Witchville

I wasn't hoping for much but I got even less than that! This 'movie' was not only bad - devoid of any real plot, wit, or meaningful context; lousy special effects; terrible acting; and laughable direction - it was also a throwback to the most simplistic and misogynist view of magic and witches I have seen in ages. At first I thought they were depicting those views in order to turn them on their head but no- that really was the lens of this movie on the world of magic and female power versus civilization. Even the campy stuff wasn't fun because it seemed not to have any sense of humour about itself and how really really bad it was. If you like to watch things that are really really bad in order to laugh at how bad they are, you might find this a treat of some sort. It really is that bad. Did i mention it is bad?

To begin with, this is a TV movie, therefore you should not have a high expectation about it. However, given that fact, I have seen a low budget action movie which is way better than this one. The actions were very bad; there were some sword fight, but when you look at them, it is exactly the actions that were comparable to a play, not a movie. There were a lot of awkward moment where you can actually see that the actors were waiting for the hit to come slowly..... and then try to deflect them. And of course the details were terrible. The minaret for whatever reason was topped with a cross ? Normally; in this kind of movies, books are made of animal skins, but on this one, it is cheaper to use paper...

All in all, my suggestion is not to waste your time on this one. I've given a 2 vote for the effort of the actors, despite a very bad direction they still do reasonably well....

Though not especially bad, it really wasn't very good either. I only stuck it out because Luke Goss is in it. If they'd cast almost anyone else, this would have died before it even started.

Sadly, although Luke Goss can usually elevate pretty much anything he's in, he can't do it single-handedly. He needs someone to play off of, someone to help him carry the load. He has none of that here. What he's got is some guy named Ed Speleers, who I kinda feel like I should know from somewhere but I can't quite place him, and a guy who looks like he's trying to be that one dude who's name I forget but I know him from playing a slightly villainous love child of Richard E Grant, Charles Shaughnessy, and Wish dot com.

The script is terrible, too - Malachy (Luke Goss) plays a dude who is the grown son of the king. The king has just died, so some other dude comes looking for Malachy and says "Bruv. You're the king now. B T dubs your subjects hated your dad and they hate you. Now go be king". But his new subjects are starving because of witch-related malarkey so they go off to kill the witch/es.

Nobody can act, though. Not the witch, not the witch's 2IC, not the 'magician' (the lovechild dude), not Ed Speleers, not his mate, and apparently not even Luke Goss could act while this was being made. But again, I blame that squarely on the 'script'. IMO the best acting here was from the guy who played the dead king. And you never see him. Ever.

2 of the 3 stars I gave this are purely for Luke Goss' presence. I can't help but be a fan. Blame it on his boy-band days.

Another turkey! Should be rated Fantasy/Humour/Sleeping Pill. With due respect to a previous reviewer I don't agree with the mantra that it's a TV movie therefore don't expect the standards to be high. Why not? There are MANY TV movies which are probably better than cinema release stock.

The same old repeated clichés, jumps, twists turns, a storyline I've seen on numerous other occasions. Nothing that helps me to like OR dislike the characters.

The best piece of acting came from the witch who was burned in the first quarter of the movie.

Nuff Said

When I saw the word 'Syfy' appear on the screen, I immediately raised my defenses and thought 'oh no, this is going to be one of those movies'. As you might know, if you are familiar with Syfy Channel's previous works, then they have a habit of putting out some fairly questionable movies that tend to be lacking proper special effects.

However, "Witchville" actually surprised me in a good way. Well, aside from the poor choice of title for the movie, then Syfy actually managed to pull this production off quite nicely.

The movie has a fairly alright story, although it was quite predictable and not really bringing anything innovating to the fantasy genre. And actually most of what was in the movie have been seen in other similar movies. But still, "Witchville" worked out well enough.

What really impressed me was the production value that Syfy had upped and put into this. Especially the costumes and wardrobes, that was just brilliant work. I liked the armor and all the detail they had put into those. However, I just didn't fully understand the obsession with skulls, almost every armor and outfit was adorned with skulls in one way or another, even the king's armor had a skull on the shoulder piece of his armor, that just wasn't proper attire for a king. Skulls are associated with death and evil, and shouldn't be adorning a king's armor. But aside from this skull-fetish, then the armors and costumes were just amazing.

And as for the special effects, well Syfy isn't exactly known for their million dollar investments on the CGI side of movie-making. However, the effect that they put into "Witchville" were actually nicely executed and seemed to work well enough on screen. Don't expect to be dazzled out of your seat, though, but it is a great step up the ladder effects-wise for Syfy. So thumbs up on that account.

The people they had cast for the various roles were also working out well enough, most of them anyway. Personally I think that the lead by Luke Goss should perhaps have been cast differently, as he was not a particularly strong actor in this movie. The movie was really carried by the performances of MyAnna Buring (playing Jozefa), Sarah Douglas (playing the Red Queen) and Simon Thorp (playing Kramer).

I am a huge fan of this particular fantasy genre (perhaps because of my 26 years of playing Dungeons & Dragons), and I did enjoy "Witchville". So you might ask why I only gave it a 5 out of 10 rating? Well because the story was somewhat of a mess, there were a lot of dead ends in the movie and the coherency of it all was just overall blurry. The movie lacked a proper red line to follow, and as such, the end result turned out to be somewhat jumpy and half-hearted.

"Witchville" is well worth a watch if you enjoy this particular type of fantasy movie, just don't expect too much from the movie in the story department.

And thumbs up for the people behind the design of the DVD cover, because they really buffed it up and made the movie appear much more interesting that it actually turned out to be. So as the saying goes; "don't judge a book by its cover".