User reviews

An evil warlock (Julian Sands) travels from the 17th century to modern times, in search of the pages of the Grand Grimoire (the Devil's bible), which, when assembled together, will reveal God's true name and allow creation to be undone. Hot on his heels is a witch-hunter, Giles Redferne (Richard E. Grant), who enlists the help of Kassandra (Lori Singer), a pretty girl who has been cursed by the warlock (for every day that passes, she ages 20 years).

Written by David Twohy (Pitch Black) and directed by Steve Miner (Friday the 13th Part 2 and 3, House), Warlock is a fun, if unexceptional, slice of supernatural horror. Twohy has obviously done his homework and fills the script with interesting little snippets of witch lore: Redferne uses a witch compass to track his foe, uses salt as a weapon (witches hate the stuff) and creates a potion (from the boiled fat of a boy!) to enable him to fly. Miner's direction is similar in style to his earlier movie, House, with the emphasis on fun rather than fear. The film is workmanlike but not particularly memorable visually, and is unfortunately let down by some poor special effects.

Warlock is diverting enough entertainment while it lasts and worth checking out if you're a fan of all things 'witchy'. Just don't expect anything exceptional.

A witch hunter (Richard. E. Grant) is chasing an evil warlock (Julian Sands) that got transported from the 17th century to 1980's Los Angeles. With help from a young woman (Lori Singer) who's received a hex from the warlock, they team up and rush against the clock to stop him from getting his hands on the pages of the Grand Grimoire (satanic bible) and in doing so he could undo all creation.

Director Steve Miner (Friday the 13th Part 2 & 3, House) achieves probably his best film in "Warlock". Some people might say his best is "Lake Placid", but I couldn't stand that annoying film myself. Anyhow, the fact is the plot of "Warlock" might be very formulaic and lack depth in the religious lingo, but he delivers a pleasurable supernatural chase thriller here. Involving some enterprising performances that go in hand-to-hand with the well-paced story, witty humour and energetic action scenes. All of these elements seem to gel perfectly for an incredibly fun ride that hardly has a dull moment to be had.

There are some nice effects are on show (warlock flying through the sky) and good makeup is provided. The violence is hardly graphic, but there's some mild graphic scenes and implied violence too. Miner adds in some nice added touches with extremely solid direction that keeps a solid pace and well-orchestrated camera-work that captures the rather exquisite scenery when the film takes a detour in the countryside. Not particularly suspenseful or uneasy viewing, but well organised action set pieces, some horrific sequences and humorous moments (ingenious ending) makes up for it. There are some well-organised scenes of excitement and thrills, especially the sequences involving a farmhouse and a terrific climax in the eerie graveyard. It's layered with a potent score by Jerry Goldsmith that builds on some rare tense scenes, but more on the rapid mood of the film.

What truly make the film standout are riveting performances even though they feel hammy. There is such an excellent blend of chemistry between the leads. With each of them throwing back and forth to each other smart and witty dialogue. Julian Sands central performance leaps out as a powerful warlock out to destroy mankind. He fit's the role perfectly with this deviously venomous presence about him. Richard. E. Grant is charming as the very determined warlock hunter Giles Redferne. When these two characters meet, the confrontations between them always spices up the film. Lori Singer is enjoyable as the unknowingly Kassandra who adds to the humour and zest of the film.

The film might be nothing out of the ordinary, but you can't deny the upbeat tempo of a thrilling adventure that leads you on a whirlwind trip from Los Angeles to Boston.

In 1681 an evil warlock (Julian Sands in top form) is about to be killed for what he has done. Then a giant storm hits and he disappears to come to modern times. A bounty hunter Redferne (excellent performance by Richard E. Grant) does the same and comes to modern (or 1989) Boston. . Sands crash lands into the apartment of Kassandra (remember its with a K) played by Lori Singer. He has been brought to modern times to construct the bible of Satan. What sounds like could be very bad TERMINATOR rip-off turns out to be a pretty good horror flick due to the performances of Sands and Grant. While Singer is okay in her role, she certainly is not bad, but doesn't seem to shine like the other two do.

