The Devil’s Mistress, 1966

Four Cowboys, a preacher and a beautiful girl—what could possibly go wrong? Try five murders and one rape.

The Creature Features Movie Guide (1981) slams The Devil’s Mistress as “hackneyed,” but we are inclined to disagree with John Stanley. So either the crappy 80s film we watched the night before has warped our little brains or simply alerted us what real shit looks like. Either way, we liked this twisted little cowboy tale.

Cue cowboys on a dusty desert trail and the smell of horse sweat. Two of our posse are repulsive right from the get go (Joe and Charlie), one is young and naive (Frank), and the forth—the enigmatic leader of the group (Will)—is tough and complex but seemingly a good guy deep down.

The cowboys are on the run. They come across an isolated cabin in the desert and are invited in for a meal by a preacher man (Jeroboam) and his mute wife (Athaliah/Leah).

Instantly, we know the wife is in danger from the two cowboys who have earlier made it clear they are violent and indiscriminate rapists. The enigmatic leader is suspicious of the preacher and his wife and orders his men to leave. While he and the younger one ride off, the remaining two insist on a staying for a bit of fun: they kill the fearless preacher man then rape and kidnap his wife. The cowboys then regroup.

While M wants this to be a rape-revenge film it is not so easy to classify. While the mute girl is an active party in the deaths of each of the cowboys, she is “the devil’s mistress.” It would appear, therefore, that she is acting on behalf of the devil or at the instigation of the devil. The killings are not clearly motivated by her desire for revenge, a fundamental requirement of a rape-revenge fantasy—although she does seem to enjoy her part. (Whether the preacher man is the Devil himself is also not clear. He says he left Salem with Leah "to escape religious persecution," but he reappears after he has been killed and tossed down a well.)

In fact, Leah’s rape seems to be a deliberate plan by the devil to place temptation before the two cowboys—who have been fantasising and joking about raping and killing a "squaw”—and therefore justifying his punishment of them. This is a perfectly orthodox representation of the Devil, theologically speaking, since it is his function to offer temptation to mortals to test their moral fortitude. If you fail, if the Devil succeeds in tempting you into sin, then God lets the Devil do as he pleases with you and your imortal soul. And the Devil, knowing that these two scumbags would not be able to resist an unarmed man and mute woman, despite the fact that he has just offered them hospitality by feeding them, sets the perfect trap for them. (The enigmatic leader senses the trap, and decamps for this reason.)

As for the revenge: Leah kills two of the cowboys in a particularly interesting way (the other two die by snake-bite and hanging). She seems to have the power to drain the life-energy out of her victims by kissing them anywhere on the body: lips, neck, wrists, any exposed skin. The first time we see Leah in action is when she kisses one of the men who had raped her. She seems to take great pleasure in this embrace, which is highly suspicious. When her victim is immediately affected by the embrace, then weakens and dies, we realise why she was so keen to kiss him.

Stanley describes Leah as a “female vampire” but she has no pointed teeth, she does not bite anyone, there is no blood of any description, and no fancy special effects to explain what she is doing. The draining of life-energy is very similar to the form of vampirism that appears in Lifeforce (1985), but the victims of the “space vampires” in this film (Colin Wilson’s novel—which the film is based on—is called The Space Vampires) draw sparks and ghostly spirits from the mouths of their victims, and the victims are left as withered and desicated as Egyptian mummies. Here, she kisses them, and they just weaken in her embrace.

For a simple film this works really well. The cast is tiny (only six people) and amateurs (five of them appear in no other film on imdb), and the cowboys are stereotypes, but they are wonderfully realised. And, given the way in which the four cowboys have been differentiated (morally), it remains unclear right up until the end what will be their individual fates. Also, although Joan Stapleton may be no Mathilda May (the female lead in Lifeforce) her Barbara Steele-looks are perfect for the film and the scenery is just beautiful.

