his own hand. The local children have a strange behavior under the command of Angel Blake (Linda Hayden) and they rape and kill others. In common, they have a strange fur on their skin. The judge returns from London and concludes that evil has possessed the children. What will he and his search party do?
'The Blood on Satan's Claw' is a weird and cult British horror film. The plot is very strange and original but some scenes are sort of disconnected. The beauty of Linda Hayden tempting the reverend is worthwhile watching. My vote is six.
Title (Brazil): 'O Estigma de Satanás' ('The Stigma of Satan')

8 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

The Blood on Satan's Claw isn't a Hammer production--but it should be! Exhibiting many of Hammer's trademark features--the Gothic setting, a diabolic threat that lives on the border of civilization, a complex hero with touches of darkness in his character, and a beautiful temptress--The Blood on Satan's Claw was actually a Tigon effort, and one that in many ways surpassed contemporary Hammer releases. In fact, the quality of The Blood on Satan's Claw is so fine, and the thrills it induces so powerful, that one can't help wondering just why the Gothic horror picture was on its way out. Few of the slasher films that would permeate the genre in the coming years can hold a candle to this picture.
The Blood on Satan's Claw is a tale of an ancient evil reborn. A farmer unwittingly plows up a strange corpse, but the alien body disappears before the local judge can investigate. Soon, terrible things begin to happen, and the local youth seem to have all gone over the edge, perhaps into witchcraft. The Judge, played to perfection by Patrick Waymark, is a flawed individual, to say the least. He is dedicated to doing the right thing, true enough, but he is also harsh, cold, haughty, and judgmental. He is also very reluctant to concede that what he considers to be superstition is at work in his village even after evil begins to manifest itself in some very conspicuous ways, and only begins to realize the truth when it is very nearly too late.
The other exceptional performance in the film belongs to the lovely Linda Hayden, who the previous year had starred in Hammer's Taste the Blood of Dracula. Hayden plays the young woman who becomes the leader of the strange cult which infects most of the village youth, and it is she who orchestrates much of the terror which ensues. Her character, ironically named Angel, is a seductress of a particularly haunting power, and it's hard to conceive of any actress from that era playing the part any better.
The story does move a bit slowly, but the drama unfolds with conviction and a realistic touch which many more explosive films lack. The ultimate climax, in which the villagers square off against the coven of witches and their demonic master, is perhaps a bit of a letdown in that it's over very quickly, but when the final credits roll the viewer is still left with a very satisfied feeling. Frightening and atmospheric as only a Gothic can be, The Blood on Satan's Claw is a well-acted and produced horror picture that should appeal especially to fans of Hammer productions.

8 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

In 1670 a British plow boy unearths strange skeletal remains while tilling a field. As it turns out it's the bones of Satan and soon the children of the village begin to practice black masses; preparing to make some murderous sacrifices to their possessor.
Blood on Satan's Claw is a profoundly eerie little horror film. It possesses such a powerful atmosphere of dread while its intriguing plot builds to some truly chilling imagery and some genuinely shocking scenes. Also there's a sexual undertone to the happenings which adds all the more to the unsettling vibes that surround this dark tale. In addition there's one disturbing rape scene and some grisly murder sequences. The film is finely directed by Piers Haggard with splendid camera work, lush locations in the English countryside, and a believably Gothic setting. The unique music score by Marc Wilkinson is terrifically creepy too.
The cast is strong in their performances. Patrick Wymark (in one of his final roles) is good as the Judge who faces down the evil. Linda Hayden is menacing as the young lady who becomes a temptress for the devil. Barry Andrews is likable as the farm hand who unearths the evil and may just become sacrifice for it. The supporting cast is solid as well.
Blood on Satan's Claw is simply a must-see for horror fans. It's outstanding film making wrapped around a haunting tale of good verses evil. Not for all tastes, but the serious horror fan will find it an unsettling and captivating gem! One of the best British horror films of the 70's.
**** out of ****

