Skip to main content

In my day, those even endeavouring to fly were accused of witchery.

Warlock
(1989)

(SPOILERS) Hero REG? Scottish hero REG? This could only have happened before anyone knew any better. As Richard E Grant himself commented of a role Sean Connery allegedly turned down ("Can you do a SKUTTISH accent for us?"), "How could they have cast a skinny Englishman to play this macho warlock-hunter?" And yet, that incongruity entirely works in Warlock's favour, singling it out from the crowd as the kind of deliciously-offbeat straight-to-video fare (all but) you could only have encountered during that decade.


Giles RedferneTell me straight. Lest your children be born slugs of cod fish, tell me now.

It helps that the screenplay comes courtesy of David Twohy ("I was hired, fired and re-hired"), who positively revels in the chance to pen antiquated dialogue ripe with colourful adjectives for his characters (well, mostly REG's witch hunter Giles Redferne). One gets the impression from With Nails that REG didn't think much of it – "… I am gearing myself up to say with a straight face and Scots accent, 'Damned be these hell besmeared and black Satanic farting holes' "; in an interview with Anne Bilson at the time of Hudson Hawk's release, she says he "appears sceptical when I say how much I enjoyed it" while noting "I was astonished that they offered it to me in the first place" and "I did the part because I knew that the chances of me ever being offered a sort of macho heroic part were so slim". Indeed – but I guess, if you're too close to something, you can perhaps fail to appreciate its full antic glory (that was certainly true of his view of Hudson Hawk).


The fish-out-of-water structure (witch hunter follows Julian Sands' Warlock – "the rudest that ever troubled daylight" – through time to prevent him from bringing together all three books of the Grand Grimoire, from which the lost name of God, invoked during creation, may be uttered back to front, undoing all worlds with it) had seen big successes in the previous couple of years (Back to the FutureCrocodile DundeeStar Trek IV: The Voyage Home) and the occasional bomb (Masters of the Universe). Other reference points include Terminator (but time travelling from the past instead of the future), Vincent Ward's Navigator and Highlander. This particular blend of medieval confusion over modern mores found a more receptive audience a few years later with Les Visiteurs (eventually remade with the same leads as Just Visiting), and while Grant's wide-eyed earnestness yields a number of laughs, it’s more director Steve Miner’s game tone that elicits a broad grin than overt attempts to get yuks. 


Miner, a former editor who graduated to directing with a couple of Friday the 13ths, has a rather grab-bag resumé, taking in further genre entries (Halloween H20Day of the Dead and comedy-horror House), as well as such diverse fare as Soul ManForever Young, and Gerard Depardieu remake My Father the Hero. I tend to associate him with the likes of Antony Hickox and Mick Garris, no one's first choice and often found delivering natural rental fare. He can deliver the necessaries, but you aren't likely to recall stylistic flourishes or visual élan. What he does have, and he should have probably concentrated on this more (or, with Soul Man, perhaps not) is a sense of the absurd. Right from the first, in the 1691 opening sequence, we are informed the Warlock is to be "hanged and burned over a basket of living cats"; it’s clear this isn’t going to be play out entirely soberly, but Miner’s shrewd enough not to go too far in that direction (one also occasionally gets the feeling he was a big fan of Evil Dead II). 


WarlockI would ask that we wait.
MediumFor what do we wait?
WarlockFor the true Zamiel to appear.

When the Warlock – I always found Sands a bit of a plank, but revisiting this, he's actually reliably mischievous – cuts off the finger of Kassandra's (Lori Singer) housemate, it's a shocking moment, followed by a twisted come-on as he goes to kiss the (gay) man and bites out his tongue ("We'd like to find this guy before he makes an omelette out of somebody else's tongue" comments one of the officers on the scene). His meeting with Mary Woronov's fake medium is similarly poised between the ghoulish and funny; her horror at being genuinely possessed is followed by the scooping out of her eyes in order to hunt the books' locations (they more resemble something from The Fly than anything truly gruesome).


WarlockI need no broomstick to fly.

The Warlock has quite the repertoire of cruel fates, including slaying a poor moppet in order to concoct a flying potion (it requires "fat from an unbaptised male child"), after which he amusingly sets off a cop's radar gun as he speeds by. A murder in Canada in 1995 was cited as influenced by this scene (the fourteen-year-old initiator of the crime was reportedly obsessed with the film).


Giles RedfernA horse that sweats in the night. Cream that sours overnight. You know the signs.

The Warlock also casts a spell on Kassandra, such that she ages twenty years every day and will "die in half a week of old age". Not that you’d really know, as Lori Singer refused to wear the old age makeup. Singer, who had her big break on the Fame TV show and comes across like a B-list Daryl Hannah, was reportedly a major pain in the ass. There's an amusing payback sequence in which Kassandra pursues the Warlock, banging nails into his footprints and causing him considerable pain as a consequence.