The film also has quite an effective score from Jerry Goldsmith and some of the dialogue or bantering between Redferne and Kassandra does seem to brighten up the film.

The one bad thing with this film are the effects. They to me don't even hit middle ground. They are just cheesy and bad at times. I don't really remember one effect where I thought that was cool. To me if they sharpened the effects and if they got a stronger performance for the Kassandra character they may have had themselves a great movie here. That and director Steve Miner was coming off the success of a few good horror films (FRIDAY THE 13TH PART 2 & 3 & HOUSE) they seemed to have a capable director. Written by David Twohy. I was give this a rating of 7 and seemed to have some fun while viewing it. Followed by two sequels.

The base premise of the story is just so commonly found.But the final story development is quite nice for me. It stays true to the older myths and help shape the myths used in other newer movies with the similar themes.

In my opinion, the acting just a -so-so, even for the era the movie is released in. Also, the execution of the screenplay is quite littered with unnecessary goofs and illogical things concerning continuity.

But for an overall judgment, I think this movie is quite entertaining, worth a 6 out of 10 score. And I agree at some newer publications referring to this movie as a classic at the genre of occult horror.

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.

I rarely watch any thriller type movies that involve the supernatural and and sort of monster or witch. They all tend to have similar plots and fail to challenge the imagination. I only saw this movie because my wife and daughter had just tuned it in when I arrived home one day. I watched simply to spend some time with them and chat during commercial breaks. I was caught up in this story very quickly and remained glued to my seat until it was over. Basically a male witch, played by Julian Sands, who wishes to reverse creation by finding a long hidden biblical document, makes the leap from the 15th century to present day to search for it. He is pursued by an equally determined witch hunter, played by Richard Grant. The movie is comical one moment and bone chilling the next. It's well presented and thrilling from start to finish. The witch chaser pursues the warlock across country, with the assistance of a young lady who falls into the story, with the chase culminating in a Graveyard in a very old section of Boston. Lots of excitement, drama, comedy and horror along the way. A delight to watch.

I have fond memories of watching 'Warlock' as a child and remember it as one of my favorite horror films.

Unfortunately - having watched it now as an adult - I have mixed feelings. The visual effects are impressive, and Julian Sands is very good as the evil, merciless warlock, yet it lacks something: suspense. 'Warlock' is unfortunately not as good as it could have been due to parts of the movie playing like a comedy. The annoying humor is present even during serious moments, rendering them ineffective in the process.

Throughout the film Lori Singer has a constant humorist attitude. It therefore doesn't help much that Richard E Grant and Julian Sands are trying to be serious. This should either have been a horror comedy, or a full-on suspenseful horror, but the blending of genres just doesn't work here. Even during the film's climax they throw in silly comical one-liners.

In general, this wasn't a bad film, and it was quite entertaining. It just could have been so much more.

Would I watch it again? Maybe in another 10 years or so...

James Cameron's 1984 masterpiece The Terminator remains one of the greatest time travel epics ever made. A true Sci-Fi classic, it grossed $78 million at the box office and was an instant favorite of critics and fans alike. Perhaps it was inevitable that its premise—that of a hero and his mortal foe battling across centuries as well as great distances—would be duplicated a score of times by lesser filmmakers in lesser films. Universal Soldier, Highlander, and their myriad dismal sequels come to mind, as does the 1993 Stallone vehicle, Demolition Man. Steve Miner's unsung 1989 B-movie Warlock is very much in this same category of Terminator knockoff. Though underwhelming in its production values, Warlock manages to outshine its contemporaries through fine writing, directing, and above all, acting.

