Scan barcode
A review by graylodge_library
The Satanic Screen: An Illustrated Guide to the Devil in Cinema by Nikolas Schreck
4.0
Now that my studies are over and I'm free as a bird to read whatever non-fiction I like without feeling bogged down by obligatory exam crap, I've been eyeing a lot of my neglected non-fiction to-read lists and wishlists (yes, I have several, because apparently one would be too easy), particularly the half that has books I've added many many years ago. Of course, I chose the one book that I couldn't seem to find anywhere. In the end, I relied on my trusty friend AbeBooks again and managed to snag the only reasonably priced copy.
Was it worth paying over 40 pounds? I'd say mostly yes. The Satanic Screen has the same problems that these types of overviews generally have: occasionally, too much time is spent in plot descriptions (note: with spoilers), and sometimes some films only get an entry of a few sentences if they are unremarkable but still fit the topic in question.
Then again, Schreck has a real verve for writing and I enjoyed his vivid style immensely. Now, I should mention that he, although currently a Buddhist teacher, has a background in Satanism (and is married to Zeena Schreck, Anton LaVey's daughter and one of the most gorgeous humans on Earth), which obviously gives him a special authoritative stance on the topic. If he says a film captures Satanism particularly well, I trust his opinion.
A word of warning, though: Schreck is very opinionated about how he likes this topic to be portrayed on film. I wasn't bothered because I mostly agreed with everything what he said, but someone else might be annoyed by the subjectivity and his push towards a certain "acceptable" image of the Devil. Aleister Crowley fans might also be irked by the no holds barred rants that basically describe him as a snake oil charlatan.
Schreck's firm opinions also allowed me to finally realize why The Exorcist (1973) and The Omen (1976) have always rubbed me the wrong way. Schreck points out the conservatism (in both these two and others) that paints, for example, sexual behavior that is considered "abnormal" or explicit language as signs of diabolism. Instead of being thought-provoking spiritual journeys or truly terrifying films that take advantage of the anxiety caused by the Devil, they seem trivial, juvenile, and almost like Christian cautionary tales or scare tactics. I'd say The Exorcist is the better constructed story out of these two, but that's about it.
Fortunately, diabolical horror hasn't always been so bland, and I very much look forward to watching some of the discussed films. There's a clear thread going through each decade that lends a useful context for each film, but as with all good cinema-related non-fiction, there are also fresh points of view to some I've already seen and now want to watch again. Even just the fact that Schreck doesn't only discuss mainstream films but also everything between underground cinema and 70s porn is worth keeping this in my bookshelf. Overall, The Satanic Screen made me realize I know absolutely nothing about the Black Arts cinema, so I guess I need to fix that ASAP.
Plus: Jeff Goldblum has played the Devil? Uh, that honestly sounds perfect beyond belief.
Was it worth paying over 40 pounds? I'd say mostly yes. The Satanic Screen has the same problems that these types of overviews generally have: occasionally, too much time is spent in plot descriptions (note: with spoilers), and sometimes some films only get an entry of a few sentences if they are unremarkable but still fit the topic in question.
Then again, Schreck has a real verve for writing and I enjoyed his vivid style immensely. Now, I should mention that he, although currently a Buddhist teacher, has a background in Satanism (and is married to Zeena Schreck, Anton LaVey's daughter and one of the most gorgeous humans on Earth), which obviously gives him a special authoritative stance on the topic. If he says a film captures Satanism particularly well, I trust his opinion.
A word of warning, though: Schreck is very opinionated about how he likes this topic to be portrayed on film. I wasn't bothered because I mostly agreed with everything what he said, but someone else might be annoyed by the subjectivity and his push towards a certain "acceptable" image of the Devil. Aleister Crowley fans might also be irked by the no holds barred rants that basically describe him as a snake oil charlatan.
Schreck's firm opinions also allowed me to finally realize why The Exorcist (1973) and The Omen (1976) have always rubbed me the wrong way. Schreck points out the conservatism (in both these two and others) that paints, for example, sexual behavior that is considered "abnormal" or explicit language as signs of diabolism. Instead of being thought-provoking spiritual journeys or truly terrifying films that take advantage of the anxiety caused by the Devil, they seem trivial, juvenile, and almost like Christian cautionary tales or scare tactics. I'd say The Exorcist is the better constructed story out of these two, but that's about it.
Fortunately, diabolical horror hasn't always been so bland, and I very much look forward to watching some of the discussed films. There's a clear thread going through each decade that lends a useful context for each film, but as with all good cinema-related non-fiction, there are also fresh points of view to some I've already seen and now want to watch again. Even just the fact that Schreck doesn't only discuss mainstream films but also everything between underground cinema and 70s porn is worth keeping this in my bookshelf. Overall, The Satanic Screen made me realize I know absolutely nothing about the Black Arts cinema, so I guess I need to fix that ASAP.
Plus: Jeff Goldblum has played the Devil? Uh, that honestly sounds perfect beyond belief.