I guess I shouldn't be taken aback by all the references to "Hammer," or how this film is reminiscent of their style. I guess any horror from Britain made during this period might conjure those thoughts, as I was having them myself. The style, the atmosphere, the hot women running around throughout the proceedings.Of course, I've heard "Roger Corman" too, but I haven't seen much of his work. At any rate, this is good stuff. Not quite Hammer "Dracula," but pleasing to the eyes and the finale is noteworthy. Good B-Movie fun...

In a remote village in Brittany, Count Sinistre (Hubert Noel) is reactivated as a vampire four hundred years after being buried alive for his crimes. He kills and reactivates a gypsy girl called Tania (Carole Gray) to be his bride in blood. Meanwhile, writer Paul Baxter (William Sylvester), is holidaying with friends in the village. Two of them discover the resting place of the vampires whilst exploring caves and are murdered and another, Anne (Rona Anderson), is drowned after she discovers Sinistre's secret. However, Baxter and antiques dealer, Madeleine (Diana Decker) escape back to England. But, Sinistre is close behind as Baxter has stolen his secret Talisman, a gold necklace carved in the shape of a bat. Meanwhile, we learn that Madeline is involved with Sinistre's cult and that she helped him move to England. In addition, Baxter's new girlfriend, the model Karen Steele (Tracy Reed), is in grave danger as Sinistre intends to make her his new vampire bride...Notable as the first British horror film to bring vampirism into a contemporary setting, but it is a disappointingly tame offering with little in the way of thrills or suspense thanks to Lance Comfort's flat direction and since most of its horrors take place off screen. Lyn Fairhurst's screenplay has promise with its inclusion of themes like reincarnation and witchcraft as well as vampirism. Sadly, however, they are poorly integrated into the basic plot and we are left with a mish mash of occult mumbo jumbo that make very little sense.Nevertheless, there are still some things to enjoy here. Reg Wyer's Eastmancolor camera-work is atmospheric including a beautiful shot of Tania lying in her coffin surrounded by red blossoms as the Count sets about reactivating her as an Undead. Another great set piece is a portrait of Karen, painted by Sinistre, which gushes blood when Tania slashes it with a knife in a jealous rage since she knows that Karen is to replace her as the Count's vampire bride. The film has no real outstanding merits in the acting field and William Sylvester, who was excellent in Lance Comfort's notable b-pic thriller, Blind Corner, here playing a writer turned vampire hunter is a rather dull hero. We don't think much of Baxter's chat up techniques either. At a party where he meets Karen for the first time, he invites her back to his flat by saying: "If you get hungry, I know a place where the scrambled eggs taste great. I cook with a non stick saucepan." Overall, Devils Of Darkness, is a big disappointment considering its status as Britain's first modern day vampire film and the fact that a promising plot is left woefully underdeveloped. It is a film that I would like to see remade because, with a better developed script and a stronger cast, it could well be a front rank genre offering. But, there are some bright moments and die hard fans of British horror cinema, like myself, will love it anyway as it is in itself a pleasant reminder of a period of British filmmaking that has long since disappeared.

I'm at a loss as to how the actors were able to go through with this film with straight faces. However, two points of the film have some merit to them. The dance scene in the beginning was fabulous; in fact, it didn't fail to draw you into the movie, despite the bomb effect you are treated to after that. The only real acting that caught my eye was that of Karen, the love interest. She too came in at a time when you were about ready to give the whole thing up. Again, she had the quality of drawing you into the relationship that was being cultivated between the main characters. Other than that, it was more or less of a bad TV movie, guaranteed to give you a few good laughs.

this movie was shown on the b.b.c.last night immediately after clint eastwoods brilliant ESCAPE FROM ALCATRAZ, it was late ,eyes were drooping,thought a bit of horror would go down well,what a shocker (in the worse sense), with it being filmed in 1965 you automatically expect A HAMMER PRODUCTION*****THIS IS NOT A HAMMER PRODUCTION******* and boy can you tell, the acting is wooden,the women are not bad but certainly not the seductive,voluptuous type were are use to in HAMMER FILMS and the plot basically just silly and to be frank nothing really happens, needless to say it was the longest hour and a half of my life, well,tiredness got the better of me, if it was a good film i would have stuck it out, but, the awfulness took its toll and the off button swiftly was pressed.did this film give me nightmares ? YES but once i fell asleep i was o.k.watch this at your peril.............. as my mum would say "wouldn,t frighten the cat"