So much average

The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

It’s sentimental, ridiculously long and only occasionally funny

It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,

This film, this magnificent work of art, is madness and lunacy poured straight onto the screen. Impossible to tear your eyes away. A lot of what I see in these reviews is that this movie should get more recognition and respect than it does, and I will gladly through my hat into the ring in support of that view.

Ken Russell's inflamed, flamboyant masochistic fantasies belong to their own sub-genre: nihilistic mini-epics designed to shock and repulse. Of course, it isn't Russell's thing to simply be shocking--he's much too tickled by his own blasphemies to stop there. The filmmaker wants to transcend cinematic controversy by desecrating everything mainstream audiences hold sacred. I imagine the crowds seeing "The Devils" in the early 1970s left the theater beaten and bowed (or, perhaps morbidly amused), most-assuredly talking about the director's visual conception of the material rather than the story or the performances. Too bad, as Oliver Reed and Vanessa Redgrave are boldly compelling here, oozing sex and hysterical charisma as a whore-loving Catholic priest and a disfigured nun in 17th century France. In the town of Loudun, Father Grandier runs roughshod over the sniveling, power-seeking Baron de Laubardemont, who seeks to discredit the popular priest with an accusation of witchcraft by exploiting a confession of lust from the hunchbacked Sister Jeanne. Soon, the Baron and a lunatic 'exorcist' have all the nuns in the convent believing they are bewitched, leading to the film's most infamous sequence, a mass sham exorcism (naked nuns writhing in lust, slavering at the mouth and desecrating a statue of Christ). It is to Russell's credit that his actors do not come off looking foolish (except for an earlier scene with Redgrave, horrified at the news that Grandier has taken a wife, nearly shoving an entire rosary in her mouth); however, the film is monstrously ugly in a monotonous way that Russell probably didn't intend. The recklessly brazen, freakishly surreal images (startling at first) eventually no longer highlight individual sequences. Russell doesn't necessarily allow the picture to get away from him as much as he lets it become a nightmarish blur, one big heap of horrors. Alas, "The Devils" is no longer disturbing because the audience is systemically benumbed by the director's check-list of atrocities. By the time we get to an elongated public burning, our thoughts may have moved on to other matters...such as, "Just how did Russell talk his actors into doing these things?" ** from ****

Let's get one thing out of the way, I adore Ken Russell. Something about his aesthetic is totally in sync with my world view. From WOMEN IN LOVE to WHORE, Russell always impresses. His rambunctious, over the top, more is more style should be ideal for THE DEVILS. Unfortunately, the film simply grows tiresome. You get what Russell is up to--group think, religious hysteria, sexual repression, etc... It takes about 30 minutes to get the point but the film goes on for another 90 piling on the atrocities and turning up the craziness. THE DEVILS feels like a madcap Hammer Horror which is a huge compliment. THE DEVILS also looks amazing with a white brick set that is totally modern and nothing to do with 17th century France, and yet it never feels as obvious as the film. Bravo Vanessa Redgrave for a no-holds-bar performance. She is spectacular and displays a restraint at moments that you wish the film had.

At a Uni reunion a while ago talk got around over a red wine or two to talk about movies we had collectively seen in the early 70s.One guy, a staunch creationist, put the boot into Ken Russell. Two of his movies, The Devils and Woman in Love, came up, both of which I had seen, enjoyed, even if I found them disturbing.I have a large DVD collection and decided to source The Devils which proved very hard.I believe I might have sourced one of the last copies available.I watched it the other night and was awe struck by the boundaries that it took on. Like Clockwork Orange, I can't see such movies being made in 2012.It is not a perfect movie, and I will not repeat comments about the historical background which others have made, and in the end I had little sympathy for Grandier, but the film does ask some profound questions about religious purity and moral right, and the separation of the church and politics. I wonder if there is a good degree of cross-over with Arthur Miller's 'Crucible' and note others have asked the same question.Oliver Reed is very good as Grandier but I think Vanessa Redgrave steals the show. A rare, unique and controversial movie, but not for the faint hearted. Along with Marat/Sade one of the greater challenges in more recent film history IMHO. For enthusiasts, I think it is worth sourcing as I believe it may have been recently released on DVD.