John Carpenter’s Prince of Darkness

• Written and Directed by John Carpenter
• October 23, 1987

A group of quantum physics students assist a Catholic priest in investigating an ancient cylinder of liquid discovered in a monastery that turns out to be the embodiment of Satan. When you write that out it sounds a bit rough.

John Carpenter is a unique director who has crafted some of the most intriguing and original visions to hit the screen. Not every one of them was a banger but at the bare minimum they were watchable attempts at something other than the usual. Prince of Darkness is one of his films and part of what was eventually called the Apocalypse Trilogy consisting of his classic version of The Thing, this film, and In the Mouth of Madness. Each dealt with the end of the world in a way only John Carpenter could present.

I can’t say I was really impressed with Prince of Darkness when I first saw it. Presented marketing didn’t intrigue me and when I finally got around to renting it on video cassette (yes, I’m that old) I found it bordering on silly. There are a few small things I can point to that compound together and harm what is a good idea. 

In this movie the premise is Catholicism was a big cover for the truth. What is the truth? Satan is the anti-God. He is a being from a parallel, antimatter universe trying to get into our universe and destroy it because that’s just what he does. Jesus was an alien who was viewed as dangerous and killed. The apostles kept the truth secret and dressed it in religious language and doctored it into what we are all currently familiar with. Okay but why not just shut up and let it be forgotten rather than keep a garble version of the truth around? Or be brutally honest so if there is a problem help is easier to get and use?

In this movie there are discussions between a never named priest (Donald Pleasence) and a scientist named Professor Howard Birack (Victor Wong) involving science and religion. The discussions are not very natural and are a little heavy handed. These are not two people having an intense conversation, but rather a director pushing forward what he had to say. Carpenter could be subtle but he was not in those moments. It feels like the whole movie stops when they talk. He decided to beat the audience over the head with his point rather than tell a good story and slip the point in.

Carpenter had a habit of getting together some interesting if not at times awkward casts. Prince of Darkness is no different. And maybe this intersects with another issue I had. These are supposed to be college kids, but they are way too old looking to be college aged. There’s not even a hint these people are taking night courses and demonstrating high aptitude. Then again, their college experience doesn’t really intersect with much of anything and you could’ve easily avoided mentioning it at all. I see no good reason why they had to be in college.

We have a few Carpenter regulars (or semi regulars) like Donald Pleasence, Victor Wong, Dennis Dun, and Peter Jason but there is also Jameson “A.J. Simon” Parker. And that is another thing that got to me. I absolutely loved Simon & Simon for which Jameson Parker is best known. To this day that’s all I think of when I think of him though he has done other stuff-but not much. I have difficulty separating him from his famous character. The addition of a mustache did little to change that perception. He just looked a little closer to Gerald McRaney. 

Or maybe it was Thom Bray who played Boz on Riptide and plays Etchinson here. That was another show I really loved back in the day and I can’t separate that actor from his character in order to fully enjoy this movie. Even now I see Boz. Clunky, unwieldy discussions and two actors that were as far from their best known stuff as possible did this no favors. Toss in them being college students rather than professionals and it becomes hard to swallow.

That’s in contrast to Alice Cooper who famously plays the lead homeless man in this movie. Then again, seeing Alice Cooper without makeup he doesn’t look like Alice Cooper. He looks genuinely homeless. And that’s outside of this movie. But it works here. The same goes for Pleasence who could make you forget about what he did before and become the character even at this point being known largely as Dr. Loomis. Then again one had no acting resume and another had a huge one. Parker and Bray had only one real hit to their name.

Watching it now I liked it more than when I first saw it. I can’t say it’s a classic or stands up there with Christine or Big Trouble in Little China but there is a certain charm to it. Though heavy handed at times, Carpenter had something to say and he got his message across though poorly. He also crafted a fairly unique man versus Satan scenario. I’ve heard this is similar to a movie called The Church, but I don’t believe I’ve ever seen it. 

I can’t say Prince of Darkness is great or one of Carpenter’s better efforts, but it certainly has improved in my estimation with age. It’s an experimental idea that succeeds just a little more than it fails. On the surface it sounds silly, but when you actually watch it doesn’t feel as silly. And with a script that has something to say (and it mostly does it better than it doesn’t) there is something to be enjoyed here. The things that really hurt it as I noted are the TV actors and the moments where Carpenter gets unusually blunt with what he wanted to say.

John Carpenter’s Prince of Darkness is one of those movies that has improved with age. While not perfect it has something to say and offers plenty of weirdness that you will enjoy. Carpenter fans will like this Cult Classic.