Is The Sudbury Devil Any Good? | Historical Movie Review
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 7 ก.พ. 2025
- The Sudbury Devil is a 2023 indie horror film written and directed by Andrew Rakich (aka @AtunSheiFilms). Taking place in 17th Century New England shortly after King Philip's War, the movie stars two witch hunters, who travel to the small Massachusetts town of Sudbury to investigate reports of demonic activity in the area. Ahead of its digital release, I got a chance to take a look at the film. Does it live up to its promises of historical authenticity, and is it worth a watch?
Clips Featured (in no particular order):
The Sudbury Devil (2023): atunsheifilms....
Filming Completion announcement: • we did it. we made a m...
Sudbury Devil Trailer: • The Sudbury Devil - Of...
Film Distribution Announcement: • i'm self-distributing ...
Historical Deep Cuts of the Sudbury Devil: • Breaking Down the Hist...
Checkmate Lincolnites: • TARIFFS and TAXES: The...
Witchfinder General: • Why Christmas Should B...
Frozen 50s Man: • Frozen '50s Man ~ Epis...
Why Ravenous is the Greatest Movie Ever Made: • Why Ravenous is the Gr...
Interview with Andrew Rakich: • Andrew Rakich on the h...
Napoleon Trailer: • NAPOLEON - Official Tr...
Music from the official soundtrack of The Sudbury Devil:
• The Sudbury Devil - Or...
My Links:
Patreon: / somasacademy
Twitter: / somas_academy
BlueSky: bsky.app/profi...
ArtStation: www.artstation...
I'm so glad I got a chance to reuse the witch costume sprites I made for my Halloween video lmao, sorry the audio is kinda borked on this one I'm not sure what went wrong
Check out The Sudbury Devil here: atunsheifilms.vhx.tv/
Omg me and my buddy said you can cut the sky orbs and it would have improved the movie. The special effects where the weak point of the movie. But I liked the practical effects and thought overall it was good.
What I've seen, with projects like Godzilla Minus One, Astartes, and the Sudbury Devil, you don't need a 100 million dollar budget to deliver a great film. You need passion.
The acting in this movie was excellent for a low budget move
Highly recommended. Best viewed after a minimum of two (2) doses of your favorite absinth.
I just finished watching the film for the first time so I wouldn't be spoiled by any reviews.
I've been following Atun-Shei for a few years and always enjoyed his theatrical take on history. As the mother of an historian, I'm always interested in learning things I was never taught in school.
Highly recommend
Just saw the movie over Christmas, and I thought it was brilliant and have been going over youtube looking at the reviews and commentary and I'd love to see more from on this subject.
I’ve seen a few of his Civil War videos, but hadn’t heard about this movie. Will check it out - thanks!
The Antonia Bird influences were a delight, not sure if Eggers is also a direct inspiration or if it's just a thing with filming historical New England but it reminded me of The Lighthouse at times.
I kind of liked some the schlocky, celestial vfx; felt like it was mostly there to hammer home to the viewer that this is in fact supernatural without any ambiguity.
Regarding color correction in big budget films (looking at you, Mr. Scott...), I've yet to see "Napoleon," but I was really underwhelmed by the depressing wintry aesthetics of "The Last Duel." I loved the book by Eric Jager, but Scott's adaptation was just a massive missed opportunity. It could've been the most historically accurate depiction of late medieval plate armor, but instead, he went with totally anachronistic "half-visor" bascinets. And while the eponymous duel itself took place in December, the 14th Century would've been a riot of color and pageantry...not the subdued, grey world that Scott shows us
I went out of my way to avoid watching The Last Duel ENTIRELY because of aesthetic as seen in the trailers lmao, my patience for dull and drab medieval films has just run out
Sounds awesome! I might check this out!
You should, judging by your channel I reckon it would be right up your alley!
I would love to watch this movie. But I also know that the only way for me to watch this without feeling too uncomfortable is alone in a brightly lit room. I don't want to watch with my parents watching and I'm not that thrilled about being scared to my core. However, I love the work he does, and I live in Mass and I gotta learn my cultural history.
