bowmanblue '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).

Bonehead-XL Throughout the seventies and eighties, New World Pictures released some of the most endearing schlock cinema of that era. Many of studio's horror, sci-fi, and sexploitation films are looked back on fondly. The last movie the company produced was "Warlock." The film appears to be an unambitious late eighties horror flick at first but has developed a cult following over the years. Dig a little beneath the surface and you'll realize why. The film was directed by Steve Miner, director of the first two "Friday the 13th" sequels and oddball haunting flick "House." Screenwriter David Twohy would go on to write blockbusters like "The Fugitive" and "Waterworld," as well as gaining a following for the Riddick series. Stars Lori Singer, Julian Sands, and Richard E. Grant all have fandoms of their own.The story owes more then a little to "The Terminator" but trades in robots and time travel for witchcraft and magic. A grand warlock, before being executed in 1600s Boston, travels forward in time, winding up in 1980s L.A. A witch hunter with a personal grudge against the sorcerer leaps into the portal after him, following him into the future. The two men cross paths with Kassandra with a K, a snarky twenty-something living in the city. The Warlock uses his Satanic powers to cause chaos, even aging Kassandra twenty years, the witch hunter on his trail the whole time. The MacGuffin motivating the evil witch is an ancient book that could bring about the un-creation of the universe. Needless to say, neither Redferne nor Kassandra want that to happen."Warlock" strikes the right balance between humor, campy special effects, eighties action-style thrills, and harder horror elements. The script gets some decent laughs out of its "fish out of water" premise. Both Redferne and the Warlock have comical reactions to modern society, particularly to airplanes and cars. Lori Singer's Kassandra, meanwhile, frequently reacts to the supernatural insanity suddenly in her life with sarcastic one-liners. Side moments, like a cop's radar going crazy when the flying Warlock speeds by or a surprisingly modern reverend, also provide chuckles. For laughs of the unintentional variety, some of the film's special effects, like animated fireballs or the flying wizard, haven't age the best.However, "Warlock" is still a horror film and provides some grisly and clever moments for genre fans. Upon arriving in L.A., the Warlock bites a man's tongue out, the severed appendage landing in a simmering fry pan. Mary Woronov's cameo as a fraud spiritualist ends with the villainous wizard yanking her eyeballs out. When a Mennonite makes eye contact with the witch, he's immediately cursed, blood running from his eyes. The most morbid element of the film happens off-screen, when the villain murders a child to rend his fat. That the film's tone isn't completely thrown out of balance by such a dark moment is a testament to Twohy's clever writing.The nature of magic also provides some witty moments. Those removed eyeballs mentioned earlier float in the Warlock's hand, deepening his sight. A cut to the chest magically heals, in a simple but satisfying special effect. When the evil wizard appears in a home, it has immediate effect on the surroundings. Milk goes sour. Bread won't rise. Though the villain is the one that mostly practices magic, it's a two-way street. Hammering nails into his footprints puts the witch in immense pain. Salt burns his skin. A bloodied weather vane is used to determine what ground is holy and what isn't. It's refreshing that the script treats the Warlock as a blatantly Satanic character, an old-fashion horror-movie witch.If the smarter then average script isn't the main attribute here, it's the stand-out cast. Julian Sands' reputation as a cult actor would mostly be founded on his work here. Sands' icy coolness and effete handsomeness suits the part well. (I'm not surprised a certain portion of the female population found him incredibly sexy.) He strikes a good balance between serious threat and wry sarcasm. Richard E. Grant, primarily known as a comedy actor, actually does well playing the straight man, the deathly serious Redferne. He's even convincing as an action hero, stabbing Sands or grabbing him with a whip. Grant's comedic strength still shines through, especially when faced with his own corpse. The best performance probably belongs to Singer though. She shows a deft comedic timing, gamely trading barbs with her male co-stars. She's effortlessly charming and, even if the script can't sell the romance between Grant and her, the two still play off each other nicely.The film's central threat, that the villain could undo the entire universe by speaking God's one true name backwards, probably isn't given as much attention as it deserves. The way the Warlock is dispatched, a payoff on a character's briefly mentioned diabetes, comes a bit out of nowhere. Yet "Warlock" functions fantastically as eighties horror comfort food. A genuinely eerie Jerry Goldsmith score keeps things rolling along. The film's fantastic VHS-box-lending poster art got the film rented more then a few times which is the ideal way to watch it. The movie was popular enough to spawn two sequels, only one featuring Sands, but the Warlock has never reached the status of a Freddy or a Pinhead. Which is a shame since the film proves highly entertaining.

bth2004 I will say without apology that most 80's movies that are period, fantasy, horror, sci-fi, or anything similar are pure garbage. This film is anything but! Let's break it down by details:First, the acting. I won't say it was remarkable, but it certainly was above par for the time and subject matter. Julian Sands is always good as a villain, and Richard Grant always does a good job. Lori Singer was a bit weak at times, but not enough to really detract from the movie-- also quite nice to look at, and the lack of a weak romance storyline was kind of refreshing.Next, the effects. The 80's did produce movies with better effects than this one, but they certainly weren't bad--especially for the period. I've seen things made in the new millennium that are worse.Finally, the plot. I won't say it's scary, but the plot was certainly compelling. There were a few interesting twists here and there (especially Renferne's end), and the overall flow was well-paced and anything but dull. If you believe in magic or in God and Satan, then the kick will be even stronger.So, you definitely want to see this at least once. It's a solid 7.5-8. Not going to win any awards, but still quite good. Praise be to God that there actually is an 80's supernatural thriller worth watching!

alexfromhorn Oh man, this movie was fun!-5 for bad camera/quality +/- 0 for special effects, they were not good but somehow they weren't that bad and looked rather realistic for a 1988 B-Movie. -2 for the bad acting +3 for quite kool characters. That good guy totally reminded me of a less capable version of one the Castlevania protagonists. The Warlock was absolutely evil, he was much of a villain somehow you gotta love that guy he is absolutely one of the most villains I ever saw in a movie! +2 Good story somehow, it was fun and really a lot happened. It had it's own type of humor I really enjoyed +1 A lot of different places they went to, a lot sceneries -1 some situations were ridiculous.Even if you can't look at VHS quality, it's rate funny