Michael_Elliott Warlock III: The End of Innocence (1999) * 1/2 (out of 4) Kris (Ashley Laurence) doesn't know anything about her past. She was adopted and there are no living relatives but one day she receives a call saying that her family home has been left to her. Wanting to know about her past, her and a group of friends travel to the house and it turns out an evil warlock (Bruce Payne) wants her blood.WARLOCK was a surprise hit when it was finally released and in fact it also turned out to be a pretty good movie. Sadly, as is often the case with good horror movies, a rushed and bad sequel followed and eventually a direct-to-video sequel. This film here could have been a lot more entertaining than it actually was but the screenplay just didn't deliver a very compelling story.The biggest issue I had with this picture is the fact that not too much happened. I mean, the horror elements really don't start until after the hour mark and then everything is rushed to get everyone killed before the film is over. I'm not sure why so much time was wasted in the first hour and especially since there were way too many scenes with the characters just sitting around talking. This here really made the film seem longer than it was and there's no question that it drags.I thought, for the most part, that the performances were better than average for this type of picture. Laurence, an unofficial Scream Queen, was good in her part and for the most part Payne is good in his. The biggest problem is that they're just not given too much to work with. The special effects are decent for what they are and once the death scenes start happening there's at least a little life but sadly it happens way too late to save the picture.

t_atzmueller When it was released, I had been rooting for a third „Warlock"-film; true the second part hadn't been a work of glory and couldn't live up to the classic first. True also, there was no Julian Sands, but it featured Bruce Payne. "Passenger 54", "Full Eclipse" and even "The Howling VI: Freaks" were all enriched by Payne's cold stare.However, the problem with Payne is, he's essentially a limited actor, compensating any lack of skill with his (usually rather threatening and malevolent) presence. Actors like that usually need a very skilled director to point them to the right direction and obviously this director wasn't on the set of "Warlock III".Payne's screen-time is largely wasted; this could have worked, had "Warlock III" been a sequel that has anything to do with the original. It doesn't. "Warlock III" is called Warlock only because it features a warlock. A wizard, magician, call it what you want. Nothing to do with the 'Super-Warlock' we came to love in "Warlock". There's no boiling of human fat for potion, no flying, no punching nails into the Warlocks footprints, etc; just a haunted house, a couple of cheap, computer-animated effects and Payne lingering around in a couple of scenes.As to the rest of the cast: hopeful, young actors, each more unmemorable as the next; each having spent more time on bodybuilding and make-up than on acting, all trying to push their pretty faces against the camera in the (vein) hope of "making it big". You could have cast Sean Connery or Javier Bardem instead of Payne; it still wouldn't have saved the film from being a complete train wreck. (This trend would continue to this very day, with films (generally remakes) like "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" or "Final Destination". It may sound like stickling here, but did films like "Friday the 13th" or "A Nightmare on Elmstreet" produce future stars like Johnny Depp and Kevin Bacon, or did they not?) What gives the film its deathblow is the camera-work, which reeks of cheapest video, just short of calling it "Blair Witch Project". Despite having a limited budget, the original "Warlock" looked grander than it was. "Warlock III", in comparison, looks like what it is: a cheap, shoddily put together flick, hoping to ride on the title of a classic.A director like Steve Miner could have saved that mess, even despite the incredibly lame script. But as it is, the "Warlock III" virtually is beyond the hope for redemption. Two points from ten is all I'm willing to give: one for Bruce Payne and the other … well, I can't really remember what for.

C G The first Warlock film with Julian Sands and Richard E. Grant was great - original, fun, a bit gory, and suspenseful. It had pretty well defined characters, and a plot that moved. (I bet the movie would have been terrific if it's budget had been about 3 times bigger for special FX.) I Feel the second installment Warlock: The Armagedon, was okay, but a bit cheesy with the magic druid theme going. Though the plot was a bit dodgy because they weren't chasing after the warlock, the improved FX and magical scenarios made the movie palatable.This third installment though is pathetic. The editing is horrible, the film drags on and on for the first 40 minutes or so. The lead character is very flat, and the Warlock is also quite flat. Although that is kind of how the warlock character has always been portrayed, calm, cold, and collected, which worked when the other leads where quite animated, but is terrible here with the boring lead. At least there are the side kicks in W3 to spice things up, as the two leads are excruciatingly lame characters.As the film is slow at the beginning, one doesn't know if it is going to be about the house, or about the Warlock. And I think that where they missed it. If they had focused less on the "haunted house" aspect early on, and more or flashbacks with the warlock, it may have turned out better.If you are a fan of the previous two Warlock films its worth renting, but prepare yourself for boredom and disappointment.If you've never seen the previous Warlock films, skip this one, rent Warlock (1989) and enjoy.

Blaidd_Drwg I'll be honest. It really was an okay movie. While no one can replace Julian Sands, Bruce Payne did a pretty good job as The Warlock. He played the facade of good well (as Phillip Covington) and he played his true evil self (The Warlock) even better. It was a treat to watch him act in this movie. Ashley Laurence did a good job of playing Kris as well, her performance wasn't too over the top, and she still managed to play the part fairly accurately. I went into this movie expecting something more akin to the original movies, and I was absolutely devastated that Julian Sands wasn't playing The Warlock. I was skeptical about it, but in the end, I was rather pleased with how it turned out.