What do you think?
Rate this book
The Satanic Screen: An Illustrated Guide to the Devil in Cinema
Satan has figured in film since the very birth of cinema. "The Satanic Screen" documents all of Satan's cinematic incarnations, covering not only the horror genre but also a whole range of sub-genres including hardcore porn, mondo and underground film. Heavily illustrated with rare still photographs, posters and arcana, the book also investigates the perennial symbiotic interplay between Satanic cinema and leading occultists (for example, Aleister Crowley), making it essential reading for anyone interested in the Black Arts and their continuing representation in populist culture.
Nikolas Schreck is the editor of "The Manson File" (1988), and director of the film "Charles Manson Superstar" (1989). He is a world-respected authority on occultism and true crime.
Nikolas Schreck is the editor of "The Manson File" (1988), and director of the film "Charles Manson Superstar" (1989). He is a world-respected authority on occultism and true crime.
256 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2001
12 people are currently reading
824 people want to read
About the author
Nikolas Schreck
10 books593 followersAmerican writer, musician, film-maker, and spiritual teacher whose work focuses on magic, mysticism, mythology and the macabre. Schreck is married to Zeena Schreck (Formerly LaVey) the daughter of the founder of the Church of Satan, Anton Lavey
Together with his wife he founded the Sethian Liberation Movement and wrote books about sex magic, portrayal of Satan in cinema and Charles Manson.
He is also the founder of the gothic-industrial band Radio Werewolf, which was active from 1984 to 1992.
Together with his wife he founded the Sethian Liberation Movement and wrote books about sex magic, portrayal of Satan in cinema and Charles Manson.
He is also the founder of the gothic-industrial band Radio Werewolf, which was active from 1984 to 1992.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews
August 4, 2025
(June 2022)
I'm still looking for information on occult filmmaker Albin Grau, and he's one of the subjects covered in this obsessive, engaging study of the devil in film. I didn't learn anything new about Grau here but I sure found descriptions of a lot of obscure movies I want to see now. I thought I knew my cinematic Faust and damnation but Schreck has unearthed some truly lost lumps of brimstone. His style is light, amusing, and from a pro-Satan perspective. The history stops at the new millennium and I understand a new edition is on the way to bring the story up to date -- if Armageddon doesn't arrive first.
Recommended to friends of the devil and to film enthusiasts looking for new temptations.
(August 2025)
I read the revised edition to find out how cinematic Satan has fared since the new millennium. In an age when one can get spiritual advice from a mechanical "intelligence," and a foul-mouthed vice-lord is the elected darling of the religious right, the devil must be having the time of its life.
The book is as amusing as ever, not so much a film history as it is an eccentric examination of the effects of various occult belief systems on popular cinematic entertainment. I don't agree with all of M. Schreck's opinions, but I do concur that THE VVITCH is in a class of its own and he pointed me to a few post-2000 movies that I need to see.
I'm still looking for information on occult filmmaker Albin Grau, and he's one of the subjects covered in this obsessive, engaging study of the devil in film. I didn't learn anything new about Grau here but I sure found descriptions of a lot of obscure movies I want to see now. I thought I knew my cinematic Faust and damnation but Schreck has unearthed some truly lost lumps of brimstone. His style is light, amusing, and from a pro-Satan perspective. The history stops at the new millennium and I understand a new edition is on the way to bring the story up to date -- if Armageddon doesn't arrive first.
Recommended to friends of the devil and to film enthusiasts looking for new temptations.
(August 2025)
I read the revised edition to find out how cinematic Satan has fared since the new millennium. In an age when one can get spiritual advice from a mechanical "intelligence," and a foul-mouthed vice-lord is the elected darling of the religious right, the devil must be having the time of its life.
The book is as amusing as ever, not so much a film history as it is an eccentric examination of the effects of various occult belief systems on popular cinematic entertainment. I don't agree with all of M. Schreck's opinions, but I do concur that THE VVITCH is in a class of its own and he pointed me to a few post-2000 movies that I need to see.
