Saturday, September 3, 2011

10%-WTF


Watched “Season of the Witch” last night with Nicolas Cage and Ron Perlman on DVD and expected a train wreck of a movie based on reviews.

Rottentomatoes.com gave the film a 10% positive which means that 90% of reviewers found the film rotten.

Nine out of ten people found this film unworthy.

 Really.

Ninety percent?

For some unknown reason I feel a need to defend this movie.

It’s not terrible and it hardly deserved the onslaught of negative reviews.

With that said I will state that the film is no award winning piece of work but it is entertaining, it has some great sets and locations and some decent FX work.

The movie did what it needed to do and that was to entertain me for one and a half hours.

Do reviewers really hate Nicolas Cage so much that they trash anything he touches?

I liked “Con Air,” “National Treasure,” and “The Sorceress Apprentice” as well and these all received less than glorious reviews.

Back to “Season of the Witch,” the film is the story of two Crusaders that leave the church and find themselves charged with transporting an accused witch to a monastery for trial.
Simple premise but the film gives you plenty of eye candy.

-“300” style battle sequences.



- Plague doctors.



- Nasty black plague make-up effects.



- A cool dilapidated bridge sequence.


- Unique “transforming” wolves.

- Scary fog filled forest.



- A decent looking demon character.



- And a gorgeous looking “accused” witch.



Plus a bunch of other little touches that makes “Season of the Witch” a satisfying medieval romp with a touch of horror and supernatural thrown in for good measure, it’s an entertaining mix that in no way deserved the bad rap.




2 comments:

GhoulishCop said...

Agreed! This was no Academy Award winner, but I thought it was highly entertaining and found a lot of the atmospherics inspirational for my haunt.

To that end I'd also recommend "Black Death" with Boromir, er, Sean Bean, and "Ironclad" with Paul Giamatti. While the former had some bizarre aspects to it, it was still an enjoyable "horror" piece. The latter I thought was just flat-out good, showing how King John, after the signing of the Magna Carta at Runnymeade, sought to regain the lands that he had given over to the barons.

Black Death was by no means scary; more on the lines of "Season of the Witch," while Ironclad was really just a terrific historical movie with some awesome violence. Amazing how the broad sword can cleave a shoulder from the torso and a mace can rearrange someone's face! ;>

But I would definitely watch "Witch" again, just to gain some details for my haunt.

Rich

The Gill-Man said...

Haven't seen this one yet, but it seems that much of the critics these days take their cues from various internet sites and either trash or profusely praise a film. There seems to be no middle-ground whatsoever, which really baffles me. Not every film is a masterpiece, but that doesn't mean that the ones who fall short of such an honorific are automatically crap either! Some movies are just good, fun flicks, nothing more.

LinkWithin

Blog Widget by LinkWithin