The beauty of Warlock's story lies in its simplicity. This is not a film with delusions of grandeur; it has more in common with Highlander than Braveheart. Hot on the trail of his mortal enemy the Warlock, our hero Redferne dives courageously after his foe into a magical time vortex that transports him from 17th century New England to 1980s Los Angeles. A true fish out of water, it isn't long before Redferne finds himself tasered at the hands of those infamous proponents of brutality, the LAPD. He's arrested but doesn't stay in jail for long. An innocent bystander named Kassandra ("With a K!," as she is quick to remind all) posts bail when she realizes Redferne may be the one person who can free her from the curse the Warlock has placed on her. Kassandra (Lori Singer) is a vain young woman who has been cursed by a spell that leads to rapid aging. At the pace of "a decade twice over a day," Kassandra not only rapidly loses her looks but has less than a week to live unless she can reverse the spell. The only way to do that is by confronting the diabolical Warlock, who rightfully terrifies her. After some convincing, Kassandra eventually agrees to join Redferne. The odd couple set off on a quest to find the Warlock and end his reign of terror before it goes any further. Along the way, the Warlock takes council with Satan himself and begins a quest to undo all of creation by uniting the pages of a spell book called the Grand Grimoire. Fully assembled, the Grand Grimoire spells out the true name of God which, if spoken backwards, will destroy the universe.

The character to whom we are to relate immediately as an audience is the Sara Connor proxy, Kassandra. Initially, she is not a likable leading woman; she is written as dim witted, cowardly, and vapid. But by the film's end, I came to find her if not pleasant then tolerable. The kindest thing I can say of Singer's performance as this boor is that it is adequate; she is never charming but far from odious. It would take an actress of the highest caliber to make me really care about Kassandra and Singer just doesn't have the chops. Still, she does what she can with the role and her effort is commendable.

Like The Terminator, Warlock focuses as much on its antagonist as it does on the heroic duo out to defeat him. The Warlock's true name is never revealed on screen. Instead he is referred to only by title, a nice touch that paints him as less a man than an entity of nameless evil. He is wantonly cruel, blond, and impossibly beautiful. His powers are formidable; superhuman strength, a hypnotic gaze, and flight to name just a few. English actor Julian Sands has a ball as the title character. The scene in which he plays video football with a young boy on a swing set is tremendous; as is the scene in which he admires a victim's pinky ring before rudely hacking the finger off. Misfortune in the form of death and dismemberment inevitably befall all who cross his path, but Warlock takes care not to become an exploitation film. Most violence happens off screen, is merely hinted at, or is handled humorously.

Richard E. Grant's performance as the witch hunter Redferne is nothing short of heroic. His character is loosely molded after Terminator's hero, Sgt. Kyle Reese (Michael Biehn). In the hands of a lesser actor, the valiant Redferne could have been a laughable caricature of superstitious Puritanism but Grant finds the heart of the character. Standing over a "witch compass" constructed of brass and witch's blood, he delivers the greatest line in the film; "Now brute, one last time we play the game out!" I enjoyed every word of Redferne's dialogue, all intoned with Grant's silver tongued faux Scots burr.

On a special effects level, Warlock falls flat on its face. This is a film produced by Roger Corman in the late 80s, which should give you some idea of what to expect. The bursts of magical energy the Warlock fires from his hands are truly garish. And don't get me started on the scene in which the Warlock is supposed to be flying down an interstate highway at 100 mph. Warlock's special effects suffer not only in comparison to recent films, but also in comparison to other films from the same time period such as John Carpenter's Big Trouble in Little China. Still, for all of the low budget special effect snafus, I enjoyed the fight scenes between Redferne and the Warlock immensely. I particularly enjoyed the climactic showdown in which Redferne takes on the Warlock with his bare hands.

All in all, Warlock is easily the best of the many Terminator knockoffs. It is action packed, well paced, and resists the temptation to get bogged down with a sappy romantic subplot. It never reaches beyond its grasp; it is a B-movie out and out and on that humble level it succeeds. It features an attractive cast and is well written, directed, produced, and especially acted.

Oh, dost thou scare me! hang me and burn me over a baskets of cats. I'm dead, you dolt, I don't care what you do after that. I can't believe they believed such nonsense in 1691, but apparently they did.

But, the Warlock (Julian Sands) was too slick for them and ends in in present day LA. Soon, Redferne (Richard E. Grant) appears to bring him back in some kind of reverse Terminator. A tongue bitten out and eyes removed in the first 10 minutes. This should be interesting.

