Aggiungi una trama nella tua linguaA 300-year-old witch terrorizes a college town to get revenge on the descendant of the man who persecuted her.A 300-year-old witch terrorizes a college town to get revenge on the descendant of the man who persecuted her.A 300-year-old witch terrorizes a college town to get revenge on the descendant of the man who persecuted her.
Marie Santell
- The Witch
- (as Marie Santel)
Sande Drewes
- Marybeth
- (as Sande Drews)
Recensioni in evidenza
During some sort of witchcraft party, a group of young adults all decide to have a séance. They summon the witch using a chant they found in some book, but it seems like nothing happens. But something did happen. The main character is possessed by the witch and goes on a murderous killing spree! Of course, since this was a low-budget film made in the early seventies, all the lines are incredibly cheesy and bad. Lines like "I like girls dumb, but you're pushing it!" and stupid things of that nature are said.
I saw this movie because the guy that played Harry was my drama teacher.
I saw this movie because the guy that played Harry was my drama teacher.
Well, the story is not Going to beat Macbeth,, nor The craft nor The witches of Eastwick, But it does a lot with good acting, practical effects and interesting camera work. I enjoyed this film and I think you will too if you're not expecting top notch Hollywood.
Disestablishmentarianism Is a very long word which I need to finish this review which actually was finished after the first paragraph they're making me talk more so I am. Be there as it may. I still like this movie and I think you will as well. If you don't go in with Hollywood expectations you're not gonna see any great CGI incredible make up, but they worked pretty hard for what they got and I think I Got my money's worth. Tubi. Lol.
Disestablishmentarianism Is a very long word which I need to finish this review which actually was finished after the first paragraph they're making me talk more so I am. Be there as it may. I still like this movie and I think you will as well. If you don't go in with Hollywood expectations you're not gonna see any great CGI incredible make up, but they worked pretty hard for what they got and I think I Got my money's worth. Tubi. Lol.
What I liked about this movie:
I don't know what film stock this was shot on, but it gives the movie a distinct look. Deep blacks and the colors haven't faded much, which is unusual for a 40-year-old movie. I assume it was done using the color process that preceded the one that was so prone to fading and that gave so many 70's movies their washed out look.
Some of the photography was quite nice, as when they're sitting around a table doing a ritual near the end.
The soundtrack, consisting of the ominous blips and drones of an analog synthesizer, was very effective, and the singsongy, a cappella piece done by Trella Hart over the opening credits was downright eerie.
The actress who played Jill (Anitra Walsh), even if I wasn't mesmerized by her performance, was a doll, which made her scenes a pleasure to watch.
On the down side, the acting was amateurish, going from the bad acting typical of low-budget movies to the two main female characters (Margery of Jourdemain and Jill) delivering overwrought monologues like they were in a stage play (good actors like Vincent Price can get away with that sort of thing in movies, but these two just came off like members of a high school drama club).
The woman who played Margery of Jourdemain (Marie Santel) was every bit as hideous as Anitra Walsh was gorgeous. With her botched nose job, she looked like Michael Jackson.
I found the story hard to follow at times and it seemed like there were holes in the plot (though maybe I missed something). I think the writers were trying to be clever by inserting unpredictable plot twists, but the execution was so poor that it just made the story incoherent. At times it seemed the filmmakers couldn't decide whether they were creating a horror movie or a comedy (a movie can be both, of course, but in this case the combination didn't work).
The movie was a mixed bag. It had good atmosphere but I had trouble getting into the story and characters. Overall, with a 5 out of 10 being the middle, I think this movie was more good than bad, so I'm giving it a 6 out of 10. I watch a lot of old horror movies and this one is more memorable than many, despite its flaws. Worth a look if it's running on TV or you see it for rent at a video store.
I don't know what film stock this was shot on, but it gives the movie a distinct look. Deep blacks and the colors haven't faded much, which is unusual for a 40-year-old movie. I assume it was done using the color process that preceded the one that was so prone to fading and that gave so many 70's movies their washed out look.
Some of the photography was quite nice, as when they're sitting around a table doing a ritual near the end.
The soundtrack, consisting of the ominous blips and drones of an analog synthesizer, was very effective, and the singsongy, a cappella piece done by Trella Hart over the opening credits was downright eerie.
The actress who played Jill (Anitra Walsh), even if I wasn't mesmerized by her performance, was a doll, which made her scenes a pleasure to watch.
On the down side, the acting was amateurish, going from the bad acting typical of low-budget movies to the two main female characters (Margery of Jourdemain and Jill) delivering overwrought monologues like they were in a stage play (good actors like Vincent Price can get away with that sort of thing in movies, but these two just came off like members of a high school drama club).
The woman who played Margery of Jourdemain (Marie Santel) was every bit as hideous as Anitra Walsh was gorgeous. With her botched nose job, she looked like Michael Jackson.
I found the story hard to follow at times and it seemed like there were holes in the plot (though maybe I missed something). I think the writers were trying to be clever by inserting unpredictable plot twists, but the execution was so poor that it just made the story incoherent. At times it seemed the filmmakers couldn't decide whether they were creating a horror movie or a comedy (a movie can be both, of course, but in this case the combination didn't work).
The movie was a mixed bag. It had good atmosphere but I had trouble getting into the story and characters. Overall, with a 5 out of 10 being the middle, I think this movie was more good than bad, so I'm giving it a 6 out of 10. I watch a lot of old horror movies and this one is more memorable than many, despite its flaws. Worth a look if it's running on TV or you see it for rent at a video store.
I got the opportunity to watch the recently unearthed R-rated version of this movie (the movie was cut for its original theatrical release in order to get a PG rating). So I was expecting the movie to be somewhat explicit in either gore or sexual material. But I was surprised. This original cut shouldn't have got an R rating back in 1970! The only sexual material is one (brief) scene of toplessness, and when it comes to violence there are only a few drops of blood and a couple of scenes of hangings directed in a restrained manner.
Still, despite this lack of exploitive material, the movie could still have been a decent supernatural shocker. But it isn't. It's very slow moving, and with a LOT of chitchat to pad things out. So I would say the PG version is the version to seek out if you really want to see this movie - because it's shorter and therefore easier to sit through.
Still, despite this lack of exploitive material, the movie could still have been a decent supernatural shocker. But it isn't. It's very slow moving, and with a LOT of chitchat to pad things out. So I would say the PG version is the version to seek out if you really want to see this movie - because it's shorter and therefore easier to sit through.
A witch that is hanged in the 1600s is inadvertently resurrected 321 years later at a Dallas area college by some nice students playing around with an old book of spells. The witch possesses a student and seems intent on getting revenge on the descendant of the man who executed her.
"Mark of the Witch" (1970) is a low-budget horror flick that's rather generic, but also effective in several ways. The overt satanic rituals were nothing new at the time as they were featured in earlier slicker films like "Masque of the Red Death" (1964) and "Devils of Darkness" (1965). While the movie was shot in 1969, the protagonists aren't hippies, but rather groovy-but-agreeable college students & their hip professor (Robert Elston).
The actress who plays the witch at the beginning of the film lays it on too thick and is exasperating. But the actress who plays Jill (Anitra Walsh) is impressive for a no-name. Actually winsome Anitra is one of the main reasons this movie is worth catching. She looks great in her blue mini-dress, etc. Unfortunately she died prematurely in 1980 at the age of 32.
The tame special effects are surprisingly proficient and the music is effectively creepy. Regrettably, the final act needed more oomph. But "Mark of the Witch" is a must to observe college culture in 1969 (styles, décor, vehicles, social customs, etc.).
The film runs 1 hour and 24 minutes and was shot in the Dallas area, including Southern Methodist University and Texas Christian University, Fort Worth.
GRADE: B-
"Mark of the Witch" (1970) is a low-budget horror flick that's rather generic, but also effective in several ways. The overt satanic rituals were nothing new at the time as they were featured in earlier slicker films like "Masque of the Red Death" (1964) and "Devils of Darkness" (1965). While the movie was shot in 1969, the protagonists aren't hippies, but rather groovy-but-agreeable college students & their hip professor (Robert Elston).
The actress who plays the witch at the beginning of the film lays it on too thick and is exasperating. But the actress who plays Jill (Anitra Walsh) is impressive for a no-name. Actually winsome Anitra is one of the main reasons this movie is worth catching. She looks great in her blue mini-dress, etc. Unfortunately she died prematurely in 1980 at the age of 32.
The tame special effects are surprisingly proficient and the music is effectively creepy. Regrettably, the final act needed more oomph. But "Mark of the Witch" is a must to observe college culture in 1969 (styles, décor, vehicles, social customs, etc.).
The film runs 1 hour and 24 minutes and was shot in the Dallas area, including Southern Methodist University and Texas Christian University, Fort Worth.
GRADE: B-
Lo sapevi?
- QuizWhen Alan is buying books, the cashier calls out the title "Diary of a Witch." This book by Sybil Leek was published in 1968 and is likely the title referred to.
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is Mark of the Witch?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
- Tempo di esecuzione
- 1h 18min(78 min)
- Proporzioni
- 1.66 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti