User Reviews

Witchcraft is the first of no less than 16 movies and that is highly impressive!

It tells the story of a woman who goes to stay with her mother in law after she gives birth to her first child. Trouble is her husband and mother in law aren't what they seem and have ties to the occult.

Watchcraft first of all is unforgivably boring, very little happens. I think it's doing this for the purpose of building tension but it fails miserably.

When things do happen they look so poor as intended impact is lost.

I do hope the franchise improves as I'm 1/16 and suffering already.

The Good:

The fact that the franchise lasted so long is impressive

The Bad:

Very boring

Unoriginal

Generic cliched finale

Things I Learnt From This Movie:

Witchcraft must get better or it wouldn't have lasted so long, right?

The opening of the movie intercuts a man and a woman being burned at the stake for witchcraft during colonial American times with a woman giving birth. That burning scene is repeated in a number of the sequels (more about them later).

Grace Churchill is the mother, a woman who emigrated from Poland with her parents, who died in a murder/suicide. She's a former junkie (if I heard correctly), but cleaned up and was surprised to find John Churchill one of the state's wealthiest men was interested in marrying her.

After the birth, they live with his mother in her huge house. Parts of the house are dusty, with things covered with sheets, and she's not supposed to go into that part. The family butler shows up to block it off when she tries to show it to her friend Linda. He becomes a little friendlier when given a fresh flower from the garden, and then isn't always there to guard the off-limits room.

That room has a mirror in it, in which she can briefly see colonial people, and also has visions of the future, though she's not sure she really saw them. She also has a dream, or maybe it isn't, in which she wanders outside at night and finds two people engaged in a ritual, and her mother-in-law Elizabeth is one of them. Blood drips out of Elizabeth's mouth.

The family also has a bunch of strange friends, older people who don't talk much. Grace's priest comes to the house to baptize William and he has a vision of flames, and becomes ill.

To some extent, as some have said, this borrows from Rosemary's Baby, which is certainly the better movie. There's even a steal of a famous shot of that movie, where the camera points through a doorway, partly showing a woman on a phone. However, the camera here actually does peer around, whereas in Polanski's film, the shot makes the viewer want to try to peer around.

Rosemary's Baby was followed by a little-seen and reportedly poor TV movie, Look What's Happened to Rosemary's Baby. Witchcraft is followed by a surprising twelve sequels so far (most of them relatively poor), though the last of them has not been released yet. Possibly the only horror series to have out-sequeled this one is the Asian anthology series Troublesome Night.

Witchcraft II picks up about eighteen years after this one, and does feature a number of flashbacks to this. Most of the sequels can stand on their own, but due to the number of flashbacks in II, it might be best to start here.

Witchcraft II also features some nudity, while there was none in this one, unless there is more than one version of the film. Some of the later Witchcraft sequels stray into erotic horror, and some feature scenes that could be considered softcore I suppose.

The main recurring character in all but two of the sequels (8 and 10) is Will Spanner, who is baby William Churchill in this one, and William Adams in the second - there's never any doubt in the movie that the baby will make it through, just what he'll be like when he gets older. Though none of them are brilliant, I don't think they're quite as bad as many others do. When in the mood for a cheap horror movie with lots of nudity, they're OK.

How many Witchcraft films were there? 13? 14? I don't know, but this, the first, is not like the others.

It is a repackaged Rosemary's Baby. and doesn't have the sex scenes of the later films in the Witchcraft series.

This film has all the elements you would expect in a Gothic horror film: a creaky old house, mood music, a scary butler, strange dreams, and lots of screaming and blood. And, we need to mention the creepiest of them all, the Mother-in-Law.

It may have been low budget, but it still was interesting and worth the time spent.

"Witchcraft" is a relatively unknown underground horror flick. Though the film has been received extremely bad reviews, it managed to spawn a total of twelve sequels (to date, at least).

The plot of the film is similar to the earlier "Rosemary's Baby". Grace Churchill has given birth to her first child, when her husband temporarily moves them in with his mother. While staying in her mother-in-laws creepy, old mansion, Grace begins experiencing bizarre incidents that lead her to believe her new family isn't what they seem.

Honestly, I'm not sure why this movie got such bad reviews from people. The only real problem I found with it was the editing style - which gives the film the look of an episode of "Murder, She Wrote". The sets of the film are quite creepy. The acting (by a primarily newcomer cast) is good. The music (though performed on a synthesizer) fits the tone of the film.

All in all, "Witchcraft" isn't an Oscar winning film, but it's a interesting way to pass 90 minutes.

As Grace Churchill (Anat Topal-Barzilai) gives birth to her son William, images of a pair of witches being burnt at the stake flash through her mind. On leaving hospital, Grace's husband John (Gary Sloan) informs her that she will be staying at his mother's home for a while until she is ready to cope by herself. Before long, Grace starts to experience strange occurrences that eventually lead her to believe that John and his mother, Elizabeth (Mary Shelley), are up to something strange.

Rather unbelievably, this tepid supernatural thriller, which clearly takes its cues from Rosemary's Baby, has spawned fifteen sequels to date, apparently finding an appreciative audience by including plenty of nudity and soft-core sex. This first film, however, offers nothing in that department: it's dull, uneventful drivel for most of the running time, only coming to life in the final ten minutes where extremely patient viewers are rewarded with a spot of much needed gore, including a decapitation and an impalement.

As a horror movie completist, I now feel compelled to watch the rest in the series, no matter how bad they get: wish me luck… I get the feeling I will need it.

So the time has come for me to finally watch and review the WITCHCRAFT series that incredibly has created count 'em 15 sequels. After watching the original I am not sure why it deserved even one.

Its the story of new mother Grace Churchill (Anat Topal-Barzilai) who with hubby (Gary Sloan under the name Edward Ross) and new baby William go to her mother-in-law's (Mary Shelley...sadly, not the one who wrote Frankenstein) house to recover and regain her strength. Problem is the mother-in-law might be hiding some dark secrets.

In the end a slow-moving, not very original horror movie. Mixed with at times shaky acting (although mother-in-law Shelley does well in her role) and sub-par delivery. Maybe try ROSEMARY'S BABY or if wanting a witch movie try THE WIZARD OF OZ.

Witchcraft (1988)

* 1/2 (out of 4)

A mother (Anat Topol) brings her newborn son to her mother-in-law's house and sure enough the husband (Gary Sloan) and his mommy (Mary Shelley) are actually Satan worshipers wanting to make the newborn the next Antichrist. Believe it or not but WITCHCRAFT was actually a huge hit when it was released to video back in 1988 but I do wonder how many people rented this thing and could have guessed that twelve sequels would follow. Obviously, the film is just another rip-off of ROSEMARY'S BABY but we get a funny little goof in the opening credits when a title reads "Origional Screenplay by" but perhaps this error was done on purpose since the film certainly wasn't original. The film itself makes a few major mistakes in regards to a made-for-video exploitation film. The biggest is that it's pretty dull from start to finish with not much happening anywhere in the first hour. The film isn't shy about ripping off other devil-child movies so horror fans might get a few kicks out of spotting the various rips. The film really doesn't contain too much violence or blood and the real sin is that it doesn't even offer up any nudity making it quite tame all around and there's really nothing here we haven't seen much better many times before. Even those awful rip-offs from the 70s at least offered up violence, gore or nudity. The performances aren't too bad for this type of film and I'll at least give director Rob Spera credit by turning in a professional looking picture, which is something a lot of the made-for-VHS films from this era couldn't say. The film does offer up some campy moments including a priest whose face starts to mutate after entering the mother-in-law's house. Another campy moment happens with "visions" coming from a mirror, which is bound to get several laughs. Still, WITCHCRAFT doesn't have anything really going for it that separates it from the pact so there's no real need to see it.

Kind of hard to see at first how this low budget rehash of ROSEMARY'S BABY spawned a thirteen chapter series of sexy horror skin flicks, but there you go. The WITCHCRAFT series direct-to-video films have always intrigued me because of their honest approach at giving its viewers what they wanted: Sex and horror elements combined into cheap, disposable entertainment aimed squarely at the video rental crowd.

To a degree they and the Seduction Cinema type productions mixing over eroticism with community theater caliber horror movie trappings can be seen as an offspring of the erotic horror genre films that came out of Europe especially during the 1970s. Which were also low budget independently distributed alternative forms of entertainment to mainstream cinemas. If they'd had access to video distribution they would have utilized that too. The only difference between the bulk of the series and something like a Paul Naschy Waldemar Daninsky potboiler are the addition of more frequent sex scenes, less emphasis on gory shock sequences, and a lot less pubic hair.

The WITCHCRAFT films were also more aimed at couples, as far as I can tell, with a sexy story of intrigue and gorgeous actresses & actors to keep the ladies interested with a few horror scenes now and then to reassure the guys they weren't suckered into watching a chick flick. There's nudity, sex, and objectification galore to be sure, but its not just limited to the female characters. Everybody is objectified by the WITCHCRAFT films, with careful attention to casting for both genders to make sure that fans of the human form of any persuasion will find them entertaining. The stories may be stupid and the execution hokey, but they deliver the goods and their effectiveness is reflected by the twelve sequels that followed this one.

Which is what makes this installment stand out from the rest of the series, in that its a genuine attempt to make a supernatural shocker whose erotic content is limited to a couple of underwear scenes. Its actually a pretty earnest if somewhat unimaginative take on its source material, appropriately updated for late 80s yuppie types but relying on the good old archetypes: The menacing housekeeper, the frenetic dream hallucinations, an eerie mystery room holding answers to the secrets, a great decapitation scene, and a decently concocted story about damnation passed down for generations & revenge from beyond the grave.

All standard issue stuff and handled professionally. If nothing else WITCHCRAFT is probably the most technically adept installment from the series, but ultimately lacks the payoff in fleshy goods that the reputation of the series suggests. Which by the way isn't the film's fault, it was the starting point, and its success allowed the producers to come back for another go, where they pushed their idea into what would turn out to be a very marketable form. Respect them in the morning or not the WITCHCRAFT films generated a solid cult following and remain in demand, which isn't surprising considering how direct they were in fulfilling the need for sexy erotic horror movies that you could watch with your squeeze.

This one too, though they kept it pretty much a straightforward spooker, and the result paid off. Its not a particularly bad film for that matter, though I feel that gals will respond to it better than the guys, who can keep quiet & wait politely until part two to get their jollies off. And if you like this movie plus haven't already, please watch ROSEMARY'S BABY sometime. I think you'd like it too.

4/10

I cannot believe that anyone finds this movie half-way tolerable. The acting is kind of like a train wreck (maybe by design)I just sat there in disbelief for 90 mins amazed at how truly terrible the cast was. Could Grace (Anat Topol) be any more stiff in her role and what's the deal with her living with her in-law, she's in no condition to go to her home to recuperate yet perfectly fine to do chores around the house at her mother in laws. The only good thing that I can say about this movie is for all of the '80s nostalgia people you will find all of the hairstytles and outfits the perfect tonic for taking you back to the good old days. The husband has a terrific hockey hairddo. I bought this stinker on Ebay for .99 and am trying to sell it for .01 with no bites...can't say I am surprised.

Avoid at all costs!!!!!!

I have this movie on both VHS and DVD. They come with excellent artwork featuring a young attractive woman lay on an altar, a skull beneath her, and the film's title "Witchcraft" within a pentagram above her. A common case of great artwork but poor movie. Grace gives birth to a baby boy (that looks at least six months old in size), her and creepy but rich husband John move into his mother's large house. It is soon apparent that John has a very strange relationship with his mother, a 300 year old painting in which they appear together before being burnt for witchcraft is a major clue. For poor Grace in addition to marrying into an odd family the house also has a creepy mute butler (like large old houses so often do!). This is a cheap looking movie, I found the acting to be quite wooden, it's slow and predictable. There is some gore including a decapitation but the effects certainly are not very special. There is no nudity but incredibly this went on to spawn at least 15 sequels, these did feature a lot of naked female flesh. Witchcraft borrows from "Rosemary's Baby" to an extent. In the UK this is rated 18 but it now feels relatively tame and I am sure that a re-submission to the BBFC would result in a 15 certificate. Not many positives to speak of though Deborah Scott/Spera as Grace's friend Linda does look pretty hot in her tight mini skirts!

Truly a legendary franchise guaranteed to delight the viewer for many many hours.

I do not get why people do not like this movie. It is a great movie. It is very scary. It has a great story line. It also has great acting. If it does not scary you know movie will. It is scarier then A Nightmare on elm street.

Wholesomely pretty, god fearing, Grace (Anat Topol-Barzilail) appears to have put her troubled, drug-addicted past behind her, and, yet, fate has other plans. After the birth of their bonny son, William, Grace, and apparently doting hubby, John (Gary Sloan) stay with John's palpably ominous mother, Elizabeth (Mary Shelley). Not long into her uneasy convalescence when the increasingly distraught young mother disturbingly discovers that very little in her new picture-perfect domesticity is quite what it appears to be!

This formulaic, conspicuously low budget Rosemary's Baby surrogate remains creakily entertaining despite its lack of originality. The capable cast proves solid, and likable, Anat Topol-Barzilail makes for a sympathetic demonically-oppressed protagonist. While light on splatter, 'Witchcraft' generates a modestly unsettling atmosphere, and these Satanic, smoke-slathered shenanigans culminate boisterously in an appropriately infernal fashion. Not without missteps, 'Witchcraft' has an endearing Hammer House of Horror meets Danielle Steel aesthetic that I found rather appealing. Not for all terror tastes, but, Robert Spara's 'Witchcraft' certainly casts a schlocky spell some may find devilishly irresistible.

not as bad as i expected still no better then mediocre the acting isn't great but overall it was tolerable and mostly acceptable the effects are solid and it has a cool head decapatation moment near the end this was quite watchable and the production values were good and it is quite well made on a low budget it has some truly creepy scenes and the score is chilling but it is ruined by the lame ending and poor dialog and characters we could care less about and it was predictable as well and it is a Rosemary's baby clone (only not as good) check out the laughable scene where our lead character where our lead character wakes up from a dream and starts screaming and totally overacting still it has some creepy dream sequences and overall this was a watchable time that is worth a rent but it is only average at best ** out of 5

Grace Churchill (Anat Topol) delivers her healthy baby William and is visited by her husband John Stocton (Gary Sloan) and her best friend Linda (Deborah Scott). When they leave the hospital, they go to the mansion of Grace's mother-in-law Elizabeth Stocton (Mary Shelley), and not home. Soon Grace feels weird things happening in the house and meets the strange butler Ellsworth (Lee Kissman). When her friend, Priest (Alexander Kirkwood), visits her, he feels evil in the house and gives a crucifix to Grace and then he dies. Soon Linda finds a book in a secret room in the house and learns that John and Elizabeth are witches from 1687, but she dies before she can tell to Grace. What will happen to Grace and her baby?

"Witchcraft" is an underrated horror low-movie, with the storyline of a new mother that sees weird things and is not sure whether she is haywire or something is really happening. The screenplay could have been better but maybe due to budget restriction, has flaws and few characters. Anyway, it is not bad as many reviews indicate. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Witchcraft"

Rosemary's Baby clone about a new mother who goes with her infant son and husband to live with her mother-in-law, but soon discovers that they are both Satan worshippers and are intent on making her baby the antichrist. Poorly done and acted horror film with no on screen action for over 2/3's of the feature and a lame ending. Rated R; Violence.

A woman, who just had a baby, goes to live with her mother-in-law along with her husband, but she notices weird things going bump in the night. Rips-off the classic Rosemary's Baby, but nowhere near as good as it. Skip this, and rent a copy of Rosemary's Baby. The bottom of the barrel. 1 out of 10.

My review was written in January 1989 after watching the film on Academy video cassette.

"Witchcraft" is an underwhelming supernatural horror piece, released direct-to-video (with video post-production and credits).

Unrelated to another new (Italian-backed) scream pic named "Witchcraft" and toplining Linda Blair, this film adds a dash of "Rosemary's Baby" to the hoary formula of a new mother's fears and the oppressive move to a gothic mansion.

Pretty Anat Topol-Barzilai is the new mother of a bouncing baby boy who haplessly finds herself moved in with a decidedly evil-seeming mother-in-law (Mary Shelley is the actress' gothic stage name) in an ancient house. She starts seeing visions, particularly in mirrors, and wisely fears for her newborn's safety. Following a burn-at-the-stake prolog, it's finally revealed that Shelley and Anat's huband Gary Sloan are reincarnated witches and they're definitely after the kid.

Pert Deborah Scott adds some life as the heroine's best pal, but pic is mainly a string of genre cliches executed by helmer Robert Spera with very little imagination. Pace slows to a crawl in the second half.

Topol-Barzilai is pleasant to look at, with her ample figure kept under wraps here even in scenes (such as human sacrifice climax) when a bit bolder approach is in order. Shelley, despite her apt name, fails at achieving a transition from menacing to out-and-out evil.

WITCHCRAFT opens centuries ago, with a man and a pregnant woman being burned at the stake. This is intercut with modern day scenes of a woman named Grace (Anat Topol) giving birth. Grace is seeing visions of the ancient couple's toasty torment, as they look increasingly like baked ziti.

Let's just say that it's a difficult delivery.

Later, Grace's husband, John (Gary Sloan), convinces her that they should move into his mother's big, spooky house. Strange occurrences start right away, with Grace experiencing dizzy spells, blackouts, and nightmares. There's also a creepy butler, and a mysterious, unused part of the house. Then, a visiting priest is reduced to something akin to a sausage left too long in the microwave! Could black magic be afoot?

Conspiratorial gloom settles in, resulting in further death and awfulness. Isn't this what all new moms hope for?

WITCHCRAFT certainly has that 1980's, supernatural movie charm going on. Though the cheeeze-level runs from medium to high, it's actually better that much of the straight-to-video sludge of the era. At least Ms. Topol is convincing in her harried role.

EXTRA POINTS FOR: #1- The sound effects during one dinner scene, making it seem as though everyone is crunching clam shells with their teeth! #2- Mom (Mary Shelley), who is so quietly malevolent! #3- The satanic "shock" finale!...