3/10
Dull Sequel To A Controversial Exploitation Classic
23 April 2008
Upon its 1968 release, Michael Reeves' British Horror masterpiece "Witchfinder General" starring the great Vincent Price, caused cinematic interest in the topic of witch-hunts, which lead to a wave of films that are sometimes referred to as "Hexploitation", the most important being the shocking "Mark Of The Devil" of 1970. Gruesome and ultra-violent as it was, the controversial original "Mark Of The Devil" was actually a very good film that delivered a more than disturbing, but also adequate and uncompromising portrayal of the madness of witch-hunts. Sadly, Adrian Hoven's "Mark Of The Devil II" (of the notorious aka. title "Hexen Geschändet und zu Tode gequält"/"Witches Violated And Tortured To Death") of 1973 is an incomparably inferior and more or less pointless cash-in on the notorious Exploitation Classic that bears hardly any of its predecessors great elements. The story is not nearly as realistic as it is the case in the original, and the sequel completely lacks the creepiness and atmosphere of the first "Mark Of The Devil". While the first film was constantly terrifying, this one gets boring quite fast, The film is not quite as explicit and gruesome as its predecessor, but still quite brutal. As opposed to the original, however, the plot often seems like a lame excuse to show a bunch of ghastly torture sequences. The film has several shocking moments, but it is never really terrifying, and it lacks the menacing feeling of the first one. While the original had a great cast (Herbert Lom, Udo Kier), the performances in the sequel are quite lame. Anton Diffring, who plays the head prosecutor of witches here, is not nearly as charismatic in his portrayal of evil as the great Herbert Lom was. The only actors who have remained from the first part is the weird-looking Reggie Nalder, possibly one of the ugliest actors ever, and Johannes Buzalski. Nalder gives the film a certain creepiness, and beautiful Erica Blanc makes a good female lead, but the rest of the performances are forgettable. I don't normally nag about bad performances in low-budget exploitation cinema, but it is inevitable to compare a sequel to its predecessor, and "Mark of the Devil II" is just way inferior to the original. Over-all, "Mark Of The Devil II" is not a complete disaster, but it is definitely disappointing.
11 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed