The Blood on Satan's Claw (1971)

Thanks for the memories!

Don't listen to the Hype. It's awful

Captivating movie !

It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

Good for a few laughs, but it's a weak effort even allowing for its vintage.The opening sequence fails to show what we're looking at in the ploughed earth so we have to be told. The direction of the actor breaking in to the attic to save his fiancée is terrible.The judge is well played, but there's confusion over who the hero is. A mother who's just lost her two children isn't allowed to play out any grief. Several scenes get lost in a thicket of Thee and Thou, and a few characters disappear or are irrelevant to the ending - no idea why the vicar wasn't central to the de-demonising.The score is far too chipper in the first half. Some of the continuity jumps are incompetent. And the monster is ... undescribabubble. That paw coming up from the floorboards? Fcuk me. And the final sequence? My sainted trousers.Can't understand why it's rated so high. Guess it's the headbangers - no distinction between bad and laughable.

Filled with cheesy acting and obligatorily campy dialog, this British horror staple is a winner.A tale of wicked children from a rural village transforming into beastly devil worshipers in 17th century England, and the religious fervor it spawns, it almost sounds like it could have been a true story. Authentic landscapes, excellent costuming and the generally gloomy atmosphere further adds to the sense of realism. filled with ignorant peasants, bewigged judges, spooky children and icy, hatched-faced vicars, this classic is definitely worth viewing, whether you are a fan of cult films, camp, or horror in general.

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

I'm always saying that I'm not a true fan of horror movies but do appreciate a good shocker and that might let me off writing a decent review. But it doesn't, of course.I saw this on The Horror Channel and I'm afraid, people, that it's not up there with 'The Wicker Man', which is a true classic, nor quite 'The Witchfinder General'. Both these others are often used as comparatives with 'Blood On...' and certainly they do have similarities; namely the folky witchcraft and devil worship deep in the quaint English (& Scottish) countryside.Whilst The 'Wicker Man' is superbly paced and there is a real sense of menace throughout and features one of the greatest endings of all time and 'The Witchfinder...' has Vincent Price swooping around on horseback and quite a lot of juicy violence, these aspects aren't as prevalent in this film.It's still good, of course, though the lack of star names require the actors to work a bit harder for our approval and enjoyment. Patrick Wymark and Linda Hayden are fine and play their roles with gusto and I noticed Mrs Frank Spencer (Michelle Dotrice) had a good and meaty role.When the sinister acts do occur, they are definitely worth waiting for, with just the right amount of nudity and carnal lust, mixed in with violence and chilling ritual. If I have a gripe, it's as I said, that the pretty landscapes dominate the picture too much and the nitty-gritty take too long to come. The ending and a scene of ritualised rape in the middle were very well done and the final scene unfolded most dramatically.All in all, a good, but not outstanding chiller, even though horror aficionados may say otherwise. I don't doubt their choice, in their eyes and it does remain one of British cinema's better horror flicks, from an admittedly chequered catalogue.