October 1, 2018
Now that my studies are over and I'm free as a bird to read whatever non-fiction I like without feeling bogged down by obligatory exam crap, I've been eyeing a lot of my neglected non-fiction to-read lists and wishlists (yes, I have several, because apparently one would be too easy), particularly the half that has books I've added many many years ago. Of course, I chose the one book that I couldn't seem to find anywhere. In the end, I relied on my trusty friend AbeBooks again and managed to snag the only reasonably priced copy.
Was it worth paying over 40 pounds? I'd say mostly yes. The Satanic Screen has the same problems that these types of overviews generally have: occasionally, too much time is spent in plot descriptions (note: with spoilers), and sometimes some films only get an entry of a few sentences if they are unremarkable but still fit the topic in question.
Then again, Schreck has a real verve for writing and I enjoyed his vivid style immensely. Now, I should mention that he, although currently a Buddhist teacher, has a background in Satanism (and is married to Zeena Schreck, Anton LaVey's daughter and one of the most gorgeous humans on Earth), which obviously gives him a special authoritative stance on the topic. If he says a film captures Satanism particularly well, I trust his opinion.
A word of warning, though: Schreck is very opinionated about how he likes this topic to be portrayed on film. I wasn't bothered because I mostly agreed with everything what he said, but someone else might be annoyed by the subjectivity and his push towards a certain "acceptable" image of the Devil. Aleister Crowley fans might also be irked by the no holds barred rants that basically describe him as a snake oil charlatan.
Schreck's firm opinions also allowed me to finally realize why The Exorcist (1973) and The Omen (1976) have always rubbed me the wrong way. Schreck points out the conservatism (in both these two and others) that paints, for example, sexual behavior that is considered "abnormal" or explicit language as signs of diabolism. Instead of being thought-provoking spiritual journeys or truly terrifying films that take advantage of the anxiety caused by the Devil, they seem trivial, juvenile, and almost like Christian cautionary tales or scare tactics. I'd say The Exorcist is the better constructed story out of these two, but that's about it.
Fortunately, diabolical horror hasn't always been so bland, and I very much look forward to watching some of the discussed films. There's a clear thread going through each decade that lends a useful context for each film, but as with all good cinema-related non-fiction, there are also fresh points of view to some I've already seen and now want to watch again. Even just the fact that Schreck doesn't only discuss mainstream films but also everything between underground cinema and 70s porn is worth keeping this in my bookshelf. Overall, The Satanic Screen made me realize I know absolutely nothing about the Black Arts cinema, so I guess I need to fix that ASAP.
Plus: Jeff Goldblum has played the Devil? Uh, that honestly sounds perfect beyond belief.
Was it worth paying over 40 pounds? I'd say mostly yes. The Satanic Screen has the same problems that these types of overviews generally have: occasionally, too much time is spent in plot descriptions (note: with spoilers), and sometimes some films only get an entry of a few sentences if they are unremarkable but still fit the topic in question.
Then again, Schreck has a real verve for writing and I enjoyed his vivid style immensely. Now, I should mention that he, although currently a Buddhist teacher, has a background in Satanism (and is married to Zeena Schreck, Anton LaVey's daughter and one of the most gorgeous humans on Earth), which obviously gives him a special authoritative stance on the topic. If he says a film captures Satanism particularly well, I trust his opinion.
A word of warning, though: Schreck is very opinionated about how he likes this topic to be portrayed on film. I wasn't bothered because I mostly agreed with everything what he said, but someone else might be annoyed by the subjectivity and his push towards a certain "acceptable" image of the Devil. Aleister Crowley fans might also be irked by the no holds barred rants that basically describe him as a snake oil charlatan.
Schreck's firm opinions also allowed me to finally realize why The Exorcist (1973) and The Omen (1976) have always rubbed me the wrong way. Schreck points out the conservatism (in both these two and others) that paints, for example, sexual behavior that is considered "abnormal" or explicit language as signs of diabolism. Instead of being thought-provoking spiritual journeys or truly terrifying films that take advantage of the anxiety caused by the Devil, they seem trivial, juvenile, and almost like Christian cautionary tales or scare tactics. I'd say The Exorcist is the better constructed story out of these two, but that's about it.
