Saad Khan

19 May 2012

Another ridiculous venture out of Nicolas Cage's ***.

SEASON OF WITCH – TRASH IT ( D ) Season of Witch is another crap out ofNicolas Cage. The movie starts with cruel witch hanging and then comesthe Man "Nicolas Cage" with some of the most stupid fake war fightsequences. From war fight till the last demon fight it was full ofdreadful dialogues and performances by each male star cast. (The Witch"Clair Foy" was good). Ghost Rider, Next, Knowing, Astro Boy, TheSorcerer's Apprentice, Drive Angry 3D and now Season of the Witch. Inlast decade this man has given us the most ridiculous big ventures.Thanks God to National Treasure series & Kick-Ass, which saved his Repa little. But one thing for sure casting Nicolas Cage in adventurouslead role is an invitation for disaster. Overall, Trash this ridiculousventure out of Nicolas Cage.

18 May 2012

Rotten Meter Way Off

This review is from: Season of the Witch (Amazon Instant Video) Rotten Tomatoes 8% rating for this flix is way, way too low. A movie teaming Cage and Pearlman (Ghost Rider plus Hellboy) is worth at least a look-see. The film is not great, but it is not terrible either. It's entertainment. And, for a couple of bucks, worth a couple of hours of diversion.

15 May 2012

Love Nick Cage - Not So Much The Movie!

I liked it but I think it lacked something. I much enjoyed watching Drive Angry more so than Season of the Witch.

smccar77

15 May 2012

Season of the Witch casts a mediocre spell

"Season of the witch," is an action-horror film that barely achievesmediocrity. 40 Million dollars, talented actors, and a supernaturalstory are usually enough to guarantee that a film will provide a decentescape for 90 minutes. SotW is one of the rare examples when money,star power, and story synthesize into a slipshod mess that is not ableto cater to anyone but the lowest common denominator. In essence, thisis a film that highlights the extent to which producers consider theiraudience dim witted.The main problems with the film are character, story andpredictability. First, the characters are simply too stereotypical andcliché. This is an action film so we are given the standard cast of:tortured good guy, spunky good guy friend, moral compass priest, throwaway helper one, throw away helper two, and pure evil bad guy. Whatdistinguishes a genre piece is developing these stock types. Thefilmmaker is supposed to add some details and background that allow thecharacters to become relatable with. SotW does nearly nothing. Torturedgood guy (Cage) has killed an innocent and is therefore tortured. Thatis it, no more details. The moral compass priest is a moral compassbecause he is a priest. These characters are so shallow that by the midpoint of the film, one could care less what happens to them. Second,the story is insultingly dumb. What if the black plague was actuallystarted by witches and wasn't a biological epidemic? And, what if theonly way to battle witches from pagan Europe was to spout LatinChristian formulas from a "Holy Book?" If you have ever asked thosequestions, SotW provides the answers. There is no over exaggerationhere. This is a fantasy story that imagines one of the greatestscourges on Western life as being supernatural and furthermore thescourge is battled by faith in Christ. This brings us to our thirdissue, predictability. The outcome is guaranteed from the start. Willthe above mentioned throw away characters die? Of course. Do they diefirst? yes. Will the other characters go through trial and tribulationthat eventually ends in a hollow redemption of their clichéd conflicts?Umm, yes. Is the ultimate good guy not actually a guy but ametaphorical faith in Christian ideals? You nailed it. To be fair,religious values are not the heart of the issue. The film could havesubstituted in some cheesy mystical idea about the value of valor andlove to achieve the same effect. The issue is that the premise is socontrived and tired that the film cannot but suffer predictability. Bythe mid point, if you have not lost all care, you may find yourselfmaking internal bets on who will be offed next and in what order.As to positive points, the film has some beautiful locations andhelicopter shots. There are a few scenes that are creepy and visuallyjarring. Unfortunately, that is about all. The acting is uneven andwooden. The pacing oscillates between exciting and bland. The specialeffects demonstrate that 40 million dollars is very easy to waste.Overall, this is a poor film.On a personal note, I will be actively mocking this film over the nextcouple weeks and will then probably forget the whole experience.Recently I had been watching some films that were more challenging forthe me (i.e. El Topo). I picked SotW as a light film to bring a bit oflevity to my film watching experience. While the film is in no waychallenging, it is also in no way worth watching. The story and visualsare a bit too dark and frightening for small children. The film itselfis too stupid for adults. This seems to be the crux of the issue. Whois this meant for? Apparently, should you find yourself incapable of anattention span, amused by shiny things in a gray landscape, andinebriated then you will enjoy this film. Such a unique demographicdoes make one wonder how a producer could green light such a project. 5of 10 stars.