The Devil’s Mistress breaks conventions of the vampire genre but sticks faithfully to Christian theology. And, although not strictly a rape-revenge film, it skates close to the real deal, offering enormous satisfaction for the female viewer despite Leah’s part as merely the agent of the devil rather than being the devil herself.

Santo and Blue Demon vs Dracula and the Wolf Man, 1973

M. didn't like Santo y Blue Demon contra Drácula y el Hombre Lobo. At all. Except the wrestling scenes. She did like them. A lot.

P. did like the film. Handsome Count, sexy vamps, diaphanous gowns, sixties/seventies sets (including cool dresses, cars and phones), caves, and to cap it off two masked wrestlers, wearing cardigans (not ironically—but who'd ask them?) throughout the whole film. Niiiccceee. It could only be improved by gratuitous nudity. But you can't have everything.

The Bestest Female Vampires of All Time

After careful consideration and long deliberation we have decide that the most enigmatic beautiful screen vampires amongst the many we have seen are:

Annette Vadim as "Carmilla" in Blood and Roses (1960) [see our previous post here]

Ofelia Montesco as "Tandra, vampire priestess" in Santo vs. The Vampire Women (1962)

Pia Degermark as "Betty Williams"/"Clarimonde" in The Vampire Happening (1971) [see below]

Maribel Martín as "Susan" in The Blood Spattered Bride (1972) [see our previous post here]

Exactly what it is about these three women it is difficult to say, but the quality common to each of them is the heart-break you feel when the camera isn’t on them. We would both willing give up a pulsing artery for these vamps!

The Witch in Love, 1966

In La Strega in Amore [aka The Witch or The Witch in Love] (1966) we do not discover that the witch is a witch until the finale; nor do we discover precisely who the witch’s enigmatic "daughter" really is. Damiano Damiani (the director) does a lot of “show, not tell”—there is much in this that remains cryptic—which is precisely why it is such an enjoyable film to watch.

There is a plot that needs to be explained first. A strange older woman (Consuelo) lures the young cocksure Sergio to her stunning but decrepit mansion to offer him a job as her librarian (the library is stunning). Sergio is so sure of himself that he can only imagine that Consuelo is motivated by a desire for his sexual services, a prospect which disgusts him. Consuelo does a fairly good job of putting him back in his box on the subject. His disinterest in the job offer terminates once he meets the old lady’s daughter. A stunning Italian beauty, Aura is attractive, seductive and strange! (Within five minutes she propose they undress each other, using their teeth only! WOW.)

[Consuelo reading from her journals]

[Sergio is intrigued]

[Sergio disrobing Aura with his teeth]

Sergio wants to protect the lovely Aura from a not-very-clearly-articulated threat and takes on the job, but he discovers he must first oust the existing librarian. That entails murder which cements his connection to the strange old woman and her daughter. The first hint of witchcraft comes with a bongo drum dance and night-time action. It becomes clear that the old woman is up to no good, although it is never clear exactly what she is up to or how she is working her magic. Aura comes and goes at her leisure leaving poor Sergio bereft without her. He slowly becomes an emotional mess much like his predecessor.

[The librarian wants to avoid conflict]

In the closing moments of the film a new potential librarian arrives at which point Sergio realizes he is about to suffer the same fate as the previous librarian; a pattern repeated who knows how many times. Sergio's responce is to put Consuelo in a bonfire, an act which her identification as a witch.

[Consuelo in flames]

The intriguing aspect of the film is trying to work out the relationship between Consuelo and Aura. They do not appear on-screen together until the middle of the film and when they do they appear to mirror each other’s movements, which is disconcerting to watch but not really enough to arouse an accusation of witchcraft. It is not until Sergio locks Aura in his room that things get seriously weird. Aura has quite a hissy fit and tries to conceal herself amongst the clothes on a coat rack in an attempt to hide her transformation into Consuelo! This however does not explain how the two women can appear together (clearly Conseulo isn’t using a glamour spell on herself).