Fortunately, diabolical horror hasn't always been so bland, and I very much look forward to watching some of the discussed films. There's a clear thread going through each decade that lends a useful context for each film, but as with all good cinema-related non-fiction, there are also fresh points of view to some I've already seen and now want to watch again. Even just the fact that Schreck doesn't only discuss mainstream films but also everything between underground cinema and 70s porn is worth keeping this in my bookshelf. Overall, The Satanic Screen made me realize I know absolutely nothing about the Black Arts cinema, so I guess I need to fix that ASAP.
Plus: Jeff Goldblum has played the Devil? Uh, that honestly sounds perfect beyond belief.
June 26, 2009
Although Nikolas Schreck (AKA Barry Dubin) maybe sort of a joke among people interested in the left-hand path, his book "The Satanic Screen" is a one of a kind work. Analyzing the history of Satan in film from an actual Satanic perspective is undeniably interesting.
Schreck is obviously a guy that knows a lot, but also seems to be quite a banal(among other things) individual. "The Satanic Screen" is an excellent book for those interested in the topic but expect to be bored every once in a while by Schreck's estrogen driven and unnecessary rants.
Schreck is obviously a guy that knows a lot, but also seems to be quite a banal(among other things) individual. "The Satanic Screen" is an excellent book for those interested in the topic but expect to be bored every once in a while by Schreck's estrogen driven and unnecessary rants.
October 9, 2014
I was surprised to find this book at the campus library of Copenhagen University's faculty of humanities at all. I was even more surprised finding it quite good, not just by the standards of books written by practicing Satanists about cinematic depictions of their faith. Even on that point, author Nikolas Schreck provides a more nuanced view than you'd find everywhere else, showing Satanism to be much more heterogenous than assumed by the general public and disspelling many myths about the faith. (he's also as critical as admiring of Aleister Crowley, and moreso of Anton Lavey)
Schreck proves himself as good a film historian and a sociologist as a scholar of the occult, digging up some rather obscure interesting films from the beginning of cinema in the late 19th century up to the late 1990s. The former are quite many, since the French Symbolists of the era did not just flirt heavily with diabolism but were also quick to embrace the film medium. On the sociological front, the most interesting element of the book is by far how astutely Schreck analyzes not just the moral judgement (or lack thereof) in cinematic depiction of Satanism, but also its specific details as corresponding to a decade's Zeitgeist... or at least its "shadow side".
It emerges here that the 1960s and early 1970s are by far Nikolas Schreck's favourite period in cinema, Satanism apparently having been almost as popular as Buddhism, Paganism and New Agery among the era's countercultural milieu. Its interest in religious practices outside the Occidental mainstream certainly resulted in a surge of more well-researched or at least less morally condemnatory films about the Devil and his disciples than had usually been seen before and since, often being more interesting from a cinematic perspective as well due to the increased outside-the-box thinking in the film medium. It here does not surprise either that Schreck considers the 1980s and 1990s the cultural low point of Western civilization, though I kind of wish he'd have elaborated on his asides about goth/industrial music scene having a better grasp upon Satanism than the black/death metal which came into its own at the same time.
Then again that might be a subject for another book.
Schreck proves himself as good a film historian and a sociologist as a scholar of the occult, digging up some rather obscure interesting films from the beginning of cinema in the late 19th century up to the late 1990s. The former are quite many, since the French Symbolists of the era did not just flirt heavily with diabolism but were also quick to embrace the film medium. On the sociological front, the most interesting element of the book is by far how astutely Schreck analyzes not just the moral judgement (or lack thereof) in cinematic depiction of Satanism, but also its specific details as corresponding to a decade's Zeitgeist... or at least its "shadow side".
