Lash of the Penitentes

A reporter goes to rural New Mexico to write a sensational story about the Penitentes, a secretive group of Spanish Catholics who practice flagellation as part of their religious rites. At the end, he is murdered for intruding and the police beat up likely suspects until one confesses, so there is no real suspense.

Plenty of shots of people being whipped and some of rural religious art, but mostly of interest to sado-masochists and sociologists.

The Library of Congress print of this bizarre, apparently hybrid film clocks in at 45 minutes, so if you've seen a shorter version, you haven't seen the 'whole' film. Cobbled together from what appears to be three or possibly four different pieces of footage, The Penitente Murder Case (as the LC print is titled) outlines in bare detail the journey of a newspaperman into the barrens of New Mexico, where he stumbles upon a hardcore Catholic sect of peons who practice bizarre rites of self-flagellation. He hooks up with a cooperative local 'boy', Chico, who escorts him, unseen, to a number of secret rituals. At the end of the film the reporter is murdered so that the 'secret' of the sect stays within the local community.

The distinct sets of celluloid include some apparently silent footage, which appears to be real, of New Mexicans performing their Good Friday ceremonies (these segments were clearly shot at 16FPS); extremely bad hand held footage with enough pan shots to give anyone a headache; incredibly dull footage of the reporter and Chico standing around 'watching' the natives; and some ve ry fine dramatic footage that is clearly staged--especially good is the circular shot of the police interrogation at the end of the film. Credited director-cinematographer Roland Price was probably responsible for the character shots, but I can't imagine the man who also shot Marihuana: Weed With Roots In Hell and Son of Ingagi being capable of the 8 or so competent minutes in this film. Penitentes was apparently butchered by the Hays Office, but the extant footage is still pretty strong stuff, as the film features whipping, nudity, and crucifixion. Narrator Zelma Carroll flubs several lines and sounds like he was given a single take to record his unctuous overdubs. He also sounds like he was well lubricated for the task at hand.

This is truly a roadhouse classic, a film so strange and so ineptly made that I find it hard to criticize. Essential viewing.

In 1960, I believe it was, we took the subway from Manhattan to Queens to catch this dreck at a grind house in the sticks. Can't recall what in particular was the attraction but I'm sure advertised salaciousness was the hook. Quite a bore, I don't think I recall anything about it except some pseudo-gothic religious mortification of the flesh framed by narrative nonsense. The real mortification of the flesh was that long round-trip subway ride to the wilds of Queens.

Actress Marie DeForrest plays the lead female character, Raquel. Her topless scene in this film was a rarity for the 1930s.

This is in the fictionalized part of the film, not the documentary part. The locals know she has been talking to the man who has secretly been filming their rituals. They kill him and then abduct her from her home. She is taken by foot near the top of a mountain and stripped to the waist. They tie her wrists to a board and raise her a few feet from the ground, hanging by her wrists. She receives a brutal whipping as punishment.

This is the only part of the film that made people sit up in their seats and look in amazement. I saw this film in the early 1960s in a grindhouse theater. It is on DVD, but all of DeForrest's scenes are cut out.

45 minutes? 38 minutes? 58 minutes? I've personally seen three versions of this one and there they are. I can't quite tell what the difference is though. It seems like certain scenes were just longer. And also more repetitious.

A silent black and white schockumentary that shows up among the mondo films.

It's supposedly based on a true case but we know what THAT means.

Religious mania, whipping, fleeting nudity, and melodramatic facial expressions pretty much sums it up. But its short running time keeps it from getting boring.

There probably is no official version. The title just gets re-used when they find more similar footage.

Definitely a curiosity piece.