[Consuelo and Aura, mirroring each other's movements]

[Aura dancing]

Other unexplained magical elements are the (implied) sacrifice of cats, the exotic and magical herbal teas that Conseulo drinks and the telepathic link that exists between Aura and Conseulo. Other mystifying moments include Conseulo’s revelation that Aura is not her really her daughter, but she leaves the viewer hanging when she fails to elaborate on who or what Aura is!

M: Aura is a stunning seductress, but it is the story of Conseulo that is most interesting. The first meeting between Sergio and Conseulo paints the most glorious picture of this eccentric older woman. Firstly she rebuffs his suggestions of sexual interest in such a confident off-handed way that indicates both her vibrant sexual history and a high degree of impatience with his self-assurance. It makes her quite likable. The sexual tension is heightened further by her late husband’s memoirs which she encourages Sergio to read from. The memoirs reveal a young and sexually aggressive Conseulo. She is a shadowy figure that scares the younger generation! She is an old woman struggling to exist in a society which doesn’t need or want her sexual power anymore, although it burns strongly for her still. Her youth is full of sexual vigor which in the whore/virgin dichotomy, she is not entitled to enjoy. Clearly, however, she did/does enjoy it.

Her enthusiasm for Sergio fades (can't say I blame her!) and it is his fear of redundancy that pushes him over the edge into violence at the end of the film (he could have accepted his fate and just left!). Perhaps none of the 'librarians' needed to die if they had each just understood they weren’t welcome anymore and left instead of breaking the restraining order and put themselves in danger; I mean talk about STUPID. The older woman knows how to easily manipulate men’s sex drive and their bravado to her advantage, although Sergio seems to have more testosterone than previous dupes. He finds a way to punish Conseulo for her sexual desire by physically burning her for her passions; for her desire to transgress; for being ‘disgusting’, a word Sergio uses repeatedly like venom. I like her, I like her cunning and her brave sexual history.

P: It is not clear who the titular witch is (the "Strega" who is "in Amore"): Conseulo or Aura? Aura is the only one who shows affection for Sergio, she is the one who seduces, embraces, and has sex with him; while Conseulo scorns his suggestion that she is sexually interested in him, and most of her exchanges with him are more aggressive rather than seductive. But by the end of the film it is not clear whether it is possible to separate the two female characters, even though they appear on screen side by side. Disconcerting and strange.

Blood & Roses, 1960 [74 minute version]

Blood & Roses aka Et mourir de plaisir* (1960) is a French production in English**, hard to get and even harder to forget once you have seen it. Never has a female vampire been so gorgeous and stylish. The film is a cinematic paean to the beauty of the director’s wife, Annette Vadim, just as Barbarella (1968) was for his later wife, Jane Fonda. Blood & Roses is sumptuous, the main players are gorgeous, the sets are stunning, the costumes are breath-taking and the score is a delight. This is a wonderful film, surely one of the best vampire films ever.

All this is obvious despite the fact that the only version of the film available today is a DVD rip of a 1990s VHS tape, a tape that is of the mutilated US version of the film. The original version was 87 minutes; but this was cut to 74 minutes by Paramount for the US market by chopping out all of the naughty lesbian scenes and adding a Blade Runner-esque voiceover at the start to explain the story. In the version we watched, the colours were washed out and the image and the sound were ‘soft’, but the film was still brilliant! That a decent print of this film is not available on DVD, while Andy Warhol’s piece of shit, Blood for Dracula (1974), is available in every DVD shop is a crime.

Although based on the Sheridan La Fanu, Carmilla story, there are some important differences. The beautiful Carmilla von Karnstein (Annette Vadim) is hopelessly in love with her cousin, Leopoldo, who is already betrothed to Georgia. This doomed love triangle mirrors the family history of 400 years earlier when Millarca, the family vampire, also besotted with her cousin, killed a succession of his suitors. The chilling story is told through the whispery voice of Carmilla, who seems already under the influence of the ancestral vampire, which sends a tingle down your spine! To put the film in a nutshell, which is not going to do it justice at all, Carmilla is possessed by Millarca’s vampiric spirit, she re-enacts her past and eventually gets Leopoldo.

