Exoticalot People are voting emotionally.

Tyreece Hulme One of the best movies of the year! Incredible from the beginning to the end.

Skyler Great movie. Not sure what people expected but I found it highly entertaining.

Staci Frederick Blistering performances.

Filipe Neto When I found this movie I seriously thought it would be another horror movie about sorcery and, in fact, the plot revolves around a malevolent wizard searching for a very old book in the twentieth century. But I was wrong: it's a lightweight and imaginative fantasy film, that entertains the audience effectively and allows for good laughs. And only fantasy could forgive such an unbelievable script, far-fetched characters and overly theatrical interpretations. Julian Sands and Richard E. Grant are the lead actors and do what they can to be OK. However, the best way to do that is the exaggerated and cheesy way they always are. Even so, Grant adopted a false accent that always sounds forced. In the past did they speak through the nose? Lori Singer was the one who I dislike the most because she never gets into the spirit of the movie and has no talent for jokes, even considering the comedic potential of her character... This is, in short, a comedy of absurdities with a touch of "B movie" style, which may be purposeful or not. But it's quite nice, if we are in the mood.

Predrag Okay, it's not the best movie in the world, but it's worth it just to the always good-even-when-he's-bad Richard E. Grant in a heroic role. Grant plays a witch-hunter who follows a Warlock 300 years into the future (ending up in 1991 Los Angeles) to stop him from destroying the world. Grant and Sands seem to have a blast with their roles. Singer is okay as the modern day babe who is forced to help Grant track down the Warlock after he casts a spell on her.Director Steve Miner already had some horror experience, but I think he outdid himself here. I was pleased with the story from start to finish (a stunning rarity in horror especially back then), the acting was solid (but not wowing), the nuance and discovery of mysticism was developed well, and the special effects were really quite good for their time with the ectoplasm's magical energy not at all looking hokey (although the flying was a bit silly by today's standards) and a nice gory finale! The script is definitely a highlight and although being very far from special, contains some excellent moments. I was really pleased with the ending, had a dash of acceptable warm-fuzzy feelings and a bit of clever tongue-in-cheek humor. This film is far better than horror fans today realize and sadly I fear it is overlooked when people delve into 80's and 90's horror to round their film educations.Overall rating: 7 out of 10.

FlashCallahan In Boston of 1691, a warlock is sentenced to death, but escapes magically into the future, followed doggedly by a witch hunter.There he is searching for the three parts of the Devil's Bible.Trailed by the witch hunter and the woman whose house he landed in, they must stop him, as the book contains the true name of God, which he can use to un-create the world.....Ever since i saw Sands in Arachnophobia, he has always been a Chicken in a Basket style actor to me, Very bad, but very more-ish.As with the film, it's one of those little lost gems that I have wanted to see since it's initial release but was never able to.I finally saw the movie, after tracking it down on the Horror Channel, and now I really wish I had saw it when I were 13, because seeing it as a 34 year old super film geek, it just stinks.The film is devoid of thrills, or scares, and honestly, the most exciting part of this is when Sands is playing a video game with the kid from Baywatch.Lori Singer provides the bad make up, and Richard E grant proves that Groundskeeper Willie isn't always animated.he effects are eye poppingly bad, even for 1988, and eventually the film gets sucked up in it's own absurdness.I saw the sequel before this, and believe me, it's a hell (ahem) of a lot more enjoyable.so bad it's boring.

Coventry "Warlock" is not a genuine horror masterpiece. It's not even a minor classic and it's not likely to appear in too many all-time favorite listings. This is, however, one of the most entertaining and pleasant horror movies of the late 80's with a familiar albeit reliable theme, a well-written script and – most of all – the exact right casting choices. Director Steve Miner ("Friday The 13th" II and III) and writer David Twohy ("Pitch Black") take a subject that was particularly popular in the late 60's and early 70's, namely witch-hunting, and provide it with a typical 80's pop culture twist. The film begins in the year 1691 in Massachusetts, though for once not in Salem, where the fierce and purely evil Warlock is chained in a tower and waiting for the next day to be hung and burned over a basket of live cats. What the hell is that about, by the way? What the added value of kittens when you're already death and burning? Either way, Warlock isn't too happy with this prospect and, with the help of his malignant Lord and Master Satan, escapes towards present day California. His evil assignment is to bring together the three separated parts of the "Grand Grimoire" – the Devil's Bible – and to dramatically reverse God's creation. Luckily enough, for mankind's sake, the tough and handsome witch hunter Giles Redferne also got catapulted forward in time and intends to stop the Warlock. Redferne teams up with local girl Kassandra (with a K) who was put under a curse by the Warlock. She ages twenty years per day! "Warlock" is a pretty cool horror and fantasy effort, but strangely enough it also qualifies as an offbeat road-movie. Redferne & Kassandra chase the male witch across the country, from California over Colorado to Massachusetts. Particularly the sequences in Colorado, set inside a typically Amish farm, are atmospheric and suspenseful. The absolute best aspects about the film are the precise and imaginative character drawings and the exact right castings. Julian Sands is sublime as the out-and-out evil Warlock. He might looks like a geek, but at the same time he has this inexplicably malevolent aura surrounding him. When the Warlock is interested in a ring, he unhesitatingly cuts off the righteous owner's finger, and he doesn't feel any moral restraints to mix a 12-year-old child into a cocktail potion so that he can obtain flying powers. Richard E. Grant, on the other hand, is the typical medieval macho warrior who unwillingly arrives in modern times and has problems adjusting. Lori Singer, in a totally different type of "Footloose", is surprisingly enchanting as the strong female type. There's quite a number of cool make-up effects and eerie scenery, but "Warlock" definitely isn't a gruesome or exploitative film. On the contrary, actually, I personally appreciate how director Steve Miner insinuates a lot of shocks, but simultaneously he leaves the horror up to our imagination.