Lori Singer (Short Cuts) joins Redferne after being cursed by the Warlock to age 20 years every day. Can't think of a worse curse for a woman. They travel to Boston to stop the Warlock, who discovers along the way that a certain priest has been doing unpriestly things, and uses that to get his information.

There is not a lot of special effects, but what there was seemed good for the time.

The real fun of this movie is the interaction of Singer and Grant. They made it worth watching.

Oh, yeah, get thee you male children baptized.

This movie actually is a pretty fun film with a lot more going for it than most people might think just looking at the cover. Sands is perfectly cast as the warlock, an evil-to-the-core witch who works for nothing less than the uncreation of the cosmos. Fighting him is an out-of-his-element witch-hunter who has chased him to the present (Grant) with a peculiar confidence. He knows his enemy and knows what he needs to do to prevent the warlock from completing the Grand Grimoire, but is lost in the present. Tagging along is a modern-day girl who is acceptably portrayed by Lori Singer caught between the warlock's unbelievable powers, her newfound friend from the past with an obsession, and her now blasted view of "how things work in the real world." Two things really make this film though. The first is that the explanations that are given actually don't bog the momentum down (and the filmmakers decide to leave some things unexplained or give the most cursory explanations to catch the audience up in the wild ride that Kassandra (Singer) has found herself in) and that although both the warlock and the hunter have powers, they are closly matched and totally obsessed, making for a very interesting conflict. There's also enough tongue in cheek to keep people interesting and to break occasional tension. Very watchable - go and try it on for size.

This is a rental jewel if you can still find it on the shelf. There isn't much substance but it is fun, a bit gory, suspenseful, and adventurous. There are pretty well defined characters, and a decent plot that moves forward through the film.

Julian Sands is great as the calm, cold, and collect warlock, and Richard E. Grant is great as the animated and out of place witch hunter. Lori Singer is quite annoying as the hunter's sidekick, and 20th century guide. But overall there is a good balance of characters and interaction.

I bet this film would have been fantastic if the budget had been bigger, especially for the FX. But it does well with a good script and decent editing.

A condemned practitioner of black magic in 1691 Massachusetts (Julian Sands) is mystically transported to 1988 with a righteous witch-hunter on his tail (Richard E. Grant). The latter teams-up with a young woman (Lori Singer) to pursue his evil prey.

"Warlock" (1989) is similar to "Terminator" with the difference of people coming to the present from THE PAST as opposed to the future. It's a thrilling chase flick with an interesting fish-out-of-water element. The first half is great, but the second half isn't quite as effective. Nevertheless, this is a very entertaining flick highlighted by the intriguing noble protagonist (Grant) and the charisma of the wicked antagonist (Sands).

The film runs 1 hour, 43 minutes, and was shot Plimoth Patuxet, Massachusetts; the Greater Los Angeles area, including Santa Paula, California City and Hermosa Beach; and Bonneville Salt Flats, Utah.

GRADE: B+

'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).

The late 80's and 90's have not been a particularly good time for big-budget horror movies, but Warlock, a kind of supernatural Terminator, works particularly well. Everyone is well-cast, although the focus is on the three leads. Julian Sands is at his most diabolical, but Richard Grant also does well, neatly portraying Redferne as a man out of time (essentially Michael Biehn's character from Terminator, in reverse). Lori Singer is...well, tolerable. The Warlock is not the all-powerful deity that the writers could have portrayed him as (and as he'll be portrayed in the next movie), meaning that the battles between him and Redferne are actually pretty interesting.

Other than Lori Singer, I like everything about this film. Richard E. Grant is at his best, and Sands is pure Evil. The magic stuff is great and I love films that have magic, and/or sword stuff. This isn't medieval, but it all fits well in a modern setting.

I first saw this in the early 90s on a vhs n revisted it recently on a dvd. This movie is definitely for 80s fan. The sequels were awful. Julian Sands clearity in his words was over the top. Lori Singer's hair color n make up were lol. The witch's flying effects were badly done n very laughable. Richard E. Grants face looked as if he was constipated n his mullet hairstyle was funny. The film's initial cinematography was good. The kills were almost nada but the film was good fun for its time.

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.