I can tell you that I'm pretty easily spooked and found it more creepy than scary, so I wouldn't be too worried about that, but definitely don't watch this movie with your parents lmao
@@SomasAcademy cosign that it is more creepy and graphic than scary :)
interesting, I wouldn't mind more film reviews
Have you've seen the British drama show called Jamestown? Pedro is literally my favourite character in that series, I believe he came from the Kingdom of Kongo (present-day Angola). Pedro is played by Abubakar Salim, the same actor that voiced Bayek from Assassin's Creed Origins. The series is set between 1619 - 1622 in colonial Virginia.
I haven't seen that show yet but I have heard of it, it looks really bad from a historical standpoint (I almost used it as my example of bad historical costuming in big budget projects), but I want to watch it just for Abubakar Salim lol
I don't think any depiction of the Jamestown settlement will ever top Terrence Malick's "The New World." That film is simply magnificent.
@@etinarcadiaego5708 Ooh boy, I have some very negative things to say about that film lmao, but you may be right on the simple technicality that nobody makes good depictions of Jamestown
@@SomasAcademy may I ask what you didn't like about it? It's a bit pretentious, I know (and the fact that it was marketed as a history action/adventure epic didn't help things either), but it's beautifully shot (on location in Virginia!) and just sort of dreamlike and mesmerizing. I love the details like Smith's Elizabethan "close helmet," the Powhatan shaman using a turtle on a wounded brave, and the ad hoc "pike and shot" tactics that the settlers employ in battle. It's a truly beautiful-yet-tragic vision of two worlds colliding.
@@etinarcadiaego5708 Oh so much. There are lots of little things, like I used it as an example in this video of bad historical clothing (although it also has some pretty decent costumes so it's not all bad), the portrayal of the Powhatan veers a bit into stereotypes of Natives being animalistic or "one with nature," Pocahontas' capture is shown taking place while Smith is still in Jamestown instead of ~4 years after he left, John Smith is portrayed as going back to England by choice instead of because of a severe gunpowder burn, and there's some dubious stuff in the towns we see. But none of those things are too severe, I can excuse some moderately problematic elements, aesthetic inaccuracies, or compressing the timeline for the sake of a tighter movie narrative. What I can't excuse is how the film draws from some of the most prominent myths about its setting, and thus reinforces wildly inaccurate ideas about the history. It retells Smith's narrative of captivity and near-execution by the Powhatan uncritically (this narrative was very likely full of fictional elements, as Smith wrote it for profits years after the fact and it wasn't the only time he reported being saved from execution by a young girl interceding on his behalf, so there's a good chance of sensationalist embellishment. Little known fact is that while Pocahontas may have been a favorite child of Powhatan, she was one of around 100, none of whom had any authority, so whether she would be present in that scenario or had the sway to stop an execution is doubtful), but to be fair it is the only firsthand account we have, so even though we shouldn't take Smith's word I can't really fault the filmmakers for doing so. Much worse in my opinion, the entire narrative of the film revolves around portraying the relationship between John Smith and Pocahontas as a romance, a myth invented for a Victorian-Era novel. Pocahontas was 10-11 years old when she met the 27 year old Smith, and they knew each other for less than 2 years before his accident forced him to return to England, so the last time they saw each other before their reunion in England was when she was 12-13 and he was 29. Millions of people believe that Pocahontas and John Smith were lovers instead of a child and an adult man whose relationship was probably more like distant family (as Smith was seemingly adopted as a spiritual son by Powhatan, and he had a friendship with Pocahontas kind of like an uncle or older brother figure). I like in Tsenacommacah (historical Powhatan land) and my job involves teaching people about Jamestown and cutting through these kinds of myths, so this kind of stuff especially irks me lmao. It's not a bad movie in its entirety, there's a lot of cool stuff in it and things I respect in their behind-the-scenes approach, but yeah, I can't excuse such a core element of the film being based on a complete (frankly disgusting in context) myth, and the other inaccuracies are just a cherry on top of that.
I'm dying for a spoiler review!
I’ve been obsessively watching the trailer for awhile now, debating on whether or not to watch it. Or I wanna watch it, I just don’t have the money-but bringing up the historically accurate accents was something I didn’t realize could be a hindrance to me. Did anyone watching it have a hard time understanding it or was it easy? Are there subtitles as well?
There are subtitles available, yes. Personally, I didn't have a hard time understanding most of what was said, but others might. You can find a few clips from the movie on Andrew Rakich's personal channel (which is simply named Andrew Rakich), and you can check out his Witchfinder General videos and his video "The Demonology of King James" on Atun Shei Films to get an idea of how well you can understand the accents used in the film.