It emerges here that the 1960s and early 1970s are by far Nikolas Schreck's favourite period in cinema, Satanism apparently having been almost as popular as Buddhism, Paganism and New Agery among the era's countercultural milieu. Its interest in religious practices outside the Occidental mainstream certainly resulted in a surge of more well-researched or at least less morally condemnatory films about the Devil and his disciples than had usually been seen before and since, often being more interesting from a cinematic perspective as well due to the increased outside-the-box thinking in the film medium. It here does not surprise either that Schreck considers the 1980s and 1990s the cultural low point of Western civilization, though I kind of wish he'd have elaborated on his asides about goth/industrial music scene having a better grasp upon Satanism than the black/death metal which came into its own at the same time.
Then again that might be a subject for another book.
April 3, 2016
In one sense, this book is just another specialty movie guide, for those who are particularly fascinated by portrayals of evil in cinema. In another, however, it represents a more ambitious project: the documentation of the public fascination with the Devil through the course of the 20th Century. That it has been written by one of the more flamboyantly visible Satanists of the 20th Century (though largely forgotten in the 21st), should only increase its interest for most readers. The problem, of course, is that Satanists and other occultists are notoriously fractious, and hence most of the potential audience will be annoyed, offended, or outraged by what Schreck says about Kenneth Anger, Aleister Crowley, Anton Szandor LaVey, or one or another occult hero or villain. In that sense, I recommend it only to those who can put aside their personal biases and enjoy the ride.
The blurb on the back cover claims that the book “documents all of Satan’s cinematic incarnations,” although Schreck never makes such an unlikely claim. Any serious fan will spot a few omissions, and Schreck deliberately avoids certain genres (such as direct-to-video releases) which could have vastly increased his listings. This is only reasonable, and makes it easier for Schreck to give a clear historical narrative of the trends in film – while I did compile a list of titles he missed (included below for your amusement), I think any reasonable person would agree that he covered the most significant movies on the subject, and even extended into some obscure realms that would have been missed by most critics. He has a good grasp of film criticism and, despite his strong opinions on the moral lessons he likes to see attached to his films, gives a fair reading of the qualities and weaknesses of many movies that rarely get such treatment. I, for one, enjoyed his witty and erudite style, even when I didn’t agree with all of his conclusions.
Missing films:
“The Haunted Castle” by George Albert Smith, 1897
“Faust and Marguerite” by Edwin S Porter, 1900
“The Inferno” AKA “L’Inferno” 1911
“Christmas Eve” AKA “The Night Before Christmas” by Ladislaw Starevich, 1913
“The Soul Snatcher” unknown date.
“Satan’s Dance,” unknown date, burlesque act on film.
“At Midnight I’ll Take Your Soul” by Jose Mojica Marins, 1963
“A Touch of Satan,” 1971
“Satan’s Children”, 1975
“Devil Dog: The Hound from Hell” TV movie, 1976
“God Told Me To” AKA “Demon” by Larry Cohen, 1976
“Good Against Evil” TV movie, 1977
“Ghoulies,” 1984
“Merlin’s Shop of Mystical Wonders,” 1996
“Coven” by Mark Borchardt, 1997
“The Eighteenth Angel,” 1997
“Idle Hands,” 1999
“Lost Souls,” 2000
The blurb on the back cover claims that the book “documents all of Satan’s cinematic incarnations,” although Schreck never makes such an unlikely claim. Any serious fan will spot a few omissions, and Schreck deliberately avoids certain genres (such as direct-to-video releases) which could have vastly increased his listings. This is only reasonable, and makes it easier for Schreck to give a clear historical narrative of the trends in film – while I did compile a list of titles he missed (included below for your amusement), I think any reasonable person would agree that he covered the most significant movies on the subject, and even extended into some obscure realms that would have been missed by most critics. He has a good grasp of film criticism and, despite his strong opinions on the moral lessons he likes to see attached to his films, gives a fair reading of the qualities and weaknesses of many movies that rarely get such treatment. I, for one, enjoyed his witty and erudite style, even when I didn’t agree with all of his conclusions.