Air StewardessCan I take that for you?
Giles RedfernOver my rotting corpse.

Sands' adversary also leaves tell-tale signs wherever he goes, leading to an inflight sequence in which Redferne and Kassandra search a plane for him (on account of "(lighter) flame that burns blue" and "cream that spoils"); it's particularly amusing that Redferne is allowed to take a weather vane aboard (a makeshift spear, essentially), with a flight attendant stowing it for him ("Where did that wench put the vane?")


Grant is a particular picture, draped in a coyote skin coat and sporting a permed mullet. It's probably easier to let REG describe himself: "an oblong-faced, minor rock'n'roll band member". This was (I think; I can't recall any other contenders) the beginning and end of his career as a Hollywood leading man, and he wouldn't have that many leads at all after this in any shape or form (the equally unlikely romantic comedy Jack and Sarah was also an isolated incident). Less is the pity, as his natural idiosyncrasy is best used in something as skewed as this. He starred in a BBC adaptation of The Scarlet Pimpernel about a decade later, and it should have been ideal REG material, a chance to go off on one as an exaggerated fop, but it fell disappointingly flat. And while you can give him a so-so supporting part, it's really a waste of resources (he was on great REG form in Dom Hemingway a few years back, a tailor-made role).


Giles RedfernOur interest lies in stopping those who would see good falter. It lies in stopping the powers of misrule from coming of age. It lies in finding that damned book, and thwarting a vile beast of a man who shall not rest until God himself is thrown down, and all creation becomes Satan's black hell-besmeared farting hole!

Jerry Goldsmith provides a fine score infused with creepy electronica, following on from the quirkiness of his work with Joe Dante. The effects work is sloppy (the company that provided them were brought in at short notice), but in a charmingly basic way. There's a small role for Anna Levine, who'd be notably cast in Unforgiven a couple of years later (and is now unrecognisable thanks to numerous plastic surgeries). 


Anne Billson (Film Yearbook Volume 8): Packed with the sort of dialogue in which characters say 'Let us tarry not' instead of 'Let's go', and striking a nice line between tension and humour, this is definitely superior hokum. 

There were, of course, several sequels, neither with REG, but one seeing Sands return and the other with him replaced by Bruce Payne. Warlock came from New World, who were going down the tubes at the time but were ironically making some classic genre fare (HeathersMeet the Applegates, releasing the aforementioned Navigator). As a result of those hassles, the movie didn't get released in the US until 1991 (by Trimark). The only surprise in all this is that Warlock hasn't been remade yet, but it can only be a matter of time.




Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Oh, you got me right in the pantaloons, partner.

The Party (1968) (SPOILERS) Blake Edwards’ semi-improvisational reunion with Peter Sellers is now probably best known for – I was going to use an elephant-in-the-room gag, but at least one person already went there – Sellers’ “brown face”. And it isn’t a decision one can really defend, even by citing The Party ’s influence on Bollywood. Satyajit Ray had also reportedly been considering working with Sellers… and then he saw the film. One can only assume he’d missed similar performances in The Millionairess and The Road to Hong Kong ; in the latter case, entirely understandable, if not advisable. Nevertheless, for all the flagrant stereotyping, Sellers’ bungling Hrundi V Bakshi is a very likeable character, and indeed, it’s the piece’s good-natured, soft centre – his fledgling romance with Claudine Longet’s Michele – that sees The Party through in spite of its patchy, hit-and-miss quality.

They'll think I've lost control again and put it all down to evolution.

Time Bandits (1981) (SPOILERS) Terry Gilliam had co-directed previously, and his solo debut had visual flourish on its side, but it was with Time Bandits that Gilliam the auteur was born. The first part of his Trilogy of Imagination, it remains a dazzling work – as well as being one of his most successful – rich in theme and overflowing with ideas while resolutely aimed at a wide (family, if you like) audience. Indeed, most impressive about Time Bandits is that there’s no evidence of self-censoring here, of attempting to make it fit a certain formula, format or palatable template.

I never strangled a chicken in my life!

Rope (1948) (SPOILERS) Rope doesn’t initially appear to have been one of the most venerated of Hitchcocks, but it has gone through something of a rehabilitation over the years, certainly since it came back into circulation during the 80s. I’ve always rated it highly; yes, the seams of it being, essentially, a formal experiment on the director’s part, are evident, but it’s also an expert piece of writing that uses our immediate knowledge of the crime to create tension throughout; what we/the killers know is juxtaposed with the polite dinner party they’ve thrown in order to wallow in their superiority.

I'm an old ruin, but she certainly brings my pulse up a beat or two.

The Paradine Case (1947) (SPOILERS) Hitchcock wasn’t very positive about The Paradine Case , his second collaboration with Gregory Peck, but I think he’s a little harsh on a picture that, if it doesn’t quite come together dramatically, nevertheless maintains interest on the basis of its skewed take on the courtroom drama. Peck’s defence counsel falls for his client, Alida Valli’s accused (of murder), while wife Ann Todd wilts dependably and masochistically on the side-lines.

Miss Livingstone, I presume.

Stage Fright (1950) (SPOILERS) This one has traditionally taken a bit of a bruising, for committing a cardinal crime – lying to the audience. More specifically, lying via a flashback, through which it is implicitly assumed the truth is always relayed. As Richard Schickel commented, though, the egregiousness of the action depends largely on whether you see it as a flaw or a brilliant act of daring: an innovation. I don’t think it’s quite that – not in Stage Fright ’s case anyway; the plot is too ordinary – but I do think it’s a picture that rewards revisiting knowing the twist, since there’s much else to enjoy it for besides.

You must have hopes, wishes, dreams.

Brazil (1985) (SPOILERS) Terry Gilliam didn’t consider Brazil the embodiment of a totalitarian nightmare it is often labelled as. His 1984½ (one of the film’s Fellini-riffing working titles) was “ the Nineteen Eighty-Four for 1984 ”, in contrast to Michael Anderson’s Nineteen Eighty-Four from 1948. This despite Gilliam famously boasting never to have read the Orwell’s novel: “ The thing that intrigues me about certain books is that you know them even though you’ve never read them. I guess the images are archetypal ”. Or as Pauline Kael observed, Brazil is to Nineteen Eighty-Four as “ if you’d just heard about it over the years and it had seeped into your visual imagination ”. Gilliam’s suffocating system isn’t unflinchingly cruel and malevolently intolerant of individuality; it is, in his vision of a nightmare “future”, one of evils spawned by the mechanisms of an out-of-control behemoth: a self-perpetuating bureaucracy. And yet, that is not really, despite how indulgently and glee

A herbal enema should fix you up.

Never Say Never Again (1983) (SPOILERS) There are plenty of sub-par Bond s in the official (Eon) franchise, several of them even weaker than this opportunistic remake of Thunderball , but they do still feel like Bond movies. Never Say Never Again , despite – or possibly because he’s part of it – featuring the much-vaunted, title-referencing return of the Sean Connery to the lead role, only ever feels like a cheap imitation. And yet, reputedly, it cost more than the same year’s Rog outing Octopussy .

Do you know the world is a foul sty? Do you know, if you ripped the fronts off houses, you'd find swine? The world's a hell. What does it matter what happens in it?

Shadow of a Doubt (1943) (SPOILERS) I’m not sure you could really classify Shadow of a Doubt as underrated, as some have. Not when it’s widely reported as Hitchcock’s favourite of his films. Underseen might be a more apt sobriquet, since it rarely trips off the lips in the manner of his best-known pictures. Regardless of the best way to categorise it, it’s very easy to see why the director should have been so quick to recognise Shadow of a Doubt 's qualities, even if some of those qualities are somewhat atypical.

I think you’re some kind of deviated prevert.

Dr. Strangelove  or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (1964) (SPOILERS) Kubrick’s masterpiece satire of mutually-assured destruction. Or is it? Not the masterpiece bit, because that’s a given. Rather, is all it’s really about the threat of nuclear holocaust? While that’s obviously quite sufficient, all the director’s films are suggested to have, in popular alt-readings, something else going on under the hood, be it exposing the ways of Elite paedophilia ( Lolita , Eyes Wide Shut ), MKUltra programming ( A Clockwork Orange, Full Metal Jacket ), transhumanism and the threat of imminent AI overlords ( 2001: A Space Odyssey ), and most of the aforementioned and more besides (the all-purpose smorgasbord that is The Shining ). Even Barry Lyndon has been posited to exist in a post-reset-history world. Could Kubrick be talking about something else as well in Dr. Strangelove ?

She was addicted to Tums for a while.

Marriage Story (2019) (SPOILERS) I don’t tend to fall heavily for Noah Baumbach fare. He’s undoubtedly a distinctive voice – even if his collaborations with Wes Anderson are the least of that director’s efforts – but his devotion to an exclusive, rarefied New York bubble becomes ever more off-putting with each new project. And ever more identifiable as being a lesser chronicler of the city’s privileged quirks than his now disinherited forbear Woody Allen, who at his peak mastered a balancing act between the insightful, hilarious and self-effacing. Marriage Story finds Baumbach going yet again where Woody went before, this time brushing up against the director’s Ingmar Bergman fixation.