@@SomasAcademy oh wow! Awesome. I’m from Boston myself but my hearing’s development is not as strong as others due to early medical complications. Thank you!
Hope to see it, but glad that it's set in that other Sudbury, on the opposite side of the pond 😂
Lol - I initially clicked thinking it was our own Sudbury, Canada 😅
I have seen nothing to sell me on seeing this film. What am I supposed to get out of watching it? Is it scary? Is it thrilling? Is it simply designed to educate me about the horrors of history? How are the performances?
1. I'd say it's moderately scary, it probably won't haunt your nightmares but it is spooky and tense, and has moments of psychological horror. It does more to unsettle than terrify. I'd compare it to The VVitch in tone and atmosphere, for the most part.
2. It has some thrilling moments, but it's not a thriller. No jumpscares in this one, as far as I can remember, although there are some moments that may make you gasp.
3. No, it is primarily intended to be a low-budget Witch movie set in colonial New England, the educational value is moreso a consequence of this setting being well-realized and woven into the horror.
4. The performances are, for the most part, excellent. I would say one of the characters is a tad over-acted, but overall I'd say the film is very well acted, and with such a small budget those performances really carry the film.
Puritan New England is in my opinion the perfect horror setting
Good stuff, but kinda hard to hear; mic issues?!
My audio quality isn't as crisp as I'd like in this video but the volume certainly sounds fine to me, some of my earlier videos were too quiet but this one isn't.
@@SomasAcademy The volume was fine, it was the quality. lol It kinda sounded like you were recording inside a very small box. Just my two cents. Love your stuff!
@@rotorbob88 That makes sense, I was recording in a closet lol
4:54
According to another review by the Cynical Historian, there were actually historical reports of such weather events, thus adding a fair bit!
There were reports of strange weather events, but as far as I'm aware these were described in fairly vague terms, so the specific types of phenomena we see in the film (orbs, tornados) are down to creative license!
@@SomasAcademy Yeah, that makes sense really. Fair enough!
Does it have subtitles?
Yes!
Great review-would love to hear more! It’s great that Sudbury is starting conversations! Here’s my series of reviews; would be interested in hearing what you think!
th-cam.com/play/PLbZ1ZA7mcUnVFvqy2jTb7GsEyjN4bJwwB.html&si=JJEKkyrvDUBDWvXL
Thank you!
I've actually watched your reviews already - found the first two when I was doing some background research for my own review, and the third while I was finding some clips for my video. Good work, I appreciated your insights, especially in that comparison video!
@@SomasAcademy Awesome! Looking forward to more reviews-and a more spoilery take on this one!
Robert Eggers already made the witch
Surprisingly The Sudbury Devil reminded me a lot less of the VVitch than of Ravenous, a movie with a very different setting.
@@SomasAcademy Atun-Shei has mentioned that Ravenous is one of his favorites, so that checks out
Is there a 'hype'?
Only among a small demographic of history nerds on TH-cam, but they're the target demographic for this video lol
😂😂😂 a horror movie which is "obnoxiously political"? Big no. Patriarchy? White supremacy? Really?? He hopes to be noticed by Netflx I guess.
...I mean if the description upsets you that much then for sure give it a pass, but if you're incredulous about the presence of patriarchy and white supremacy you might have a bit of a warped view of the 17th century British colonies. Men were widely believed to be mental and spiritual superiors of women and expected to serve as paternal figures (and legal guardians) to their wives, women were not equal under the law and could not own property unless they were widowed, Native people were frequently labelled the "children of Satan" and were killed or enslaved en-mass (the majority of the indigenous population of New England had been killed or shipped off in chains to the Caribbean shortly before the events of this movie), Black people were believed to be naturally less intelligent and more animalistic and thought to be marked by God for enslavement, and in many colonies the laws explicitly allowed for "Negroes, Mulattoes, and Indians" to be owned as servants or slaves while White people could not be slaves and could not be servants to non-white people. We're not talking about anything ambiguous here, it was very overt.
I’ve never seen so much sorrow hidden by three (very Millennial) emojis
People do bad things, including people 400 years ago. You know that, and I know that. Grow up