The Devils

[rapta]

Sounds like BFI will be handling this on disc, as they reposted the news about the Clockwork collaboration on the BFI DVD, Blu-ray & UHD group on Facebook, probably to focus the inevitable barrage of questions over a 4K/Blu-ray release. Brilliant news, and funny that Ben Stoddart has gone from "no, we're not fucking releasing The Devils" to "yes, it turns out we are actually releasing The Devils" practically overnight.

For some reason I assumed Criterion would handle this in the US, but unless Janus have reposted anything on socials and I missed it, maybe Warner Bros will release it themselves Stateside?

[MichaelB]

Clockwork sounds like a spin-off Warner outfit.

[DRW.mov]

Clockwork sounds like a spin-off Warner outfit.

It is a newly formed WB "major minor" studio, run by Christian Parks, formerly of Neon, and a few other Neon ex-pats.
In terms of a disc release stateside it seems to very much still be up in the air. Both WB and Parks/Neon have long standing and healthy relationships with CC, and an easy argument could be made for them sticking with that pipeline. But we've yet to see if Clockwork has any plans for their own home video arm. Similarly, Neon was pretty consistently releasing films through Universal and then Decal, with spotlight titles going to Criterion, before occasionally doing some "boutique" releases themselves (Oldboy, No Other Choice).

All that to say, Clockwork is a totally new company and while they're under the WB banner, similar to Focus under Universal, they are run rather differently. So we'll just have to wait and see.

[Altair]

Truly the end times of cinema with this being released. The rapture can only be around the corner now.

[rapta]

Worth noting the last high profile Warner Bros license BFI handled was Get Carter, and WB themselves released that in the US. What happens for the US remains to be seen, but I could see Criterion going out of their way to try and get the US rights. They may not succeed, but always worth a try.

[Finch]

Re-reading the BFI booklet piece about the censorship battles Russell fought with the BBFC and Warners, it seems that the removal of the rape of Christ aside, the cuts and trims imposed on the film prior to the UK release in 1971 amount to trims to Sister Jeanne's exorcism (including the removal of the bloodied syringe and the anal rape) and more graphic shots of Grandier's torture and his burning at the stake. It's nuts that Warners had also asked for the removal of the crosscutting from the rape of Christ to Grandier's sacrament -- the juxtaposition is what makes the entire sequence!

I'll say that if WB end up releasing the 4K and BD themselves statewide instead of Criterion, I'd have sympathy for the Beckers feeling hard done by if indeed a verbal agreement had been made that Criterion would have the home video license. I'd prefer for it to be Criterion unless Warner Clockwork are more conscientious about the grading than their colleagues were with Warner's European UHD of Barry Lyndon!

Since the movie opens October 16, I don't imagine CC or WB releasing the disc before November stateside.

[Lowry_Sam]

Given that it has been on and off the channel over the past several years (most recently with the nunsploitation theme) & frequently shows up under the all-time favorites category, surely Criterion would still be a strong contender.

[dwk]

I'll say that if WB end up releasing the 4K and BD themselves statewide instead of Criterion, I'd have sympathy for the Beckers feeling hard done by if indeed a verbal agreement had been made that Criterion would have the home video license.

Even though WB has already released them on UHD, getting the rest of WB's Kubrick titles for a box set is a pretty good apology. (I assume the verbal agreement, if there is one, was along the lines of "if we want to release it we will, if we want to license it out you get it.")

[jtarvainen]

One thing the Hell on Earth documentary doesn’t make clear is whether the rediscovered Rape of Christ footage contained the intercutting, i.e. were Kermode et al. simply able to insert the full scene into the film as-is, or did they need to make creative choices of their own regarding the intercutting?

[GaryC]

Re-reading the BFI booklet piece about the censorship battles Russell fought with the BBFC and Warners, it seems that the removal of the rape of Christ aside, the cuts and trims imposed on the film prior to the UK release in 1971 amount to trims to Sister Jeanne's exorcism (including the removal of the bloodied syringe and the anal rape) and more graphic shots of Grandier's torture and his burning at the stake. It's nuts that Warners had also asked for the removal of the crosscutting from the rape of Christ to Grandier's sacrament -- the juxtaposition is what makes the entire sequence!

A relatively minor thing, but one BBFC cut was the word "cunt", which seems to have been overdubbed as "slut", which I suspect will still be the case whatever additional material is in this restoration. The Devils wasn't the only film the BBFC cut that word out of, before they passed it for the first time two months later in Carnal Knowledge.

[kindaikun]

One thing the Hell on Earth documentary doesn’t make clear is whether the rediscovered Rape of Christ footage contained the intercutting, i.e. were Kermode et al. simply able to insert the full scene into the film as-is, or did they need to make creative choices of their own regarding the intercutting?

I’m sure Kermode has mentioned this somewhere, but I seem to remember him saying the scene as featured in Hell on Earth was put together by the editor of the doc whereas when the SD “director’s cut” was later prepared, Russell worked with his editor to recreate it, but I may be misremembering.

[The Curious Sofa]

I only have seen this once, decades ago, on British TV. I liked it and especially enjoyed Derek Jarman's set design, but then I always held out for a restoration to revisit it.

[MichaelB]

A relatively minor thing, but one BBFC cut was the word "cunt", which seems to have been overdubbed as "slut", which I suspect will still be the case whatever additional material is in this restoration. The Devils wasn't the only film the BBFC cut that word out of, before they passed it for the first time two months later in Carnal Knowledge.

To quote what John Trevelyan allegedly said to Ken Russell, "I don't think the British public is quite ready for 'cunt'", although, as you say, he changed his mind—or, more likely, bowed to the inevitable—not long afterwards.

Whether this is restorable depends on whether the original audio stems survive. When I was working on Indicator's The Camp on Blood Island there's a bit where a woman is blatantly saying "whore", whose lip movements are quite different from the "slut" on the soundtrack, but I assume that was a post-production change. (Hammer was generally very aware indeed of what the BBFC would and wouldn't allow; they were keen to push the envelope slightly, but not at the price of risking their investment.)

I’m sure Kermode has mentioned this somewhere, but I seem to remember him saying the scene as featured in Hell on Earth was put together by the editor of the doc whereas when the SD “director’s cut” was later prepared, Russell worked with his editor to recreate it, but I may be misremembering.

No, that's exactly what happened. The Hell on Earth doc was screened in 2002, and it was only after that when Russell and Michael Bradsell reintegrated the footage properly for their semi-restoration, which was unveiled in 2004. (I was in the audience for said unveiling, so I can be precise about the date.)

[jtarvainen]

That's interesting, thanks!

(Apparently Michael Bradsell also edited the documentary; never noticed that before.)

[Never Cursed]

First things first: a huge thank you to Finch for sending me a copy of Craig Lapper's essay. Also, spoilers for this film abound in this post.

As MichaelB and Finch have noted, it details each specific change that the BBFC and Warners imposed upon the film. The most immediate and important takeaway is that most of the cuts following the removal of the "rape of Christ" and femurbone scenes (i.e., the material that is presumably not recoverable) are attempts to tone down scenes that remain in the film. In other words, there are no further "lost scenes" and the cuts imposed by Warners and the BBFC are relatively minor when compared to what remains in the film. It should also be noted that, per Lapper, some of the very first cuts were made from the film by Russell after showing the film privately to Trevelyan and Harlech. Russell describes these as removal of the sight of feces after Redgrave's enema scene (though this can still be briefly seen), trimming the whipping, and unspecified trims to the "rape of Christ" sequence.

The requested cuts, as enumerated in the Lapper essay, are as follows:

Warners cuts

1. A reduction in the licking of Christ's wounds during the dream sequence.
2. A reduction to the scene in which the Mother Superior masturbates in her cell, and a reduction in the flagellation.
3. A reduction to sight of Grandier's tongue being tortured.
4. The removal of all sight of excrement on the Mother Superior's leg after the enema is administered. Also perhaps 'greater discretion' in the enema sequence generally.
5. A reduction to sight of the nuns having sex in the convent, perhaps retaining a high angle shot only.
6. A reduction in the mime sequence to remove 'dildo sucking' and 'red crotch' shots (note: by this is meant shots of the mimes and mummers during Grandier's execution).
7. A reduction in the amount of inter-cutting between the reading of the letter and the King's shooting sequence. [Presumably this was a stylistic point rather than a censorship matter.]
8. The removal of the inter-cutting between Grandier's sacrament by the lake and the exorcism scene in the scene in the Church. [Ostensibly, the
studio suggested this because the inter-cutting reduced the 'impact' of Oliver Reed's performance. However, it was also acknowledged to the BBFC that, 'I know you have a number of notes on individual items within the exorcism sequence. Some of them would, of course, be lost by cutting the film as suggested above; and there are certain things in the exorcism prior to the King's departure which I know (the BBFC) object to'.]
9. A reduction to the Mother Superior's final scene with the syringe and bone.
10. A reduction to sight of Grandier's legs after the wedges have been hammered in.

BBFC initial requested cuts

Reel 3- In the plague sequence shorten the shots of the woman victim screaming and dying on bed. [BBFC cut only.]
Reel 5- Shorten the Mother Superior's fantasy of copulation with Grandier in the image of the crucified Christ; in particular shots of her licking his wounds and subsequent shots of them both on the ground. [BBFC and studio cut.]
Reel 6 - Remove shot of Mother Superior masturbating, opening this scene with the reactions of the watching nun. [BBFC and studio cut.]
Reel 7 - Considerably reduce the sequence in which the torturers use a syringe on the Mother Superior; removing shots of insertion between her legs, shot of syringe with tip bloody and all anal penetration. (Remove also later sequence of syringe used in Mother Superior's mouth producing vomiting.) Remove also 'cunt' and 'fuck me'. [BBFC and studio cut.]
Reels 9 & 10- Further reduce the 'orgy', in particular removing shots of two nuns (one with metal collar and chain) rolling together on the floor, all shots of nuns masturbating on the figure of crucified Christ, shots of Father Mignon masturbating on the gallery, and shots of the nun rubbing the candle sexually. (We should consider removing the second part of the 'orgy' entirely, up to the entrance of Grandier. This involves re-editing with the scenes of Grandier and the sacrament at the lakeside - being continuous without the intercut scenes). [BBFC and studio cut - it is worth noting Trevelyan's use of the phrase 'further reduce orgy as this clearly implies the scene had been edited following the January screenings of the film, as also implied by Ken Russell's undated note to Trevelyan in which he noted that he had 'cut the orgy in 2'.]
Reel 11 - Remove shots of Grandier's tongue being pricked by torture [BBFC and studio cut.]
Reel 13 – Reduce the number of blows on the wedges, and remove both shots of Grandier's legs covered with blood. [BBFC and studio cut.]
Reel 14 - Remove shots of mummer with simulated genitals, and all of the fellatio mime. [BBFC and studio cut.] Remove the final shots of Grandier in the flames when his face is charred. [BBFC cut only.] Remove shots of Mother Superior using syringe on herself, and all shots of her kissing the phallic bone and the implication that she uses it to masturbate. [BBFC and studio cut.]

Lapper then reproduces some of the back-and-forth between Russell and the BBFC re: cuts to the UK version; I'll omit this for space, but can post it if anyone wants to see it. Obviously, the "rape of Christ" and femurbone scenes (as Russell left them after cutting the former somewhat following his showing the movie to Trevelyan and Harlech) still exist. After taking a cursory look at the version of the film circulating on back channels (with the full "rape of Christ" sequence cut back in), it's difficult to tell how much some of these shots ended up being "reduced." Obviously Grandier's legs, closeups of the enema's effects, and the mummers/mimes are gone, but Grandier's tongue, the plague victim, and the Christ's wound-licking/sex with Christ fantasy shots still remain, and, in the longer version, the two instances of intercutting that irritated Warners are present.

TLDR: Having seen the longest circulating version of the film and read descriptions of what remains absent from it (and is presumably lost), I don't think this new, presumably definitive restoration will be missing much of importance - though I think the movie is just okay and wouldn't really gain or lose much from the addition or subtraction of what ultimately amounts to inserts of grotesque details. Honestly, I think the movie's reputation is overinflated by the hyperbolic response of basically everyone around Russell freaking out at the movie's depiction of blasphemy. If anything, the comparison reminded me just how much norms shifted over the course of ten years - was Zulawski's Possession cut at all for its UK release (even if it got an X rating)?

[domino harvey]

TLDR: Having seen the longest circulating version of the film and read descriptions of what remains absent from it (and is presumably lost), I don't think this new, presumably definitive restoration will be missing much of importance - though I think the movie is just okay and wouldn't really gain or lose much from the addition or subtraction of what ultimately amounts to inserts of grotesque details.

I think it will be interesting to see mass response to this film once it releases, as it’s unavailability has built it up the same way we’ve seen so many other “rare” films and they all lose a good deal of cachet once they’re more widely available, because I’d agree that this is just an okay (at best) movie, and one grossly overinflated in import by its absence. I think it will easily sell out whatever limited edition it receives because frankly movies that have a “naughty” sheen like this (and it’s not even that wild) keep getting released

[Never Cursed]

I think it will be interesting to see mass response to this film once it releases, as it’s unavailability has built it up the same way we’ve seen so many other “rare” films and they all lose a good deal of cachet once they’re more widely available, because I’d agree that this is just an okay (at best) movie, and one grossly overinflated in import by its absence. I think it will easily sell out whatever limited edition it receives because frankly movies that have a “naughty” sheen like this (and it’s not even that wild) keep getting released

Agreed on all counts, even if I do want to see the restoration in theaters just for the overamped reaction of people my age who haven't had access to the version on back channels. I recently saw Fellini Casanova (also for my tastes an okay movie) with a pretty young and hip crowd, and I was quite surprised and embarrassed at how much they responded to the even milder, almost cartoonish grotesqueries of that movie.

I'm curious how many times people here have actually seen one of these kinds of movies (one that's been built up as a cult object to insane degrees because of unavailability/censorship) and have come out feeling that it merited the hype. The only two that I can think of off the top of my head where I found the reputation to match the movie itself were The Mother and the Whore and On the Silver Globe, and both of those I assume would turn off basically any mainstream audience.

[denti alligator]

For the record, I think it's a fantastic film--maybe not a masterpiece, but really an incredible achievement. The visuals are audacious not just in the content but in the presentation. Beautiful use of different lenses, amazing mise-en-scene (especially costume and set design), and jarring editing all add up to something outrageous and mesmerizing.

[MichaelB]

I first saw it on the big screen circa 1984 (on the second half of a double bill with Altered States, also a first-time viewing!), and that was pretty much my reaction. Quite aside from anything else, it's one of the few big-budget British films that isn't at all afraid to get political, both in terms of internal Catholic politics and the wider machinations outside the convent. And there's no other film that looks or feels quite like it.

I took my ex to see the 2004 semi-restoration on the big screen, and that was pretty much her reaction too—she fully expected it to be campy nonsense, and was most surprised when it wasn't.

[denti alligator]

Right, and the content itself is not just pushing the boundaries for the sake of pushing the boundaries. The political stance is serious, yet angry and unapologetic.

[Finch]

I think it's a masterpiece. If it opens theatrically in my area, I am going to go to a matinee screening. I don't want my first experience of seeing it on the big screen marred by idiots unable to watch anything unironically.

[Finch]

I'll add that I found the film pretty harrowing even in the cut version and think that now the rape of Christ and femurbone scenes are reinstated, it finds the right balance between the serious intent and the more sensational aspects. This is not Mark of the Devil and it doesn't need additional graphic torture inserts.

[beamish14]

I think it's a masterpiece. If it opens theatrically in my area, I am going to go to a matinee screening. I don't want my first experience of seeing it on the big screen marred by idiots unable to watch anything unironically.

I’ve seen it in 35mm twice. I think both times, audiences giggled a bit at Vanessa Redgrave’s histrionics, but they were completely silent by the end.

I remember the programmer telling us that we were seeing Martin Scorsese’s print of it, and that he had frequently loaned it out to repertory houses

[bad future]

I think it's a masterpiece. If it opens theatrically in my area, I am going to go to a matinee screening. I don't want my first experience of seeing it on the big screen marred by idiots unable to watch anything unironically.

It's Friday, what are you up to tonight? I'm grabbing a six pack and heading to the cinema with the boys to laugh at Ken Russell's The Devils

(I totally relate to this fear... I particularly remember almost a decade ago sitting through a packed screening of Halloween '78 where the whole theater burst out laughing every time anything ominous happened, so 'wise' were they all to 'tropes.' But I think if this happened in my city in 2026 for The Devils I might even be happy about it.)

[GaryC]

My first watch was in 35mm at university, at 4am at the end of an all-night horror session. It turned out to be a print shortened by about ten minutes, maybe to be reissued on a double bill. I really couldn't tell you what was missing. I saw the semi-restoration at one of the BFI Southbank showings, saw the UK release cut on BBC2 (introduced by James Ferman) as part of their Forbidden Weekend in 1995 and more recently on the BFI's DVD.

I'm not the greatest Russell fan out there, but it's certainly a pretty considerable film though I don't go along with the theory that just because something's "transgressive" it's automatically great. As to whether previously unavailable films turn up, if they live up to the hype, for just one example, I do think The Wicker Man is somewhat overrated due to the length of time before a full version was available. So we'll see what happens with The Devils after it shows in Cannes this month. (I saw what was probably the first UK showing of the original version of The Wicker Man, at Eastercon in 1992, projected from someone's NTSC video copy.)