Warlock (1991)

one of my absolute favorites!

Excellent, Without a doubt!!

It's funny watching the elements come together in this complicated scam. On one hand, the set-up isn't quite as complex as it seems, but there's an easy sense of fun in every exchange.

It is neither dumb nor smart enough to be fun, and spends way too much time with its boring human characters.

WARLOCK is a cheesy and derivative horror movie from director Steve Miner, the man who brought us the similar-in-style HOUSE. The story is of a 17th century warlock who is captured by irate locals but manages to escape to the then-present day, pursued by a vengeful witch hunter. The warlock's plan is to gather together three parts of an ancient grimoire which will allow him to destroy the world.The first thought upon watching this movie? Derivative. There are bits of THE TERMINATOR, HIGHLANDER, and THE ICEMAN COMETH in this one, and it's not as good as any of those movies. In fact, it's completely cheesy, with Julian Sands going into complete ham mode as the baddie of the piece and Richard E. Grant struggling throughout with his Scottish accent. The film's budgetary constraints are also more than apparent as this looks and feels more like a B-movie than an A-list picture.My biggest complaint, however, is with the casting of non-actress Lori Singer, whose attempts at humour fall flat time and time again. She's awful, it has to be said, and really drags the film down so much that I was laughing at it rather than with it. That's a pity, because WARLOCK remains an oddly enjoyable outing. It's not as gory as you'd expect but there are some imaginative death scenes. The special effects have dated badly but are pretty fun to watch, particularly the ones involving the warlock flying around. I liked the mythology in the film including the witch-finding apparatus and the seeing eyes. Cult actress Mary Woronov has a good cameo. WARLOCK remains predictable from beginning to end, but as a bit of cult fun it remains enjoyable.

In 1691 Boston, Warlock (Julian Sands) is imprisoned and sentenced to death. A portal to present day Los Angeles takes him away and witch hunter Giles Redferne (Richard E. Grant) follows him. The Warlock arrives at Chas' home where Kassandra (Lori Singer) is staying. He kills Chas as he goes on a search for the three parts of the Grand Grimoire, the Devil's Bible. Kassandra returns home to find Redferne. The cops arrest Redferne. The Warlock attacks her turning her into 40 and rapidly aging. She bails out Redferne as they hunt down the Warlock.Julian Sands is a pretty good villain. It's a nice little supernatural thriller. The odd thing is that the Warlock is the most compelling character and seems to be the lead in the movie. I'm not sure aging up Lori Singer for a chunk of the movie is the best move. She's not a great actress and her looks are her better assets. Grant is also not the leading man type. There isn't anything spectacular but it's a well made B-movie.

'Warlock' was released over twenty years ago and I've only just got round to watching it. And, I have to say, better late than never. It really is a fun movie.No, it never tries to be particularly serious. It doesn't have the budget for that. It's about a warlock (or 'male witch' as we learn they are) who, upon being captured in the seventeenth century, only goes and pulls one of his disappearing tricks and ends up in modern day L.A. And, if that wasn't bad enough, he's only figured out a way of 'uncreating' the whole of God's great existence. Lucky for the rest of us that Richard E Grant and his (interesting) Scottish accent have also time travelled to stop him. So, he teams up with 'average Joette' Kassandra (with a K) and we have our movie.And, 'our movie' happens to be in the same ball park as other great chases through Los Angeles. Due to the film's L.A. setting and the fact that we have two superhuman leads squaring off against one another, I couldn't help but think of Terminator. However, due to budget constraints, it's not quite as slick as the cyborg epic and falls more into those lower budget versions, such as Dark Angel and The Hidden. But then I also loved Dark Angel and The Hidden, so I didn't mind.Warlock's special effects certainly aren't that special, but, by the time you find yourself laughing at how they portray someone 'flying' (I'm sure if you look closely you can see the wires) you should already be enjoying the whole film too much to really care.Take the whole thing with a big pinch of salt. It certainly does. The dialogue is nice as our 'out of time' hero struggles to adapt to modern day living and women who wear make-up. All in all, it's nothing new, but it certainly is fun (you may need an appreciation of low budget 'so-bad-they're-good' type movies to really enjoy it).

From mediocre writer David Twohy and mediocre director Steve Miner, comes Warlock, a very mediocre movie. There are way way worse films of this sort, but this is pretty cheap. This is the kind of story that Sam Raimi could do justice to. Neither Twohy nor Miner are able to make anything clever out of this. The finished product is disappointing, It begins in 17th century Massachussets (the third British colony in America, famous for its witch hunts) A hieratic is about to meet the noose for worshipping Satan. On the day he receives his sentence, the clouds come and take him away, off to 20th century California. A witch hunter seeking revenge for the murder of his wife follows the warlock (somehow) into the future, and using a witch compass proceeds to track him down. He also has the help of Kassandra, a young lady seeking to reverse a spell that was put on her, when the Warlock entered her house.Warlock doesn't really work as a horror, a fantasy or a comedy. Despite its campy absurdity, it's hard to laugh at, unless looked at as an unintentional comedy, which would relieve you of having to question things like, how does a man dressed in sheep's wool get passed airport security carrying a four foot piece of copper used as a spear?So what is Warlock? it is nothing more or less than a cheaply made, product of the B-movie industry, with bad special effects, sub-par picture quality, and the occasional moments that provoke giggles don't cut it.