MovieChat Forums > Messiah of Evil (1974) Discussion > Who is the Messiah of Evil, really?

Who is the Messiah of Evil, really?

posted 17 years ago by rixrex
8 replies | jump to latest

I think that there was a version of this that had Tom as the Messiah of Evil, posing as a stranger in the town. There are too many things going on that hint to this, one being that the Messiah shown in the 100 year old flashback is the same actor. We don't see his face clearly, but the build is the same and the style of dress is very similar. Then there's the supposed drowning with the later appearance of the Messiah coming out of the sea. It appears that at some point during production this was changed and several scenes were then shot to create the effect of Tom just being another normal person. But I think he was originally slated to be the Messiah with a surprise reveal near the end, and that was changed in the favor of leaving the Messiah character as surreal as the whole film, and unknown. Don't know which I'd prefer, but if it had been a more modern film, you can be sure the DVD would have the alternate version and labelled it either as Director's Cut or something. I think they now actually force the filmmakers to create alternate versions to pump up DVD sales, and you no longer see filmmakers complaining about the MPAA ratings much anymore since they know their cut will get on the DVD and be seen by more people than in the theater anyway.

Well, that's a different matter. Anybody else see the Tom as Messiah thing happening here?

[–] chriseff 17 years ago

I thought the same thing, actually. When I saw the 100 year flashback, and the "Dark figure" riding the horse, you could tell by his facial structure that it was clearly the same actor who played Thom. Also, the fact that after spending that much time in the town did not affect him added to my suspicion that he would end up being the Evil Messiah returned. I was actually quite surprised there was no reveal at the end, and wondered what all that foreshadowing content meant.

Perhaps that was the point of not ending it so obviously, to get people talking about what might have been.

[–] scarpred 17 years ago

While looking for any information about the movie, I came across this, an interview with Michael Greer from an old magazine-

"I have a new film out called 'Messiah of Evil.' It's a straight film. I'm the leading man and play the devil's son."

So, I suppose this was the plan then.

Here's the link, but that's all he says on the film- http://www.queermusicheritage.us/jun2003b.html

[–] largo2032 16 years ago

It's a shame that Mr. Greer passed on, because It would be nice to actually talk to him about Messiah, and ask him about any of the script that may have been cut or deleted scenes. If that is true about him being the 'Dark Stranger', It would explain alot. What if Thom was a descendant of the 'DS'? Because he seems to lie about his true origins at the Dinner Table at Arletty's house.

[–] sunnyj73 15 years ago

I thought that he may have been the descendant or reincarnation of the Dark Stranger, but not aware of it maybe. The ending always confused me a bit, too. That was the only answer that made any sense to me.

Ain't no shame in my game, brother.

[–] chas77 12 years ago

Just finished watching the film. Intense movie! Enjoyed it quite a bit.

Spoilers below...

If what you guys propose is true regarding Thom, why would he be running away from the cannibals in town? We see him crouching in fear near the cars when the cops are shooting at them, then, when he gets a chance (when they are eating the cop that has been shot) you see him making a beeline. Right before, or right after you see him getting attacked by one girl.

He doesn't seem to be one of them.

The whole thing is just kind of weird. I mean, instead of running down to the ocean in the end, why didn't they take one of their cars? Maybe the filmmakers could have shown a quick shot of the cars destroyed by the villagers or something. Anyway, trippy film.

[–] love_horror 12 years ago

I have to agree with chas77. Thom wouldn't be running from the cannibals if he was the Messiah of Evil. It just becomes so pointless.

My pain is constant and sharp, and I do not hope for a better world for anyone.

[–] Duncan_Idaho02 8 years ago

He was running because he did not know he was the descendant of, and was to become, the messiah of evil. How many times do we see where the character is clueless about what is actually happening to them. I thought it was pretty obvious once you saw that the same actor played the dark stranger. Then as they were running down the beach and the townspeople were following them, just as prophesied that he would lead them down the coast. When tom drown he made the metamorphosis complete and emerged from the ocean.

[–] DevilYouKnow 9 years ago

I remember reading somewhere that they used the same actor because it was easy to do so (low budget and he was on set). But that the Messiah was actually someone other than Tom.

https://twitter.com/DracTweets