<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Misleading
Review: "The Satanic Screen" is an exhaustively researched, yet non-didactic examination on depictions of the Hoofed One in Cinema. Schreck is a purported Satanist, so he finds a great deal of material on his icon lacking. According to the author, Satan/Lucifer is a bringer of light and knowledge, so therefore he finds much of the Satanic cinema lacking. He applauds the depiction of devil worshipers in "Rosemary's Baby" (who condone rape, mayhem and murder) but decries the reactionary tone of "The Exorcist." The book remains fascinating. I didn't realize that Terrence Fisher's creaky "The Devil Rides Out" (1966) to be so authoritative or that Lugosi and Karloff's "The Black Cat (1934) was based on an incident involving The Great Fraud Aleister Crowley. The book flows very well, beautifully written, and although many can't share the author's worldview it makes for fascinating reading.
Rating:
Summary: Another of Schreck's canibalistic appropriations
Review: Listen well, scholars:Nikolas Schreck, like so many "writers" today with no talent of their own, feeds off of the inspiration, originality and sweat equity of others. Schreck depends on compilations of other people's works, adding nothing new. Were I Charlie M., I'd be a little pissed that he had launched his career on my back and giving nothing in return. He, Aquino, and Flowers owe their identities to Anton LaVey, yet feign blindness to his brilliance, lest they pale by comparison to the truly creative spirit of LaVey. Schreck's writing is about as insightful as his music--NOT! He adds nothing to the body of work already in place on Satanism in the cinema. Open wide the gates of Hell, and toss the bum out!
Hugo
Rating: 
Summary: Satanic Screen = Satanism in Film
Review: This book has been unfairly rated and reviewed for what is it. The author presents a well researched and often pompous reviews of the history of satanic references in film.
I bought this book for that exact reason, to study this history of Satan (as in the satanic form) in film. Who better to write such a book than a satanist? Of course the philosophy of the satanist is quite different than your average author, and this is definatelty made clear in this book. I can see how the average reader who was looking to simply find a nicely reviewed book on the subject would get offended in reading this book, but all I have to say is that his research into the black arts is entirely accurate, which I can't say for most of the films that have satanic origins.
Don't shoot the messenger.
Rating:
Summary: Pass this one by
Review: This dreary book is more a study of satanism (rather than a study of the devil as a screen character) and simply fails to engage the serious film enthusiast unless he enjoys Schreck's self professed satanic beliefs. If you want a study of satanism, then give it a try, but if you are looking for a legitimate film study of satanism, look elsewhere.
<< 1 >>
| 