Missing films:
“The Haunted Castle” by George Albert Smith, 1897
“Faust and Marguerite” by Edwin S Porter, 1900
“The Inferno” AKA “L’Inferno” 1911
“Christmas Eve” AKA “The Night Before Christmas” by Ladislaw Starevich, 1913
“The Soul Snatcher” unknown date.
“Satan’s Dance,” unknown date, burlesque act on film.
“At Midnight I’ll Take Your Soul” by Jose Mojica Marins, 1963
“A Touch of Satan,” 1971
“Satan’s Children”, 1975
“Devil Dog: The Hound from Hell” TV movie, 1976
“God Told Me To” AKA “Demon” by Larry Cohen, 1976
“Good Against Evil” TV movie, 1977
“Ghoulies,” 1984
“Merlin’s Shop of Mystical Wonders,” 1996
“Coven” by Mark Borchardt, 1997
“The Eighteenth Angel,” 1997
“Idle Hands,” 1999
“Lost Souls,” 2000
February 26, 2014
Lots of good stuff here. This is a great series--excellent for film heads--always well researched (though the misspellings here are pretty unforgivable--on and on about Teflor when it's Telfor in Ninth Gate--you can't love a flick that much and forget such an important name). Too much emphasis on the author's favorites--dismisses The Exorcist and The Omen outright which is pretty ballsy--great on you, I say but not to hype other flicks as being the end all-be-all. Really stuck on what the ultimate meaning of the Satanic input is here--if it's pro Bible, the author gets all hissy--even though the Devil is the big baddie of the Bible so it stands to reason....I get not being all preachy but not at the expense of an entertaining film. Some good flicks can be preachy. High marks for including Night of The Demon and the "Darkness" figure from Legend--not called the Devil but such an archetype it's only right that it be included. The book is very complete--includes such goodies as Haxan (a silent classic) and 7th Victim--an underrated and understated classic, while still mentioning big productions like Devil's Advocate. Some straying off the beaten path but overall an interesting read but in need of another go round with the editor's pencil..:)
October 2, 2023
The devil as a patron of arts... well the author did a tremendous job here to present the devil's reign on screen from the 19th century up to the 1990s. Through the devil's looking glass, when Satan was silent (1913-1929 in Metropolis or Golem), the atom age antichrist of the 1950s, sympathy for the devil in the 1960s. In the book you'll find many great movie posters and photos. Highly recommended if you are looking out for the devil inside movies to watch!
April 12, 2018
A fun romp through the last century (twentieth) of movies featuring the devil.
September 28, 2024
Excellent overview of Satan in the cinema.
June 10, 2015
Somewhat uneven, but a good way to pick horror flicks. The author certainly could have done with an editor to tell him to chop out the bits where he flat out says "oh, this has nothing to do with satanic cinema, but I'm going to talk about it anyway." It also became apparent that he has a very particular type of satanic/horror film that he finds acceptable (aka good) and everything else is utter crap (in his eyes). His aversion to any kind of gore & his triumphing of (his idea of) cerebral satanic movies got a little tiring towards the end, but he does do well describing films when he is interested in them.
August 16, 2012
This book can basically not be compared to any other book, it's definitely worth a read- there aren't any other books on the subject.
It's perhaps slightly ironic that Schreck, whose work revolves heavily around the study of Charles Manson, chose a picture from Rosemary's Baby for the cover- considering that Roman Polanski, who made the film, lost his wife to Tex Watson at Cielo Drive.
It's perhaps slightly ironic that Schreck, whose work revolves heavily around the study of Charles Manson, chose a picture from Rosemary's Baby for the cover- considering that Roman Polanski, who made the film, lost his wife to Tex Watson at Cielo Drive.
August 18, 2012
Very nice work, certainly a topic few if any other authors have covered.
August 20, 2012
Remarkable work- if it were updated, it would surely have even more relevant material.
September 2, 2012
Wonderful work at expressing the many faces of darkness.
August 19, 2012
A very good look at reflections of Satan used by the film industry.
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews