The Devonsville Terror

Trailer—The Devonsville Terror

This typically mediocre horror flick is only worthwhile if you are a die-hard fan of the genre. The acting is good enough, and the story was okay, but as usual, this is a horror film that is not the least bit scary, or even creepy. If there is one very good thing about this movie, it is the look of the picture. I'm sure I'm not alone when I say that horror films that were filmed 15 to 25 years ago tend to have a dark, cold, and often lonely feel to them, and that the quality of today's technology is actually a bad thing when trying to film a scary movie these days. But the great look of this film still doesn't mean that any of you should bother watching it...

Three women are killed, by pigs, a burning wagon wheel, and a burning at the stake, for witchcraft. Whether they were really witches or not is not clear, though as I've read someone else point out: there is a curse on the Doctor's family that appears to be real. The Doctor, played by Donald Pleasance, has maggots poking out of his skin that he plucks out with tweezers. He continues to practice even though this doesn't seem very hygienic. He'd like to end the curse (understandably), but it's unclear what he does towards that end. He hypnotizes some people so that they remember their past lives, or their ancestors' lives, or maybe he's implanting suggestions. Three women arrive in town about simultaneously: a radio host, an environmentalist, and a school teacher. The townspeople mostly don't like them, and begin to think they are witches, partly misunderstanding the women, partly making up lies about them. There are some good scenes, and while a bit slow, its main fault seems to be holes in the story. There's a lot of information missing that is not of the sort that can be left as mysteries. There's a really terrible demon or devil face that appears a few times. It looks sort of like what Bill Paxton's character turns into in Weird Science. There's also some bad voice-over at the beginning and end that is evidently supposed to be by the Doctor (Donald Pleasance), but sounds more like Kiefer Sutherland (who is not in the movie).

Typically I dislike films about witches (with the exception of Dario Argento's horror classic Suspiria), but The Devonsville Terror is quite amusing. The script is disastrous, the performances are over-acted, and the special effects are anything but special. The plot is devoid of any significant twists or surprises. The audience anticipates the impending events faster than do the characters, and the conclusion is accomplished suddenly and sloppily. However, I can't deny that this film makes me curiously happy when I watch it. Something about the lighting and overall appearance of the film. The soundtrack is also quite good, and gives the film an eerie quality. I particularly like the scene where Walter Gibbs' face melts (the special effects are primitive but cleverly done using wax melting in time-lapse). That scene always gives me the creeps. The storyline, despite its uncreative, allows the characters to really show their true colors. Walter Gibbs' character specifically is quite gross, and almost matches with his looks. A film worth trying, and for those who are skeptical, Donald Pleasence of John Carpenter's Halloween also stars.

300 years after townies killed three witches, the citizens of Devonsville feels that crusading urge again when three new women (an environmentalist, a deejay, a schoolteacher) move into the community. Teacher Jenny (Suzanna Love) finds only local stud Matthew (Robert Walker Jr.) to be a willing dating prospect, which is bad because his ancestors were the ones who organized the witch killings. Meanwhile, Dr. Warley (Donald Pleasence) investigates the town's history to cure himself of the curse of having worms crawl out of his skin (really). This was another childhood viewing I decided to revisit that holds up as well as one would expect an 80s Ulli Lommel flick could. This flick is just plain weird at points though and full of bizarre scenes like when Paul Willson shows up at Jenny's house and gives this long rant about love before playing his violin. Lead Love was married to Lommel at the time (and apparently writing the checks) with both players fresh off the success of THE BOOGEYMAN (1980). She is probably the main appeal here. The end is pretty amusing as Jenny is revealed to be a witch with superpowers and she causes heads to roll, explode and melt. Then she splits town, with her relationship with Matthew left with no resolution and a guy trying to ape Pleasence's voice doing a voice over. Pretty sure Pleasence did one day of filming as all of his scenes are shot in the same room and he is wearing the same outfit. Filmed in Wisconsin, this had Bill Rebane working on the production and captures some gorgeous fall foliage.

Director Ulli Lommel this time created the idea of three women back in 1683 who are arrested for crimes that they obviously did not commit and are sentenced to death in three different gruesome ways which I will not describe (watch it!) Then the movie goes three hundred years into the present (1983) where in the town of Devonsville, there are all of the sudden three young beautiful women who mysteriously arrive to the town. This town is your average small-town where everyone knows your name 'cheers' style. Lommel does capture that small-town feel very successfully and I found myself drawn into the complex web of ignoramuses inhabiting this town. The only smart one in my opinion was Dr. Worley (Donald Pleasance), Pleasance always provides an utterly fantastic performance in any work he does and he didn't let up in this movie. The ending is a perfectly blatant ripoff or homage if you will, of the Raiders of the Lost Ark. You would think Lommel would pay homage to another slasher flick but oh well. Otherwise this movie wasn't too bad, Suzanna Love is great as always but I wasn't to keen about her short hair, what do I know? It was 1983 and I guess that was the big 'thing' then. Witch fans will love this flick no doubt. Peace

This movie had a nice old feeling to it as the commentator before me said, but that's it. The story is stupid, the acting is mediocre, and the effects are horrible. And the whole arm/worm thing is disgusting might I add. And many of the things just look fake....I love horror movies, and on a scale of 1-10 compared to Children of the Corn (which was made just a year after this;1984)...I'd give it a 1.5 for the lonely feeling, and the .5 for effort.

Well I've been watching a lot of really weird stuff but this one is worser than awful. Pityful. The plot is so stupid it's hard to believe; special effects are crappy and hilarious; characters are stereotypical to the extent that the moviegoer feels offended; nothing makes the least sense in this movie which is a pile of badly rearranged commonplaces of horror. More than this the setting is squalid and depressive, and the whole movie looks close to some very ugly TV series. Expect boredom to its highest. A completely unexplained end stops the audience's sufferings. And there is Donald Pleasance in the cast, too. Yuck.

Watching this movie a second time was very feasible. I understood the plot more better and I liked the movie better as well. If you really watch and pay attention to the movie, you will see that it has a strong plot that makes since. I think people don't like this movie because it was hardly any gore and it was kind of slow moving, but again, just pay attention to the plot it is a good move. *** 1/2 out of *****

Devonsville grocery store owner Walter Gibbs kills his sick wife, thus invoking the spirits of three women who were executed as witches three hundred years earlier. When the town's newest arrivals - teacher Jenny (Suzanna Love), environmentalist Chris (Mary Walden) and DJ Monica (Deanna Haas) - upset the locals with their progressive feminist thinking, the superstitious menfolk begin to believe that the women are the reincarnations of the long-dead witches. Ulli Lommel is the man responsible for the atrocious Boogeyman II (1983), but his next film, The Devonsville Terror (also '83), is surprisingly fun. The premise is trite, and the slow-burn approach might be off-putting to some, but the film is atmospheric, well acted and actually makes sense. It also features a solid supporting turn from Donald Pleasence as the town's doctor, some gratuitous nudity, and is top and tailed by gnarly violence, starting with the three executions - the first woman is eaten alive by pigs, the second is rolled down a hill strapped to a flaming cartwheel, and the third is burnt at the stake - and ending with some satisfying splatter - an axe in the head, an exploding noggin, and a Raiders of the Lost Ark style melting face - all of which goes to make it a more than reasonable time-waster. 6.5/10, rounded up to 7 for IMDb.