MovieChat Forums > The Blood on Satan's Claw (1971) Discussion > Censorship or bad continuity?

Censorship or bad continuity?

posted 19 years ago by muzilon
15 replies | jump to latest

I've seen this film twice on TV (under the title "Blood on Satan's Claw") and found it atmospheric but very disjointed. A lot of characters seemed to appear and disappear without explanation: the young girl whose hand turns into a claw is never seen again; ditto the old aunt who walks out screaming into the night; Michelle Dotrice's character is suddenly being chased through the woods by angry villagers; one minute the young hero is hiding in the attic with his "possessed" leg but the next minute he's suddenly sitting around the bonfire with the dancing devil-worshippers, etc. Was I watching a censored version, or did the film just have a rough time in the editing room?

[–] BRONSONasHARMONICA 19 years ago

Well i am just about to buy this in a Anchor Bay box set so i checked.It was cut when first released on a "X certificate".But now all cuts have been waived on a "18 certificate".You might have seen a cut version if it was not a Anchor Bay release.Hope this helps.

http://www.bbfc.co.uk/website/Classified.nsf/c2fb077ba3f9b33980256b4f002da32c/8c4c08e12a0b85b780256e0b0020f6e8?OpenDocument

[–] muzilon 19 years ago

Hmm, it would be interesting to know what the British censors originally cut. Reading through the User Comments I'm relieved to see I'm not the only one who found the storyline "disjointed and vague". :) For instance, it wasn't clear to me that the demon was actually trying to collect body parts from the villagers in order to reassemble itself, but this does make sense now it's been pointed out.

[–] graemeh 19 years ago

It's uncut on anchor bay - the lack of continuity could have something to do with the fact it was originally intended to be three separate stories somehow linked(like asylum and house that dripped blood have four separate ones) the commentaries on the version in Anchor Bay's Tigon collection are well worth a listen, dont know if thats the same as is available separately though

[–] Tryavna 19 years ago

Yep, the individual release is the same as the one in the Tigon collection.

I agree with you about the disjointedness being due to the film's original screenplay. Although I felt that the writer and director managed to weave together the two storylines that dominate the final half (the children's devil-worship and the judge's return), I don't think that the first storyline (about the girl who goes mad and the boy who cuts off his own hand) really connect with the rest of the film very well.

By the way, apparently very little was cut for the initial release. The rape scene was trimmed, and the nude woman dancing with the knife at the end was cut. Maybe a few other seconds were cut here and there, but nothing that would have affected any real content.

[–] mbeswick99 19 years ago

I could have watched 92 minutes of that girl dancing at the end. She was beautiful.

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Tryavna 19 years ago

The reason Anchor Bay chose to "crop" the image is because that was the movie's original aspect ratio in cinemas. Anchor Bay generally (though not always) chooses the proper aspect ratio, so I'm willing to trust them here. That also might explain why the Channel 4 print you own does not contain the word "The" in the title -- in full frame or open matte, it may have been cropped off. Thus the fact that you're able to see "The" in the titles on the DVD indicates that it shows the more accurate aspect ratio.

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] cheesyal 18 years ago

I watched this last night on DVD and it was the Anchor Bay release. I Got it from the video library, so I don't know if it is part of a boxed set or not.

The narrative seemed to have major gaps with all the points made earlier still present. If this is an uncensored version and there is nothing else to add this is a shame as the film was very enjoyable in other respects.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] phoeniks-1 18 years ago

I agree. This movie would not do as a remake. In fact, most of the remakes that comes out of centemporary Hollywood are poorly made, with a few lucky exceptions (The Italien Job was actually better than the original!). Films like "Psycho" or "The Wicker Man" (since we are talking horror!:) ) should not have been made again. I don´t see the point, except for making money. Artistically though it seems that there is a shortage of ideas these days, and that is a bad thing. Maybe the tendency will die out eventually, but as it is, I think it is fair to say that it is some sort of a crisis. However, as long as the filmmakers can improve original material, no one should complain. But it almost never happens, so why bother? "Because we are only in it for the money!"

[–] grrrdevin 16 years ago

Who said it had to come out of Hollywood? If I ever get a career in film I'll try to stay as far away from Hollywood as possible.

"I've been living on toxic waste for years, and I'm fine. Just ask my other heads!"

[–] denham 13 years ago

I agree about the disjointed nature of parts of the film and that it's not mostly a matter of censorship, but it's a pity that the last ten minutes are rushed and by no means get the most out of the scenes in question. This contrasts with the nicely paced quality of most of the film previously, in fact the direction and camerawork generally were far superior to what I'd expect for this kind of movie. I half wonder if a lack of remaining time and finance might have been factors, Cross of Iron style.

[–] chongajuly 13 years ago

Margaret actually makes her first appearance during the rape of Cathy Vespers, reading from a book of witchcraft before Angel rips off Cathy's clothes (the beast remains hidden in the shadows). The next time we see Margaret, she is fleeing from the villagers, who are quite right about her being a witch! Even after the Devil's skin is removed from her leg, she continues to talk only of her Satanic master. Great film that requires multiple viewings, seeming to improve every time.

"I take pleasure in great beauty" - James Bond

[–] alucardvenom 9 years ago

A lot of characters seemed to appear and disappear without explanation: the young girl whose hand turns into a claw is never seen again;

Yeah, she's never heard of again. They do however mention that she is locked up in asylum.

ditto the old aunt who walks out screaming into the night;

can't remember that, so I really can't say.

Michelle Dotrice's character is suddenly being chased through the woods by angry villagers;

She escapes from the house in preview scene, and Judge sends those dogs after her, so it's not bad continuity.

one minute the young hero is hiding in the attic with his "possessed" leg but the next minute he's suddenly sitting around the bonfire with the dancing devil-worshippers, etc.

It's "time saver" actually. He appears to be terrified, then scene cuts to him being at bonfire. If you can't follow that up, then you really shouldn't watch movies.

Was I watching a censored version, or did the film just have a rough time in the editing room?

It might be, but movie itself is bit disjointed. Remember that guy who cuts off his hand? Yeah, me neither. He kinda pops up in one more scene (after little girl in the woods is raped and killed), but overall I don't remember he plays any vital part of the story or is ever seen again after that.

However I think it just adds up to the atmosphere of the movie. There's suppose to be state of confusion between characters, because it seems that they "purged" away superstitions, yet witchcraft (aka superstition) seems to be back.

Also, movie was lot more ambitious for it's budget. It doesn't follow just one character and his\her fate, it tries to present mass panic on entire village and how all townsfolk were affected by devil worshiping cult, so editing was all over the place.