17 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

This eerie film is set circa 1640 , when is earthed by a farmer (Barry Andrews) a weird human remains located in an British small village . Later on , a farming community is haunted by the demon himself . Children and adolescents being possessed by hairy demon and becoming them into a coven of witches practicing exorcisms and witchery . The teens led by a nasty young girl (Linda Hayden) are worshipping the devil , raping , and sacrificing other young people . Meantime , a judge (Patrick Wymark) investigates the rare events .
The film packs gruesome images , grisly killings , thriller and intense horror sequences . Magnificent detail period is perfectly set in 17th century . Somewhat nudism at times in charge of Lynda Hayden and pagans ceremonies . For its US release the nudity was censored, particularly in Linda Hayden's seduction scene , by darkening the footage to avoid an X rating . Enjoyable casting by Patrick Wymark (a role ¨Witchfinder general¨-alike) who died slowly after making the film , a gorgeous and erotic Linda Hayden (Taste of Dracula blood) , Barry Andrews (Dracula has risen from grave) , Michele Dotrice(who married to Edward Woodward) and Tamara Ustinov (daughter of Peter Ustinov and niece of Angela Lansbury) . It's produced by Tigon , usual in terror movies and richly atmospheric in Pinewood studios . The movie displays a weird and creepy score musical by Marc Williamson . Evocative and imaginative cinematography by Dick Bush , Hammer films ordinary (Twins of evil , Dracula 72 , When dinosaurs ruled earth). The motion picture was well directed by Piers Haggard (Venom , Quatermass conclusion) . The flick isn't for the faint-hearted , however to be liked for horror fans.

20 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

This 1970 British horror pic is just oozing with atmosphere. It takes place in England in the 1600s where life was harsh and the appearance of weird bones in a farmer's field sets off a chain of demonic activities when a group of farm children discover them. They then begin to worship a mysterious evil entity and start sacrificing other children to it. The music score is appropriate for the movie and there were some scenes that made my skin crawl (no pun intended). I would recommend this movie for connoisseurs of classic horror pictures where the characters don't act like total fools when confronted with evil. If you're squeamish, don't watch this in the dark.

17 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Real English countryside locations that breath ancient history. Old stone built houses, wild forests and mysterious ruins. Folk beliefs and practice of witchcraft and mysticism of nature. Now here's an evil fairy tale that both looks and feels right. One of the best films in British horror genre with only a few others on the same line, like 'The Witchfinder General' and 'The Vicker Man'. This is no way an ordinary horror flick, but bears its claws deeply into historical core of the witchcraft in Britain and uses its influences most efficiently.
Piers Haggard's direction is not overwhelming, neither is it using loads of usual heavy horror gimmicks. It simply lets the story evolve more naturally with only a few necessary effects cleverly executed. The young actors are good and mostly unknown for me, except Linda Hayden disturbing the local priest and the whole farming community with her ways of black magic. She was also appearing in 'Taste the Blood of Dracula' as the figure of innocence corrupted by evil. A certain sense of innocence is present here too in nearly all the people, even when cruelty takes place. It's like simple minded children playing with something new and dangerous and not quite understanding the real state of madness until it's too late. The young are constantly pushed and ordered by their elders, which makes the seek for rebellion and trying the forbidden more tempting. And still they end up even more possessed and ordered by Angel (Hayden), who clearly enjoys her new found form of twisted strength. Patrick Wymark's firm judge, who tries to bring back the order through his stronger set of rules and valued formulas, may show up as the only savior. But in the end, is he really just the lesser of two evils? So a certain metaphoric message can be seen here if one so wishes. In a way by this kind of surroundings and people the whole story comes out as a bit more believable tale. All this doesn't mean that the film isn't enjoyably fun to watch too.

13 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

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.

5 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

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.

18 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Blood on Satan's Claw, while obviously suffering from a few narrative lapses and abrupt transitions (probably due to editing) is a fine little movie. Like it's Tigon-backed predecessor Witchfinder General, this succeeds in capturing the medieval period splendidly, and the diabolic goings on are cleverly contrasted with the pastoral setting.
The film also manages to be original in a way few of its contemporaries manage. It handles its shock moments very well and remains a disturbing entry in the British horror field. I should mention that some viewers might find what amounts to a rape scene a little too distressing. The shocks and gore moments are mainly done by implication or quick cuts away, so it's the suggestion as much as what you see that makes it work.
The plot at times is a little hazy for the first time viewer; but essentially the demon Behemoth (pronounced BEY-AH-MOTH) is churned up by a plough and spreads some sort of infection amongst the rural community, driving a girl mad on her wedding eve (never explained) and growing various parts of itself on the younger members of the community. These are gradually used to make a composite of the demon.
As silly as this may sound committed performances from the actors - Linda Hayden and Michelle Dotrice especially - and some narrative obscurity actually makes it work. With an excellent music score and a brilliant realised medieval rural England Blood On Satan's Claw has retained its position as a Cult favourite. Memorable and atmospheric and well worth seeing.

7 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Quite simply, 'Blood On Satan's Claw' is the finest horror film produced in Britain in the Seventies. Haunting, horrific and hopelessly compelling it deserves far greater recognition than it currently warrants. Linda Hayden, the most talented actress working in British exploitation films at the time, delivers her finest performance in the film, and it is one light years ahead of the standard in the genre. Patrick Wymark, in his last film role, is also excellent, and music, direction and art direction are all of an exceptionally high standard. Interestingly, the film was shot as 'The Devil's Touch', and originally released late in 1970 as 'Satan's Skin'. For some reason business wasn't too good and it was rereleased the following year on a more succesful double bill with 'The Beast In The Cellar'. Don't miss it!

21 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

The Blood on Satan's Claw is a terrific film from Tigon Productions and yet, it's still pale compared to their greatest film – this being `The Witchfinder General' staring Vincent Price. Don't let the opening sequences of this film mislead you. The first 20 minutes are rather disappointing, with false scares and missed opportunities to set a satanic tone right from the start. The only real moments to enjoy during these initial 20 minutes are the atmospheric images of rural Britain around the 17th century. The photography of the little cursed village, completely isolated from the rest of England, is shown very effective. Yet, the real `horror' only kicks in when we're introduced to the absolutely astonishing Angel Drake. The young –and bewitching – Linda Hayden plays this shrew from hell. The plot can be summarized as followed: Satan (although never directly referred to as) takes over a little town by transferring his maniacal thoughts and devilish rituals over to the local adolescents and teenagers. Led by Angel Drake, these `children' perform witchcraft, mutilate and brutally kill fellow children who're marked by the growing of Satan's Skin (a bizarre fur suddenly growing on their bodies).
Truly atmospheric and tense with a dazzling demonic theme, subtle undertones of eroticism (Hayden seducing the priest in the church!!) and a spirited courage of director Haggard to break all the typical taboos in horror (pedophilia! Or the Children as symbol of evil!). Peter Wymark is terrific as `the Judge' but you can't help imagining Peter Cushing to play his role. I read in the production notes that Cushing was approached to star (as well as that other British horror legend, Christopher Lee) but the budget of the film was too small. But, just because the budget is modest, it doesn't mean the film can't be shocking. On the contrary! The group-rape scene – controlled by the ghastly eyes of Hayden – is still shocking, even by today's standards. Can you imagine the impact this particular scene caused at the time it was shot? In the year 1970, mind you!
Despite a few flaws, `The Blood on Satan's Claw' is an absolute highlight in the British horror field. Especially recommended to admirers of Hammer films and semi-sleaze lovers. The only letdowns (aside from the semi-tedious opening) is the rather annoying overuse of inappropriate music and the all-too-dramatic slow motion ending.

21 out of 31 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

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

8 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

THE BLOOD ON SATAN'S CLAW takes place in olden times, in a village where a macabre discovery is made, omens and portents abound, and deviltry is afoot. In short order, the youth of the town start acting in an odd fashion, even disrupting their bible study! Much to Reverend Fallowfield's (Anthony Ainley) chagrin. For his part, the judge (Patrick Wymark) believes it's all nonsense. However, something untoward is definitely going on. Self-mutilation occurs, as well as a marked increase in youthful indiscretions! A savage lust seems to sweep through the ranks of the young! A girl named Angel Blake (Linda Hayden) appears to be the ringleader, w/ the others only following her wicked ways. Death is the result. When Angel shows up late to see the Reverend, she attempts to... change his religion! Later, w/ Fallowfield wrongly incarcerated, unholy activities happen in the deep woods. Can Satan be defeated, before the entire village dances into his arms? TBOSC is recommended for the occult horror aficionado...

3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Set in the 17th century. Ralph Gower is out plowing the fields one day when he accidentally uncovers the earthly bones of Satan. Angel Blake will find Satan's Claw and begins to lead a coven of children into devil worshiping. People are turning up dead but the Judge needs proof of that witchcraft is involved - but some feel it's more sinister than witchcraft.
The film is well acted out - bravo to the actors. I also felt it was beautifully filmed and a well written story. It feels and looks like a high dollar production although made on a fairly modest budget.
This film does get violent, there is rape, murder and some blood splattered but it is done in a way that is (somewhat) watchable. If any of this offends you then I do suggest that you look for a milder film on the subjects of Satan and witchcraft.
8/10

3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Satan's Skin, or the much better alternate title of Blood On Satan's Claw as it's known as in the UK at least, is set in a small English village during the 17th Century & starts with local farmer Ralph Gower (Barry Andrews) ploughing a field & uncovering bizarre remains complete with fur & eyeball. Ralph reports this find to a Judge (Patrick Wymark) who happens to be visiting Isobel Banham (Avice Landone), a close friend. Upon investigation the remains have disappeared some having been taken by local teenage children. These events seem to bring great evil to the village, a young woman named Rosalind Barton (Tamara Ustinov) goes mad & grows strange claw like nails on her hand & shortly after her boyfriend Peter Edmonton (Simon Williams) cuts his own hand off in the very house the Judge is staying in. A local girl named Angel Blake (Linda Hayden) seems to be the focus of the evil as she holds satanic rituals in one of which a young girl named Cathy Vespers (Wendy Padbury) is brutally raped & murdered. As the Judge continues his investigations he has to resort to harsh measures to extract the truth in a desperate bid to rid the village of the terrible evil that has engulfed it...
This British produced film by short-lived Tigon Films was co-written & directed by Piers Haggard & is quite simply a brilliant piece of horror cinema. The script by Haggard & Robert Wynne-Simmons is a bit muddled at times but it moves along at a nice pace, has a nasty edge to it & is captivating. Satan's Skin has a lot of power & imagery that will stay with you for a long time, the very fact that children are used as disciple's of the Devil & are involved in murder & Satanic rituals makes the film unsettling & somewhat disturbing to watch. The scenes of a naked Angel trying to seduce the local Reverend (Anthony Ainley) or the scene where a boy taunts one of their victims (Robin Davis) Mother (Charlotte Mitchell) & then there's the infamous bit where Cathy is stripped & raped before being murdered as part of a ritual. These are shocking scenes that give Satan's Skin a bleak, harsh & grittiness about it, director Haggard creates an eerie & unique atmosphere throughout & one of the best in any British horror film made, from the fantastic opening credit sequence featuring a close up of a silhouetted Crow to the period settings, the woods, the costumes, the dialogue, the absolutely wonderfully haunting music & the creepy image of people with patches of the Devil's skin. As you would expect Satan's Skin also explores the superstitions & prejudice's of a close community & the attempts by the educated Judge to convince them that Satan doesn't exist. On the negative side I thought the ending was rushed & a little disappointing while when Satan himself turns up he looks rather cheap & somewhat silly. Technically Satan's Skin is solid with nice cinematography & production values throughout. There are some decent gore scenes including someone chopping their own hand off, an eyeball in a deformed skull, someone is killed with a pitchfork & a nasty scene where someone has a patch of Devil's skin sliced off their leg by a Doctor using a scalpel & without anaesthetic... The acting is top-notch & Wymark as the Judge is superb. As a whole the many excellent aspects of Satan's Skin easily outweigh the negative ones, this is simply a brilliant horror film with a wonderful atmosphere, some of the best & most appropriate music I've heard in a horror film & some memorable imagery. One of the best & I wholeheartedly recommend it to all horror fans as an essential watch, brilliant stuff.

6 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

When a young farmer(played by Barry Andrews) unearths the satanic-looking remains of an unknown creature, he gets the local judge(played by Patrick Wymark) to view them, but then a mysterious and deadly chain of events begins as the bones somehow regrow themselves into a furry claw that attacks a man in an attic. Meanwhile, local children led by Angel Blake(the beautiful Lynda Hayden) start practicing evil rites meant to fully resurrect the demonic being. Can the judge and townsfolk stop this threat in time? Though atmospherically directed by Piers Haggard, with a fine cast(including past and future 'Doctor Who' actors Wendy Padbury, and Anthony Ainley) this is an otherwise most disjointed and unpleasant film, with gaping narrative holes, such as how this thing got started in the first place, and spread so quickly. The ending also feels truncated. Still, there are some effective sequences here and a spooky score, it's just a pity the script is so muddled.

8 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Personally, I thought this was better than The Wicker Man, the movie it probably gets compared to most often. I loved everything about this movie, though the frequent female nudity was somewhat cheesy (though not especially gratuitous, as it fit into the movie and plot well).
The best part of this movie, I think, is the atmosphere that so many horror and thriller films seem to lack. It's the little things, like a brief glance of someone's fingers replaced by demonic claws, that put you in the mood to be creeped out and told a story of helpless village overcome by evil.
I find it interesting that the children and young adults who rebel against the stern authority of the Church, frolic in the woods, and preach free love are essentially hippies, though they're portrayed as self-centered hedonists, rather than idealists and peaceniks. It's a sly attempt at social commentary in an exploitation movie, which may seem amusingly quaint to modern audiences, 40 years later.
Highly recommended, especially for fans of classic 70s horror.

