Witchcraft II: The Temptress

I feel very strongly about the above line. This is just plain out butt awful. First the main charcters are supposed to be teenagers, but they look to be in their 30's. The Temptress character looks much younger than everybody else in the film. Then there is the wooden acting. The direction is even worse. And oh my God!!!! That d**m awful script. It looks like some person just had only a crayon and wrote some notes on a piece of tiolet paper and the rest of the crew just worked off that and improvised everything!!!

Please. I beg you if you have not seen any of the films in this series, DO NOT WASTE YOUR TIME. They are all awful. Each one just manages to get worse than the other. As though that was possible. Followed by way too many sequels. I stopped watching after part 7, but I think they have reached a part 10 or 11. The first one was awful, so how the H**l did it get followed by so many more sequels? Rating: 1 out of 10.

My review was written in June 1990 after watching the movie on Academy video cassette.

This sequel to the 1988 video picture is an effective showcase for the charms of newcomer Delia Sheppard. This is another direct-to-video release, but Sheppard will be featured on the big-screen in "Rocky V".

She plays a temptress, out to charm young hero Charles Solomon who's been groomed (unknown to him) as the supreme warlock to take over the world. As detailed in the first film (flashbacks of which are presented here), Solomon's parents and foster parents all practiced witchcraft.

Opposing Sheppard are the local reverend (Frank Woods), whose daughter Mia Ruiz is Solomon's girlfriend. One cute gag has Woods complaining about exorcism that "Catholics are so much better than Methodists at this".

Direction by Mark Woods is okay, though the climax is directed too much like a heavy metal music video. Center of attention is Sheppard, previously seen in the barely released "Sexbomb". She's severely styled as a dominating blonde hellcat in trashy, revealing costumes. Her campy performance tags Sheppard as the '90s answer to Mamie Van Doren.

Tech credits, especially the optical effects, are chintzy.

WITCHCRAFT II, the first sequel to it's decent predecessor is without a doubt the worst horror film in history(So far anyway.) This time the baby from the original is grown up and living with foster parents. Suddenly an evil witch who looks like a Madonna wannabe stalks him to teach him his birthright...BIG deal! Extremely boring, terrible story, acting(Except for Charles Solomon as the teenager.), and laughable effects. Other films in the series to avoid: IV, VII, and VIII(I haven't seen X and XI(!)yet.) * out of *****.

Evil witch tries to lure the surviving baby from part I, now a teenager into the forces of darkness. Not quite as bad as the original, but still awful by any means. Frequent nudity and some violence & sex doesn't help, but actually make things worse. Rated R; Nudity, Violence, Profanity, and Sexual Situations.

Not that I really liked this movie, in fact, I watched only part 1 and 2. The first was OK, but the second was so much worse that I never watched a Witchcraft movie again. It seems to me that you are all with me, but what I can't understand is why the h**l you watch FIVE other sequels too if you thought this one was so awful??????