Danish director Benjamin Christensen in 1921 took the subject of witchcraft and confected a film experience around it to explore it as a historical phenomenon and see how it relates to the then present. This film defies simple categorization: is it a documentary? a horror film? a docu-fiction? a film essay? I’d go with that one. And indeed the film is experimental and unconventional in the way it is presented, but in truth Christensen wasn’t concerned with revolutionizing the form or medium, but rather exploring the ramifications and implications of a certain historical moment in a very essayistic fashion (even when many of the events are being dramatized). The result, however, does in a sense trascend this “academic” function and becomes both, an interesting study of a historical event and a very effective horror film. Actually, “Häxan: Witchcraft Through the Ages” could very well be one of the most accomplished horror films out there, much better than the majority of what we become nowadays, which is funny because it was never intended to be one in the first place.

“Häxan” is divided into seven parts and explores witchcraft and superstition in the middle ages. At first we see how believes like hell, the devil, pagan practices and even early depictions of the solar system were understood in early civilizations and the middle ages. It is then followed a series of vignettes that dramatize certain practices that were believed to be related to witchcraft and inspired by Satan himself. We then see how church-sponsored witch hunts played out, focusing on an old woman falsely accused of being a witch, who after being severly tortured admits to several accounts of witchcraft and dennounces other supposed witches, and a young maiden who after one encounter with a monk is believed to also be a witch. This section takes up the majority of the film and is the one that more closely resembles a traditional narrative film. The seventh and last section focuses on the pathological rather than the supernatural, and it depicts Christensen’s actual thesis and what I believe to be the main reason behind this film: it shows how all these superstitions of the middle ages could be rooted by a lack of understanding of mental illnesses, and how in the society of the 1920s (though I don’t think its any different today, almos 100 years later), in which we supposedly understand this topics way better and claim pride because of how we’ve distanced ourselves from medieval practices such as the inquisition, there’s still a stigma around mentally ill people, and while we’re not drowning them or burning them on a pyre we still segregate them from the rest of society for not being “normal”.

It comes somewhat as a surprise that a 1921 silent film would be so accomplished on a technical level. It has a very theatrical quality to it, especially the scenes depicting all the supernatural stuff going on. The special effects are amazing even by today’s standards, and it shows how creative could a filmmaker be in a time with no digital aid, playing tricks with the celluloid, emphasizing the visually important like sets, costumes and make up of the nightly creatures – the Devil, played by Christensen himself, has a very distinct look that definitely is the stuff of nightmares. The colour palette, achieved through the old technique of tinting I believe, ranges from a palish ice-cold blue to a rust-like orange that transmits a haunting sense of other-worldliness. Also, the use of ancient illustrations and paintings that thematized these superstitions visually adds a scholarly value in a sense that, even if its presented on a very matter-of-fact way, ultimately makes the final product all the more creepy.

Let’s talk now about the horror elements on this film. Like I said, this film defies categorization, so to label it a pure horror film is a bit of a stretch, and yet it works great as one. The aesthetic lends itself to create a world full of mysticism and dark actions, giving the horror sequences a sense of dread, putting on display a sort of theater that indulges in the darkness its trying to expose. But the really horrifying moments don’t come from the scenes with Satan and the witches performing rituals and their twisted version of the Sabbath, but they rather come from the inquisition scenes. The real evil lies within the church and how they passed judgement, the methods they used to get their confessions, and how they gloat for doing “God’s work”, what in reality is plain and simple moral corruption. Christensen delivers this message strongly, knowing where the true horror really lies. The performances, all delivered by small time but very talented actors, also add a level of horror to the film through their distress and/or viciousness, beautifully captured through haunting close-ups (to a similar effect like the one achieved by Dreyer in “The Passion of Joan of Arc”, which actually came out seven years after this one).

“Häxan: Witchcraft Through the Ages” is a very unusual film. In a sense it is a documentary, but Benjamin Christensen definitely makes the most out of the medium and aptly transforms it into very disturbing horror. The techniques on display wouldn’t be used by other filmmakers until decades later, yet we can see that Christensen went about them effortlessly. Aesthetically beautiful and haunting, subversive in form, intellectual on how it approaches its subject matter, and truly horrifying considering that everything on display actually happened (unlike most modern horror films that liberally use the tag “Based on a true story”), “Häxan” is rightfully considered to be a masterpiece of horror cinema, even if it isn’t a pure genre-film and falls on the rather informative and essayistic side of the spectrum.

Thanks for reading and I hope you liked it. If you could share this review with your friends and family I would really appreciate it, and don’t forget to follow if you want to stay up to date with the contents this blog produces. Until next time!