Kattiera Nana I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.
Claysaba Excellent, Without a doubt!!
Kien Navarro Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.
Francene Odetta It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.
moonspinner55 Cheapjack shocker has Los Angeles couple pulling up stakes after the wife suffers a miscarriage; her husband has been offered a lucrative job in the rural town of Lilith, but her freaky premonitions foretell an unhappy experience, especially with fat cat Orson Welles overseeing the community and its devil-worshipping residents (all under 30). Pamela Franklin has the central role, and she's an interesting presence even if she's been directed to stare at the other actors (and into the camera) as if under a spell. Writer-producer-director Bert I. Gordon should have taken his cue from William Castle after Castle bought the rights to "Rosemary's Baby" but allowed outsiders to take the reins. Gordon's plot, despite its familiar occult trappings, does have some interest, but the presentation is inept. *1/2 from ****
fedor8 Is it me or has Orson put a fake nose yet again for this movie? He did it at least once before, in "Touch of Evil" for example, so I wouldn't be surprised if he dood it again. Perhaps that was one of the conditions for appearing in this low-budget Bert I. Gordon nonsense. "Alright, I'll do it, but under several conditions, the first one being that I can use a fake nose." Pamela Franklin is in nearly every scene. This means that even if this were the dumbest supernatural thriller around, it would still be at the very least an easily watchable movie. Those eyes! The lines that come out of Pamela's beautiful mouth and her behaviour are a cross between goofy, ditsy, and absurd. She and her hubby Ontkean have a road accident, she witnesses the death of a woman in the other car, and yet they drive on as if nothing had happened. She even takes a "souvenir" from the crash-site, the dead woman's doll.Plenty of nudity here. On occasion "The Witching" feels like it'd been produced by Hugh Hefman, with the notable difference that all the breasts featured here are real. The movie looks like a 70s flick (which it is) but the occasionally synthesizer-orientated soundtrack is very much 80s. That is a little strange.The ending is just about as stupid – because totally devoid of ANY twist – as any that I'd ever seen. We had been told beforehand that Pamela has to become a witch in order to bring back to life Orson's dead son, after which she will take his place in the grave. We are told this 20-30 minutes before the end. And guess what happens? That's exactly what happens. I don't remember ever seeing a horror film with such a dead-end crappy ending without a point. If the writer is too lazy to come up with an end-twist (even if it's totally cliché) then he should at least not reveal everything that the viewer will ever find out, already a half-hour before the conclusion. Duh.Many idiotic things occur, such as a total lack of explanation as to why Franklin willingly became a witch. There was no indication at any point that she wanted any of this, and yet when the time came she took part in the ceremony without any hesitation. Duuuh. The ceremony was to take place only if she became a witch of her own accord. Well, why she accorded of her own accord to join the according chord, this is never accordingly accorded. But this IS a Bert I. Gordon flick, after all, so let's be grateful for little things."The other condition that I accept this role is that I win and Pamela loses. And that there is no surprise twist at all." Hmm, perhaps it's all Orson's fault.
EraserheadDr I have a copy of "The Witching", but i'm not sure if it's the same as "Necromancy". The film is very strange itself. It has a bunch of mumbling in the film. When Orson Welles talks, his voice is all mumbly and really is terrible. It also has a lot of nudity, and I don't know how it had a PG rating. It also has a lot of Satanism in the film.It has rituals and a bunch of strange, wicked things. For me, I think it's okay, but not the best horror film to see. Very odd with the story and really is messed up. It's about a woman and her husband go to a town called Lilith, and no children are allowed there. Because Mr. Cato(Orson Welles) wants it that way.You better watch the film if it sounds interesting to you. But it contains a lot of nudity and satanism, witchcraft, bringing the dead to the living and the living to the dead, and just messed up.
verna55 Writer/producer/director Bert I. Gordon, known best for his various '50's giant-monster-on-the-loose sci-fi epics, does his rendition of ROSEMARY'S BABY. The action takes place in a small, sinister village that specializes in the manufacturing of occult toys. Orson Welles is the madman at the center of the terror who is plotting to give his dead son life again. Pamela Franklin is the pert and pretty young woman gradually being lured into the dark and mysterious world of the supernatural. Despite prominent billing, Welles makes a fairly brief appearance. The cast handles the tiresome material well, and this is probably the closest Gordon has come to making a good film. But, keep in mind, it's not really a good film, but an absurdly entertaining diversion for those who think they can take it. A slightly longer version of the movie called THE WITCHING contains several minutes worth of frontal nudity, and contains an early appearance by scream queen Brinke Stevens.