Hansi

12 May 2012

DONT LISTEN TO CRITICS

THIS MOVIE IS A GOOD REASON TO IGNORE THE CRITICS AND GO WITH YOUR OWN INSTINCT,WHETHER TO SEE A FLICK OR NOT..NICK CAGE DID A EXCELLENT JOB AS SPENT DISILLUSIONED CRUSADER..SOPPORTING CAST WITH RON PERLMAN DID GREAT PERFORMANCES..ALSO STORY MOVED ALONG VERY WELL..OVERALL A VERY ENTERTAINING MOVIE,SO MUCH FOR THE CRITICS,U LISTEN TO THEM YOU'LL MISS, ONE GOOD FLICK...

Exonian

12 May 2012

Really disappointing

A film addressing issues concerning the black death and the medievalmind set linking plague with witchcraft and the demonic in the cultureof the day sounded interesting. A film starring Nicolas Cage and ClaireFoy sounded well worth viewing. What a disappointment! I wonder whatinduced two such powerful and talented actors to allow themselves toget involved in this kind of stuff? The central part of the film was atad formulaic - it dealt with heroes coping with the hazards of thequest/journey, and getting to the end of the journey against the oddsetc etc. Not exactly "Lord of the Rings", but it was I supposecompetent, albeit somewhat predictable. But then the end - there was nodramatic resolution of the conflict between modern and medieval worldviews - instead, the last reel suddenly goes off into a piece of horrorfilm fantasy with comic book demons jumping about the place. If Iwanted this sort of horror movie, its been done loads better elsewhere.If I wanted a realistic plot looking at the issues, it wasn't done atall. A real let down.

aeetes

06 May 2012

What's worst?

The 2 is for OK cinematography and effects, but these ingredients aloneunfortunately doesn't make a movie. The script and directing isshockingly bad, for this kind of budget. Season of the Witch suggests: The crusades was for a better good; theInquisitions was a legitimate enterprise; Nicholas Cage isn't a seriousactor. If you wan't to see the witch hunt from a different perspective, take alook at En kvinnas martyrium/ Jeanne D'arc by Dreyer.If you wan't to see the crusades from a different perspective, takelook at El Naser Salah el Dine/Saladin by Chahine.If you wan't to see Nicholas Cage from a different perspective, takelook at Wild at Heart by Lynch, Adaptation by Kauffman/Jonze orBringing out the Dead by Scorsese.If you liked this movie, however, take a look at thelow-budget-directly-to-VHS-shelf at the 80's museum.

maggie

05 May 2012

awesome

i like it... my husband and i kept on talking about the movie afterwards. worth watching at the theaters ^.^ at first u think you know how it was going to end but then it change on you .. in a good way

GODZILLA MONSTER

03 May 2012

"Lets Get Outta Here!" Uttered By Pearlman...

