“Witchfinder General” is the third and final movie directed by Michael Reeves, who would pass away unexpectedly the following year. It involves the witch hunts that took place in many parts of Europe from the late fifteenth to the late eighteenth centuries. This particular story takes place during the English Civil War, which ran from 1642 to 1651, and is centred around Matthew Hopkins, a known so-called witchfinder of that period, played here brilliantly by Vincent Price in his best role.

The historical Hopkins was active between 1644 and 1647 and claimed to hold the title of ‘Witchfinder General’ though no such rank had ever been given to him. Within those few years he was responsible for more witches being executed than anyone prior, but ultimately questions were being asked about his methods and he wisely chose to retire.  It seems that it was no longer strictly legal to torture prisoners in England at that time.

The movie, of course, had no such qualms, as the director was not aiming to present a historical fiction. Instead, the film depicts the complicity of entire communities in this demonizing of the other. Stories are spread around, some people use these stories for their own benefit, and others will just go along with , believing the spooky stories they hear.

That is one of the great aspects of this movie, that the title character may be the villain on paper, but the real villain is society. Hopkins and his assistant do not turn up to villages uninvited. They are invited there and the people who lived there are the ones making the accusations. There are some scenes where the accusers would try to look into the cell where the victim was being tortured, taking vicarious pleasure in the person’s suffering. The opening scene of the movie sets up this idea brilliantly. The scene is an apparently idyllic countryside, then a hill where a gibbet is being erected. A screaming woman is dragged towards the gibbet by a group of villagers, and is hanged while a priest recites prayers. The camera then cuts, suddenly, to a distant figure on a horse – Matthew Hopkins, self-styled witchfinder general, presiding from a distance over the scene of semi-judicial murder carried out by others.

Reeves did not shy away from the misogyny present in witch hunting. While some men were accused the majority of victims of this were women. One of the female characters in the movie is raped in the open by Hopkins’ assistant, and another man, a local (who we can assume knew her well) merely watches on with a leer on his face. The implication is clear – the community is collectively responsible for these horrors. The community is the villain. Hopkins becomes the instrument used by the community to perpetuate the injustice.

Vincent Price’s depiction of Hopkins is magnificent, and in my opinion is his best work. He depicts Hopkins as remaining aloof from the messy side of things, with his assistant John Stearne (a brilliantly nasty Robert Russell) doing the dirty work. You do not really get the impression that Hopkins believes any of what he is saying. His motivation seems to be the money he gets paid for his services, and his pressuring the more attractive accused women to have sex with him by hinting they will go free (which of course does not happen.) Stearne, in contrast, is depicted as a sadist who enjoys torturing people, especially women, a great deal. It seems that their partnership is based on mutual benefit. While Price can be fun in his more over the top roles, he plays Hopkins straight and with considerable restraint, providing villages with what they want with well chosen words and decisive actions. Price’s detachment makes the character all the more chilling.

The hero of the story is Richard Marshall, a roundhead soldier, played by Ian Ogilvy. Ogilvy also sells this role superbly. He is a young man in love, a brave and capable soldier who is promoted for his bravery in action, and is also capable of potentially dangerous actions to protect his fiancée Sara Lowes and avenge her dead uncle. The finale of the movie, and how it changes both Marshall and Sara, is a chilling indictment of what pain and fear does to its victims.

The supporting cast are all excellent in their roles. Patrick Wymark appears in a small role as Oliver Cromwell. Hilary Dwyer plays Sara, and Rupert Davies is her uncle John Lowes. Their performances all help to sell this extremely grim and tragic story.

Interestingly the original script (written by Reeves with his collaborator Tom Baker) was much more violent than the final version that was filmed. There was to be a depiction of the battle of Naseby, and the finale where Hopkins gets his comeuppance was far more horrifying. Had the movie gone ahead with the original idea, I suspect it may not even have made it to a cinema release. As it was the movie was seen to be very violent and unpleasant, and received negative reviews from some critics. Others, however, praised the film and realised why the violence and sadism had been depicted like that. Reeves’ intention, that the film depicted the societal guilt, would not have been impactful without the cruelty. American Internation Pictures, who had made a contribution to the film and insisted on Price being cast, were very surprised, as they had believed the film to be a tax write-off. Instead they discovered a remarkably good movie.

“Witchfinder General” is a remarkable movie made by a talented director whose untimely passing cut short what promised to be a brilliant career. Reeves was not interested in conventions or tropes – he wanted to show that society can be the villain and that the good guys don’t usually win. He succeeded admirably. “Witchfinder General” is a gut-wrenching movie, tragic and horrifying, and psychologically so very real. It is a hard watch, but very satisfying.