Warlock 3: O Fim da Inocência

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)

Have a look - one person from HELLRAISER, one from BRAIN DAMAGE, a poor womyn's Sarah Michelle Gellar & the third in an also-ran series of "speculative" films. Another Point: children spoil "horror" movies - in fact, they spoil ANY type of movie - thankfully, the little "sweetheart" is used sparingly. Taken on it's own merits, a none too bad addition to the Haunted House craze & (probably) the only American (or is it Irish??) attempt to ape (elements of) THE BEYOND. It's difficult, but brave the self-conscious "alternative" vibe (including such unpop as Thick Liquid, Haze & Hot Water Music) & there IS a lot to enjoy. Surprise: some truly nasty moments - a male equivalent of the breast torture from MAKE THEM DIE SLOWLY and a slap of Female Domination, that, if the roles were reversed, would have seen this effort banned in Australia. Black Metal fans watch out for the villian's unveiling; something straight off a Venom sleeve. An unapologetic Junk-Food Late-Night scare flick.

This film starts in New England in 1673 with a young mother known simply as "Mrs. Miller" (Catherine Siggins) walking with her daughter in the woods. Temporarily distracted, she takes her eyes off of her young daughter--only to find her missing when she turns back around just moments later. After searching frantically, she discovers that an evil warlock has kidnapped her daughter and plans to sacrifice her that very night. Fortunately, being a powerful witch in her own right, she manages to cast a spell that, not only prevents him from carrying out his plans, but also traps him inside the basement of the house he chose to use. The scene then shifts to several centuries later with a young college student named "Kris Miller" (Ashley Laurence) being informed that she has just inherited an old house in a small New England town many miles away. Naturally, being somewhat reluctant to travel to an unknown destination all by herself, she asks her boyfriend "Michael" (Paul Francis) to come with her. Unfortunately, he declines due to some exams he needs to prepare for over the weekend. That being said, she then drives to the isolated house and spends the night there all by herself. It's during this time that she thinks she hears a young girl's voice and begins having visions of a doll that seems eerily familiar. Even so, she manages to get to sleep, but the next morning, she begins hearing the young girl's voice again. To her surprise, when she follows the sound to the front door, she discovers that Michael and several of her other friends have arrived to keep her company after all. Needless to say, their presence does much to calm her anxieties. That changes, however, when an architect by the name of "Philip Covington" (Bruce Payne) stops by to visit and, unbeknownst to her, he looks exactly like the warlock who kidnapped the young girl several centuries earlier. Now, rather than reveal any more, I will just say that this 3rd film in the Warlock trilogy wasn't nearly as bad as I thought it might be. For starters, even though Bruce Payne did a credible job as this particular film, I thought Julian Sands was slightly better in the previous two movies. Conversely, I thought this film had better special graphics. Likewise, this film seemed more focused on the primary plot than the second movie to a certain degree as well. In any case, while I don't believe this film was necessarily superior to the other two, I honestly don't consider it to be inferior either, and for that reason I have rated it accordingly. Average.

I just saw this on tv so don't know how it was promoted when it first came out. Was it advertized on daytime soap operas? It looks like a "horror" movie for people who don't like horror movies. And it's made in the popular style of movies churned out by directors who don't know how to make movies but wish to put across the impression to children that they DO know all the "tricks" of making dramatic flicks. As others here have said, there are lots of tv shows a lot scarier than this mediocre slop.

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.