...Lets See? It's 1300AD...Cage & P Man Decide To Leave TheCrusade...They Are In Somewhere "Overseas" Then Pearlman Utters..."LetsGet Outta Here!"...I Secretly Recorded It, And Upon Returning Home IPlayed It BACKWARDS!...Ohhh My Gosh!...I Am Shocked! It CLEARLY Said;"Nicholas, I KNOW You Need Money, But THIS Is Ridiculous!?" How ComeSome Guys Speak Britishy And Some Guys Speak Americanny? "I" SHOULDHave "Gotten Outta There"! It Got So BAD That P Man Also UtteredSomething About Pissing, But @ That Point I Thought MAYBE There WasBetter Dialogue In The Bathroom. So I Went There And Someone FARTED AndI Thought; "Wow, It Is NOT Dialogue BUT It Sure Sounded Better ThanWhat I Was Hearing In The Theatre!" Sorry About The Off ColorInclination, BUT Man, "Dat Was BAAaaaad!"

ravman3-948-583985

02 May 2012

Director Fault!

All of the actors did a great job and the special effect rocks.Nicholas Cage did the best with what they gave him to work with. Themovie was all over the place and the ending sucks. Every one in thetheatre with me was very disappointment on the ending. The two heroesdies! When the movie ended we just sat there hoping for more of themovie for the money we paid to see it. Blame the failings of this movieon the director he need to pull it together. At one point he wanted todo an epic, a comedy, a romance to a horror he just could not make uphis mind. Like another post this movie will be just a memories in 2012.Save your money until it comes to your nearest Wal*Mart discount binds.

harold37076

29 April 2012

A great movie with a great story line.

My wife and I both loved this film, and will watch it again. It kept uson the edge of our seats. The demon looks very good. The on locationshooting gave the film a very real feeling. Mr Cage was very believableas his character. Mr Perlman was very good as Felson. He was bothcomical and believable a a Crusader. I just wish I would have seen itat the theater were the big screen would have brought it to life. Onour 50" screen was very good, but it lacks the greatness of a largescreen. I would have loved to have seen this in 3D. I hope Mr. Cagemakes another film like this soon. Also the friendship on the leadcharacters are believable, and they work well together.

DANIEL

29 April 2012

Unexpected

So my wife takes me to go see this flick. Did not expect much from it, but I was was way wrong! It was an unexpectely good movie. I'm not saying its Oscar worthy however,it had enough action and suspense to keep you awake.

John

29 April 2012

enjoyment

I enjoyed and liked this movie.I am used to the over kill CGI effects and gory movies from the past 20 years. Lets just say my senses are very much numbed toward those movies. I went to see this movie not expecting it to awe me or that it out do all the other over kill CGI/gory movies. I went to see it with no other expectations other then just some entertainment. This movie did an excellent job at that. The action scenes weren't jam packed that you lost sight of the storyline. There weren't thee's and thou's like the Shakespear stories that makes you want to fall asleep. There were plenty of well placed 1 liners that make me laugh. There weren't the usual corny little guy fights back and in the end, wins the day and gets the girl. This was about a man discovering he was mislead, in turn, caused him to do things he doesn't want to do, and that he set out to redeem himself. In the movie, he wasn't perfect, he wasn't all powerful, he was just a man.I don't agree with all the other viewers about how bad this movie is. I think they have too much expectations. And those expectations are not realistic. It's like when you watched Lord of the Rings the 1st time, you are like wow, but then you go back to see it again, and you'll usually end up feeling "hmmm.... it's okay, not all that made out to be". In closing, I would recommend that if you go see it, go see it without any expectations, just go see it for entertainment and you will be rewarded.

Danielle

28 April 2012

We Be Witchin'

The overall movie was pretty decent, and that was going in without any expectations. Like always, it was supposed to be a historical-type fantasy thriller, but the lack of international accents made it fall. For what it was worth, the acting was good, especially from Claire Foy and Stephen Campbell Moore. There were some catchy one-liners, as well as a constant flow of suspense and action. All in all, it was certainly entertaining, but not something to 'OMFG' about.

Max_cinefilo89

20 April 2012

Where's the magic?

Nicolas Cage. Magic. Blockbuster. A familiar combination, since DominicSena's Season of the Witch hits theaters only a few months after TheSorcerer's Apprentice (whose producer Jerry Bruckheimer, in the oddestof coincidences, worked with both star and director on Gone in 60Seconds, eleven years back). While the latter was a by-numbers Disneyeffort (plenty of effects, a general lack of heart), Sena's latest workmanages to also be quite a bit boring and occasionally ludicrous.This time, Cage doesn't play a magician, but a crusader who, havingwitnessed too much bloodshed, runs off to Europe with his fellowsoldier and best friend (Ron Perlman). They discover a plague-riddenlandscape where witch hunts are an everyday routine, and eventuallymake it to a village where they encounter a priest (Stephen CampbellMoore) who needs help taking a potential witch (Claire Foy) to amonastery, where she will face trial. Assisted by a loyal knight(Ulrich Thomsen) and an eager youngster (Robert Sheehan), they begin aperilous journey that will test their faith in every possible way.The storyline certainly had enough spark to produce an interestingmovie, but Sena messes with the final product by not knowing what toaim for: depending on the section, Season of the Witch is a historicaldrama, a thriller with hints of the supernatural or, at worst, a clumsymeld of horror and fantasy (then again, what should we expect from afilm that shares its title with the third Halloween flick?). Settingaside factual inaccuracies, namely the fact that the Crusades, witchhunts and black plague didn't occur simultaneously (and what's withCage's sudden bout of modern cursing in a Medieval setting?), theuneven tone kicks in after a moderately promising first half, leavingroom for basic plotting that culminates in a ghastly genre switch and amost annoying "twist".The acting is a similar mixed bag: Cage does his usual genericblockbuster shtick, which jars considerably with the gravitas comingfrom Thomsen and, to a lesser extent, Sheehan, both of whom are takingthe film far more seriously than required. A cameo by Christopher Lee -who actually looks more like Max von Sydow - livens things up despiteits brevity (even Tim Burton has given him more screen time), and thejoy of seeing him and Perlman - lovable as always - in the same moviecould make up for the rest if the second half of the picture wasn't soshoddy. As for the witches (yes, they do appear in a few scenes),well... they look like cheaper versions of Doctor Who's Weeping Angels,minus the scares.Season of the Witch could have been interesting, but it comes off as abland blockbuster with very little to go for it. Sure, it's got RonPerlman head-butting a demon, but is that enough? Afraid not.

19 April 2012

I liked it

This review is from: Season of the Witch (Amazon Instant Video) I read some of the reviews other people leave and it is like they are critiquing the actor's entire life. I watched the movie and enjoyed it for what it was. I found the story intriguing, the characters held my attention, and the climax was unexpected. I downloaded it first and watched it on my TiVo because so many rated this poorly, but after watching it there, I felt it was good enough for my library and bought the Blu-Ray. I watch a movie and take the story as an individual work (except sequels) and not another chapter in the lives of the actors.

capone666

17 April 2012

The Vidiot Reviews...

Season of the WitchNow, I'm not exactly sure which of the seasons belongs to the witch,but I'd venture it's the one where it gets as cold as one of theirtits.While it's ambiguous as to which month this fantasy is set, we do knowit occurs during the Crusades. Done with waging war in the Lord's name, two knights, Behman (NicolasCage) and Felson (Ron Perlman), desert.On their way home, they come upon a plague-infested town, where theyare incarcerated for abandoning their post.Fortuitously, both are given a reprieve by a contaminated Cardinal, inexchange for escorting a supposed witch to an outlying monastery whereshe will be tried for witchcraft.En route, the girl reveals her true ominous nature.A contrived concoction of pious warmongering, witch-hunt hysteria andbad hairpieces, Season of the Witch is a laughable lark.Besides, Christianity shouldn't censure Wicca, since Jesus was awizard. (Red Light)

RichardSRussell-1

17 April 2012

Do You Suppose It Stank This Bad in the Dark Ages?

Season of the Witch (TIME, PG-13) — fantasy: sword & sorcery, 3rdstring, originalNicolas Cage has an interesting track record. He's not afraid to takeon oddball, off-beat roles, which sometimes pays off for him andsometimes just makes him look clownish. He was stunningly good in hisOscar-winning performance as the self-destructive alcoholic in LeavingLas Vegas, for instance, and he did terrific work as the magician inthe sadly under-appreciated Next, a movie based on (of all things) themany-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. (Picture THAT as thestrange attractor on a movie poster!) He was pitch- perfect as BigDaddy in Kick-Ass (another movie I liked a lot better than themainstream critics). OTOH, The Wicker Man, Ghost Rider, Knowing, say nomore.So it's kind of a crapshoot attending a movie whose advertisingcomprises essentially "Nic Cage is in it.".Regrettably, you can chalk Season of the Witch up on the "What was hethinking?" side of the ledger. It's a classic stinker.There's a brief prolog set in the geographically indeterminate villageof *ahem* Villach in 1235 AD, as 3 supposed witches are summarilyexecuted by hanging and drowning. I presume the primary purpose of thissequence is to demonstrate the "damned if you do, damned if you don't"attitude of the Catholic Church, since once you were accused ofwitchcraft, there was essentially nothing you could do to demonstrateyour innocence.Next we jump ahead a century to a montage of battle scenes from theCrusades, spanning the years 1332 to 1344, as valiant knights Behmen (aslightly chubby Cage) and Felson (Ron Perlman) slauter their way acrosswhat was then called the Near East. Finally, moments after sticking hissword into a peasant woman, the nihilism of it all comes crashing in onBehmen, and he walks away in disgust, his loyal buddy Felson at hisside.A month later they're passing thru a village that's been stricken withthe plague, and they are press-ganged by the dying Cardinal D'Ambroise(Christopher Lee, looking pretty stricken himself) to transport asuspected witch to the Abbey at Severac, where they can definitivelydetermine if she's the cause of the pestilence upon the land. That'sbecause they possess the World's Only Copy™ of the Book of Solomon,which is full of information about such things. The girl (Claire Foy)is young, pretty beneath all the dirt, dimpled-chinned, and strong asan ox. Half of the ragged band accompanying her prison wagon to theabbey are already convinced she's a witch and want to do her in on thespot. Behmen, sick of pointless killing, resists, insisting that he'spledged that she will get a fair trial. Yeah, right.There are adventures along the way, and a couple of surprises await atthe end of the journey.The one good thing about the movie is that it shows all the ugliness ofthe religious fanaticism involved as the Crusades spilled over into theInquisition. But that's it. The performances are dull and listless, thedialog is uninspired, the color palette is relentless shades of gray,the score is unmemorable, and there's virtually no production design,as almost everything occurs somewhere in the nameless central Europeanout-of-doors. (The movie was shot in Hungary and Austria.) The dirt andmuck are pretty realistic, tho, and I suppose it's a good thing themovie wasn't able to reproduce the medieval stench — at least notliterally.

DonnaE

12 April 2012

Wait for the Blue Ray, and rent it.

It is not worth the $10 ticket to get in the movie. Just rent it. We left thinking that the director edited the good parts out.

matej-trkanjec-133-920386

11 April 2012

No rest for the wicked

Season of the Witch is an interesting, dark, melancholic movie thatcould have been better, but still gives quite a good ride. The openingof the movie is good, scary and gives a good prediction of what themovie is going to be like. The CGI is terrible and one has the feelingthat is playing a video game rather than watching a movie. The story isgood, creepy at points, and has a rather good, unexpected twist at theend, so I can't say much against it. This is a road-movie, so about 90% of it is based on traveling but great sequences (e.c. wolves andhallucinations) give the movie an emission of thrill towards theviewers. The movie could have been a bit longer, because 90 min is justnot enough for an adventure movie of this type. It gave me a sensationthat some things were a bit rushed, and the end a bit longer than itshould have been. The characters were a bit colorless, as the actorsdid a routine job without much interest, which is a shame becausePerlman and Cage (a great casting idea) can do a much better job. Ifyou like dark adventures with good actors and an unexpected twist youwill enjoy it. Just don't expect it to get an Oscar.