Warlock III: The End of Innocence

The first Warlock film with Julian Sands and Richard E. Grant was great - original, fun, a bit gory, and suspenseful. It had pretty well defined characters, and a plot that moved. (I bet the movie would have been terrific if it's budget had been about 3 times bigger for special FX.) I Feel the second installment Warlock: The Armagedon, was okay, but a bit cheesy with the magic druid theme going. Though the plot was a bit dodgy because they weren't chasing after the warlock, the improved FX and magical scenarios made the movie palatable.

This third installment though is pathetic. The editing is horrible, the film drags on and on for the first 40 minutes or so. The lead character is very flat, and the Warlock is also quite flat. Although that is kind of how the warlock character has always been portrayed, calm, cold, and collected, which worked when the other leads where quite animated, but is terrible here with the boring lead. At least there are the side kicks in W3 to spice things up, as the two leads are excruciatingly lame characters.

As the film is slow at the beginning, one doesn't know if it is going to be about the house, or about the Warlock. And I think that where they missed it. If they had focused less on the "haunted house" aspect early on, and more or flashbacks with the warlock, it may have turned out better.

If you are a fan of the previous two Warlock films its worth renting, but prepare yourself for boredom and disappointment.

If you've never seen the previous Warlock films, skip this one, rent Warlock (1989) and enjoy.

the third part of the series is simply blasphemic. Trying to make a 90s teenieshlasher version out of the great warlock sujet.

Where Part 1 & 2 had atmosphere, fun and style (no big surprise looking, who directed them) Part 3 is only boring,plotless and stupid. Not to forget acted real badly. Only Payne as Warlock is acceptable.

This movie is pretty damn good. Way better than #2, and just a nose away from the first. This film focuses around the miller house and goes back to reveal a bit more about the Warlock and his presence in colonial times. It is really quite well done and the acting put forth by Bruce Payne supersedes Julian Sands'. It is also quite creatively done, especially what the Warlock does. Excellent, probably the best in the series.

I'll be honest with you I like Playboy playmates, and I especially like Angel Boris (playmate of the month July 1996)who has a small part in this movie. In fact she is the whole reason I rented this video at all. Since this is the third movie in a seris I decided it would be a good idea to see parts one and two before I got to this one. I thought part one entitled "Warlock" was pretty boring but had good characters and a good try at a plot so I did'nt hate it. Part two entitled "Warlock:The Armeggedon" was excellent in my opinion. It had cool special effects, good plot, was'nt boring and the Warlock Julian Sands was still in it who I liked from part one. By this point I was glad I saw them both because they were fun and now I was ready to see the one I wanted to see in the first place. Boy was I disapointed. The movie was very boring, had no plot, wasn't scary (even though you could tell they were trying to make this one scary unlike the other ones), and Angel Boris was barley in it and when she was she would just say stupid lines that they wrote for her just so they could have a hot chick type person in it at all. The main character was a whiney plain lookin girl who should be in some sappy show like 7th Heaven instead of a horror movie. These aren't the only characters who are lame in this movie because your glad when all the guy characters die and could care less anyway. Now that I told what I thought was bad here is what I thought was good: Angel Boris' breast's exposed twice, Angel Boris in a thong, and the new Warlock Bruce Payne was'nt that bad even though I still missed Julian Sands who I'm kind of glad was'nt in this one because it was so lame. If you did like this movie then I would like to recommend another seris of movies which is similiar to this one but a thousand times better. This seris being the "Night of the Demons" movies. Because They are scarier,have better special effects,have a ton more female nudity, and are also funny which this movie was'nt trying to be, but comedy is of course an important part of the horror movie experience.

I praise the first Warlock film...... who wouldnt? I even defended the second one because too many sad people winged about it. Geeze, it wasn't that bad!....... was it?

So should I defend this third installment?.... Hell No!!! .... I just cannot seem to peice together any possitive words in my head to maybe lift this review up a notch.... in fact maybe it's better that I dont even talk about this tele-movie-esque film at all.

Instead may I suggest that someone put pen to paper and create a fourth Warlock film that blends the first two formulas into one. Being that Redfern seeks assistence from the Druids to battle against the Warlock.... none other than Julien Sands.... none of this Bruce Payne nonsense.

(No offence Bruce. You were great in Passenger 57... but you just aint no Warlock)

So to sum up Warlock III: End of Innocence...... Miserable waste of time. Part 4 would be a classic.... if it existed! 2 out of 10

(it gets a 2 because it had at least some balls to even be made at all)