Witch

This extremely entertaining gothic horror story, co-directed by Craig Hinde and Mark Zammit, will keep you completely engrossed and on the edge of your seat the entire time.

Starring in Witch is the excellent Russell Shaw, who gives a remarkable performance as the mysterious recluse Thomas. Shaw undoubtedly has a great future ahead of him, and I hope to see more work from him.

Fabrizio Santino, Ryan Spong, Daniel Jordan, and Sarah Alexandra Marks all deliver outstanding performances as well.

Richard Oakes provides the stunning cinematography which is beautiful to watch.

Reece Sanders handles the visual effects masterfully, and they are consistently very powerful.

The stunning settings and costumes, which heighten the sense of realism and transport you to 16th-century England, are always well-detailed.

Imran Ahmed, a very gifted composer, has created an incredible score that enhances the historical context of England in 1575.

Strongly recommended; supernatural horror enthusiasts will adore it.

Some films are so bad they're good. Witch (2024) is so bad, it's almost insulting. Directed (or rather, mishandled) by Craig Hinde and Marc Zammit, this supposed folk horror catastrophe is one of the most painful cinematic experiences in recent memory.

The movie starts off slow-and not in a brooding, atmospheric way. It's just boring. Within the first ten minutes, it's clear that pacing, suspense, and coherent storytelling were left at the script draft stage. The plot, which revolves around a man trying to prove his wife isn't a witch, somehow manages to drag despite being absurdly thin. When the film suddenly throws in a half-baked multiverse twist, it's less of a shock and more of a desperate grasp for relevance.

The acting ranges from wooden to downright embarrassing. The only slightly redeemable performance comes from Daniel Jordan, who tries his best with the role of a judge-but even he can't save this trainwreck. The rest of the cast feel like they were pulled from a last-minute community theatre audition.

The direction is amateurish, with lifeless scenes, bizarre editing, and dialogue that sounds like it was written by an AI trained solely on Tumblr posts and bad Renaissance Fair scripts. The horror elements? Laughable. At one point, a poorly rendered CGI flame floats across the screen like a PowerPoint animation. It's hard to tell if this was meant to be scary or if the film is secretly a parody of itself.

Visually, it's a mess. Despite being set in 16th-century England, everything feels oddly artificial and modern. The cinematography has all the charm of a history channel reenactment on a tight budget.

I can usually find something to appreciate even in the lowest-budget indie films. I want to like them. But Witch is on another level of bad. I honestly don't think I could finish it even if you paid me-not without falling asleep or losing my will to live.

Final verdict: Do yourself a favor and skip this one. Burn some sage, say a prayer, and pretend Witch (2024) never existed.

It is 1585 England. There be witches. There is a battle before it flashbacks to four nights earlier. The blacksmith's innocent wife is accused of being a witch. This is a British fantasy indie. I don't know why all the printed material says 1575 when the text in the movie says 1585. To me, that tells the story of this movie's amateur production. The first thing I noticed is that none of this feels real. This location feels like some present day reconstruction theme park. I do have to say that there are interesting singular images, but when it gets stretched out to full scenes, it becomes rather boring. In the end, this movie puts me to sleep.

Despite a few low lit scenes, this movie is so poorly produced it's hard to get into it. Story idea is ok, but the costumes and sets are so bad it's distracting. The costumes look like they ordered cheap bagged Halloween costumes from Amazon! Except the scenes in the woods, the sets look like they were build by a high school theatre club. The blacksmith is working with hammer and iron outside a shack and without a fire. It could have been improved and still been cheaply done. Low lighting or artistic photography would have improved it a lot. If there's nothing else that looks good, it's not a total waste of time.

I went into this thinking it was going to be a run-of-the-mill horror movie, as I had seen no press for it before running across it on Amazon Prime. If you want to consider the way women historically been portrayed and treated, then yes, a bit horrifying to see it in play.

But I found it to be an intellectual, genre-bending new take. It's not a trifling hack-fest. It's an intriguing little mystery, a smidge of what-if, a refreshing period piece written for today's audience wrapped in a tale of a man's eternal love for his wife and the lengths he will go to protect his family.

The negative reviewers on here probably haven't capacity for nuance in film, and where there are many movies to better suit them, if you don't want to think a little, avoid for simpler matter.