4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

The Blood of Satan's Claws (1971)
*** (out of 4)
Effective horror film set in 17th century England as the children and teenagers of a small village are turning themselves over to Angel (Linda Hayden), a beautiful girl who is teaching them witchcraft. THE BLOOD OF SATAN'S CLAWS is one of the most respected horror films from Britain and it's easy to see why. While the story itself isn't anything to write home about, I've always thought that you could take an unoriginal idea and turn it into something special as long as it was well-made. There's no question that the entire witchcraft sub-genre was overused during this period as drive-ins were full of pictures dealing with Satan but this one here ranks as one of the best because on a technical level it's nearly brilliant. Director Piers Haggard does a terrific job in his duties and he really manages to make this an eerie, creepy and at times disturbing film. There's some minor use of violence but the majority of the eeriness comes from the style of the film and how Haggard manages to milk every scene for all its atmosphere. The entire movie really does feel as if you're in the 17th century and the scenes with the beast were quite effective. The first hour of the movie really manages to feature some creepy material and especially the killings and the scenes that simply feature the claws. Another major plus is Hayden who is simply terrific in her role as the seductive leader. Patrick Wymark is also very good in his part as the judge. Editor Richard Best, cinematographer Dick Bush and the music by Marc Wilkinson are all extremely effective and help make the movie what it is. THE BLOOD ON SATAN'S CLAW could have benefited from a better or at least more original story but there's still no doubt that this is a prime example of how good the genre could be.

5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

This, yet another 1970's film entry into the genre of devil-worship and witchcraft, features beautiful, moody cinematography and does a good job placing this film in the English countryside of a few centuries ago. The scenery is always gray, yet rich and fertile, setting a somber mood, which together with a menacing score, set the viewer up for untold frights and horror to come. Unfortunately, the scares are not delivered, and there is little to cringe from.
Though the film is cast with fine character actors who wear their costumes well, the story is muddy from beginning to end. Eventually one has an idea as to what is going on (in a vague way), but throughout, events happen that leave the viewer unsure and confused as to how it all ties together, rendering ineffective the scenes otherwise intended to be creepy; the film never quite reaches thriller status. While ultimately we know that devil-worship and sorcery are taking a toll on the locals, the evil-doers really never do anything supernaturally frightening as might be expected. There is some gratuitous nudity and a relatively graphic rape scene enacted on Satan's altar, but the slight edge these bring to the movie are let down by the lack of anything intellectually or psychologically frightening, which a film of this genre typically needs. The special effects offered are mostly laughable and wholly forgettable and probably take away more from the effectiveness of the movie than they add. Some of the visual effects were good ideas, but none of them were executed well. At times the film has the feel of historical drama in regards to superstition and ignorance and religion as they relate to witchcraft and Satanism, but only in a minor way.
When the viewer finally arrives at the film's closing moments, expecting surely something terrible and horrific to reveal itself, or perhaps a shocking twist, alas, the final scene is overshadowed by a serious and distracting plot ambiguity and does not come close to delivering the payoff that this movie so badly needs. The adeptly filmed sets and rich scenery, together with a creepy musical score, create an appropriately chilling mood; but in the end, a mood is all that BLOOD ON SATAN'S CLAW has to offer.

7 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

For a very low budget film, this one is pretty good and delivers on some excellent chills. A peasant in 17th century England uncovers what he thinks is a dead creature while plowing--little did he suspect he actually unleashed a demon that would destroy much of the village. That's because somehow or other, this demon created a bizarre cult of mostly sexually charged teens who would kill or even gratuitously take off their clothes to serve their master! The plot is pretty interesting and bloody, though the ending did seem a bit too easy--as the demon was in fact a real wimp.
It's a decent time-passer, but parents should be forewarned--in addition to a bit of violence, the movie also features some full-frontal nudity and isn't exactly kids' fare. I was actually rather surprised this was shown on Turner Classic Movies, as most R-rated films don't show this much skin and TCM doesn't normally show movies like this.
Interesting and not nearly as schlocky as its very limited budget might suggest.

5 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink