One of the worst movies I've ever seen

Don't listen to the negative reviews

It is neither dumb nor smart enough to be fun, and spends way too much time with its boring human characters.

.Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.

Sadly, that really could fit as an alternate title of this film. I am utterly flabbergasted at all of the reviews here rating 'Curse of the Demon' a '10' and/or calling it a classic. It is most decidedly neither.Plot in a nutshell: Skeptical American doctor in England makes it his mission to expose 'black magic' as pure myth, but changes his mind just in time.Semi-spoiler alert: There really is a demon as mentioned in the film's title. And it has more than a passing resemblance to 1954's 'Godzilla.' The viewer sees it twice, book-ending the film with its appearances. The other 90+ minutes? A well-worn story-line that has the obstinate protagonist 'hero' Dr. John Holden (played by Dana Andrews) collecting clues and sort of tracking a mystery to its resolution, like a private investigator, only it's been done before, and better, by Sam Spade and Philip Marlowe.And....there's your film. For the life of me, I cannot understand what inspired multiple reviewers here to call this 'chilling,' suspenseful,' 'unrelenting'....I'm at a loss for words, other than to say...'are you insane?' This is by and large a detective story, with a demon cameo thrown in for good measure. 90+ minutes of Dana Andrews playing the skeptic and making the rounds at Scotland Yard, attending a seance, questioning a man under hypnosis, and attempting a break-in of the villain's house, where he wrestles with a cat....this is not the stuff of nightmares. Please. Stop with the exuberant praise.Besides the two short appearances of the demon, there is only one other potential supernatural sequence, and it comes when the villain of the film, Dr. Karswell, seemingly is able to conjure up a fierce wind out of nowhere, so strong that all present feel the need to take shelter. How's THAT for horrific? A strong wind! Is that really going to keep you up at night? My goodness. People who find this film chilling, suspenseful or scary are likely frightened by Gumby.Thankfully there are a few other reviewers here who have been spot-on in their comments, similarly relating what I noted above. One wrote 'in truth, there's not a lot in the film that would qualify as horror.' Another added 'the movie bogs (down) a little in the forced love story and probably spends too much time on the main protagonist's investigation.' Probably indeed. These are both accurate assessments and give a more honest appraisal than the others here grading this film a 9 or a 10.Rating: 6/10. This is not a terrible effort, but it is by no means 'one of the best ever' and absolutely not worthy of the praise showered here by some. It's a decent, slightly-above average flick and that's pretty much it. I doubt I will ever give it a 2nd viewing.

On arriving in England to debunk the leader of a demonic cult, an American professor finds his host has died in mysterious circumstances and the cult leader has the same plan for him ...No spoiler to say the demon is revealed in all its cheesy glory very early in the movie, which was a mistake. The trouble with MR James stories is that they're all about a rising mood of unease created by subtle sensation and weird effects that are only glimpsed, and so they lack the visuals most film makers demand. The real effect of the demon (added over the objection of the director, apparently) also causes a problem because the story ends on a vague note, without deciding the clash between imagination and reality. It's unclear the sceptical professor has been swayed, and the actor certainly doesn't go through a change, yet the concrete demon means it was all real.The pace is fine, and picks up toward the end with a few elisions. Plenty of good scenes, especially the cat attack and the hypnosis tragedy, and the cherry song is utterly weird. And there are a few touches of non-conformist fanaticism to deepen the dread.The lead actor plays an unsympathetic character, rude and irritating, and I think he should have had a break down after the window death to add depth to the story - instead he's brusque and efficient. Best performances are from the cult leader and his mother.Nothing special in the photography, which is disappointing. Music is typical 1950s melodrama, laid on with a trowel.Overall: mixed bag, but it captures the essence of the story.

I had not watched this film for many years until I watched it tonight on the Internet. A true horror GEM that probably gets overlooked! Dana Andrews and the rest of the mostly British cast are all great. Andrews is extremely stalwart, with a jaw that could probably knock a demon over with one thrust! I know this sounds like I'm making fun of the film or Andrews but I'm not: he was made to fit the part of the skeptical scientist and man of reason who sudden finds himself cursed and doomed to die in only 3 days at the hand of a demon.It's interesting watching his character slowly begin to realize that all his nay-saying of the "black arts" has totally been turned on its head. Lots of mood here, heightened by the decision to film in black and white and having much of the action happen at night.The special effects may seem dated to some but impressive for 1957, in a film whose major expense was probably paying Andrews to be in it.In the past few years, films like "The Conjuring" have, reputedly, brought some new "intelligent" films into the genre. I think this started with "Sinister" from a few years back.Hopefully, we'll see the end of the "Unstoppable Slasher" films that were churned out a decade or so back.I really like this film and it needs to be remade/updated! Perhaps with Anthony Hopkins as the villain, Of course, as has been seen before, a reboot doesn't necessarily mean greatness but... who knows?

This psychological horror remains a classic in the genre, due to the impressive plot, original story, and strong acting. The film presents the horror refreshingly straight-faced, with no pause for irritating comic relief which sometimes mars otherwise flawless films. Instead, it's nightmare all the way as the clock ticks towards the inevitable arrival of the demon. A lot of suspense is generated as the countdown continues. The film sustains a tense atmosphere as the deadline to Holden's death slowly ticks down, until the brilliant finale where the roles of pursued and pursuer are reversed, with Karswell trying to escape from Holden.Seen today, it's a memorable piece, similar to the atmospheric horrors served up in the 1940s by Val Lewton. Some of the special effects in the film are obviously pretty dated (that's where the fun lies, of course) but the demon, seen from a distance, looks pretty impressive if not quite as scary as was intended. A lot of work has gone into the fire-and-brimstone demon, and although everyone involved regrets the inclusion of the monster, I could never see why...it adds a lot to the film for me, and improves it, creating an image to stand in the mind. Perhaps it would have been spookier to leave the demon to your imagination, but the huge, articulated puppet is a good a representation as any.The acting is good all-round, with Andrews and Macginnis pitched against either other in a psychological battle. Macginnis is the real star of the film, with his goatee beard he looks like a kindly old man but with a slightly sinister touch, and it's probably his most prominent and best-remembered performance. Andrews may be a bit stuffy as the imported American hero, but he knows his job and puts in a fine, solid performance. It is interesting to see how Holden (a sceptic) manages to come up with rational explanations for all the strange events happening around him, even at the film's end. Based on the story Casting of the Runes by MR James (one of my very favourite authors - check him out) the story is very original and the film is well worth seeing. A minor masterpiece of the genre.