* The French title translates as "To Die of Pleasure", but Blood and Roses are recurrent motifs, thus the English title.

** Some people claim that this film was shot in French and dubbed; this is rubbish. Not only are the actors clearly speaking English, but the tomb of Millarca reads "Here lies my love, Millarca", not "Voici se trouver mon amour, Millarca"

[The stunning Annette Vadim and Elsa Martinelli as Carmilla and Georgia]

[Mel Ferrer as Leopoldo]

[The heartbroken Carmilla]

[Carmilla is drawn to Millarca’s crypt]

[Carmilla's bleeding heart, which can only be seen thus in a mirror]

There are too many worthy scenes to go through here. The narrative elements are too clever and too many to list. But we like a challenge so here are our top six:

1. For visual beauty, the scene at the party as Carmilla strides passed the pool
2. For chills, the predatory chase of the servant girl by Carmilla/Millarca (also stunning beautiful)
3. For sophistication, the dueling piano scene
4. For emotional voltage, the broken wine glass at dinner scene
5. For sheer freakiness, the dream sequence
6. For fun, the ‘dance on your bed while your drunk’ scene

[Carmilla strides passed the pool]

The servant girl and Carmilla

Carmilla playing the piano (Carmilla's reflection comes into focus as Leopoldo enters the room)

Carmilla drinks from her broken wine glass

A scene from Georgia's dream sequence

Carmilla changing records after her bed-dance

We got our copy of Blood & Roses from www.VideoScreams.com [catalogue no. 1467 on this page], if anyone knows of a longer version then speak now!!

The entire film is also available at present chopped up into ten-minute chunks on YouTube. The following chunk is from the ball near the start of the film, including Annette Vadim's solo bed-dance. You can follow the links from this to the rest of the film. Enjoy!

[UPDATE March 2010: for a discussion of the 77 Minute version: see here]

A Witch Without a Broom, 1967

I prefer witches with brooms after watching this appalling time-travel flick. A young witch from the 1400’s falls in love with a university history teacher from the 1960s after viewing him in her sorcerer-father’s time-travelling, smoking fish-bowl thingy. The iconic broom is replaced by a large magical pendant that controls the fish bowl. The witch and the university teacher go on a wild journey through time, although by accident as the apprentice witch struggles to control the time-travel pendant. There is a touch of the Benny Hills about this ridiculous history lesson.

[Marianna and her father (Wurlitz the Wizard)]

The traveler’s sourjoun takes them through the prehistoric grunting fur-wearer stage, what looks to be medieval Europe, then a short stay in the glory of the Roman empire, complete with engaging man-flesh gladiators, before getting to the best bit of all—the future! 2006 has metallic cleavage-enhancing uniforms with shoulder pads to outdo 80’s fashion victims. Only seven beauties remain, lonely and sexually frustrated (they have been orbiting the Earth for 20 years after the apocalypse). Although they haven’t seen a man it doesn’t take them long to get the drinks and canapés flowing in an attempt at seduction—a prelude to repopulating the Earth. In keeping with the 60’s theme the hero is endless propositioned and endlessly willing and the heroine has a fountain of blonde hair.



While Marianna starts out looking like the bad girl as she disobeys her father and draws the object of her affection across time she proves to be hapless with magic and she needs her father to get out of trouble. Predictably, she must give up her magic and her identity to eventually live her life with the man she loves, which of course she does. Disturbingly, she doesn’t remember him although he remembers her. But it all ends well when inside her head she hears the voice of her father encouraging her to return the amorous affections of the seeming-stranger and it all ends with a snog. ERRRRRRRRRRRRRRR. Go for it Freudians.

[Marianna receiving her father's message]

M.