The Devonsville Terror (1983) watch online HD

"The Devonsville Terror" focuses on a small town in New England where three women perceived to be witches were executed in 1683. 300 years later, a mysterious woman, Jenny (Suzanna Love) arrives in town as the new school teacher. She seems to be a student of the feminist movement, which doesn't sit well in these parts. Little has changed in Devonsville— the one room schoolhouse has a class of about 20 kids and still has a fireplace, and the people still seem to have retained a colonial mindset. The arrival of two other women (a scientist and a female sex radio host) gets the townsmen riled up and curious as to whether or not the witches have returned reincarnated. Meanwhile, a doctor (Donald Pleasance) spends all of his screen time pulling worms out of his arm and studying a curse bestowed on his family linked back to the executions.

I'm not even going to get into Uli Lommel's filmography of the past decade because it truly is that bad, but I will stand up for him on two counts, because he did make two decent horror films in the '80s: this, and "The Boogeyman" (1980). "The Devonsville Terror" plays out like a Halloween TV movie of the week and draws from historical occurrences such as the Salem witch trials. Because of this, the script is actually pretty informed and intelligent in terms of logistics. It's a Lommel film, so some coherence has either been lost in editing or was never entirely present to begin with, but overall it's a mostly cohesive picture.

It's obvious from the get-go that this film's thematics are rooted in feminism, and it acts as a reiteration of the modern issue of cultural progress vs. tradition, which, for a horror film, is a bit sophisticated. All three of the modern female characters who enter the town represent three things that much of conservative America fears: feminism, sexuality, and science. That alone sets this film apart for me and elevates it above most horror fodder. Thematically, this film is far elevated above what it need be.

As for the horror— it's not scary. There are a few spooky shots and some really cool camera-work (the kaleidoscopic flashback shots of the witch executions are the things horror classics are made of), but I'd say it's more atmospheric than anything. It has the autumnal New England setting down to a tee, and is a perfect October/November watch. The opening scene in the film where the witches are executed is perhaps the best scene in the film, and really sets the tone for the rest of the movie. Not only is it well shot, but it's also well acted and actually still fairly shocking.

The acting in the film is not great, but is good. Suzanna Love plays the vulnerable, educated schoolteacher and has a gentleness that juxtaposes nicely with the harsh, judgmental nature of the townsfolk who seem to be against her. Donald Pleasance has little screen time and spends all of it in a single setting pulling worms out of his arms (which is apparently the result of a curse by the witches tracing back through his paternal lineage), but he's a pleasure to watch as always.

Overall, "The Devonsville Terror" is a shocker for those who thought Uli Lommel never made a decent film. This is not a bad movie. It's actually on par or even above average as far as '80s horror goes, and it is a thematically sophisticated genre film. Not only is it well made, but it's also plain fun to watch. Definitely not something just anyone would enjoy, but if you like your witches and ghouls served '80s TV movie style, then "The Devonsville Terror" is prime pickings. 7/10.

Watching this movie a second time was very feasible. I understood the plot more better and I liked the movie better as well. If you really watch and pay attention to the movie, you will see that it has a strong plot that makes since. I think people don't like this movie because it was hardly any gore and it was kind of slow moving, but again, just pay attention to the plot it is a good move. *** 1/2 out of *****

Director Ulli Lommel this time created the idea of three women back in 1683 who are arrested for crimes that they obviously did not commit and are sentenced to death in three different gruesome ways which I will not describe (watch it!) Then the movie goes three hundred years into the present (1983) where in the town of Devonsville, there are all of the sudden three young beautiful women who mysteriously arrive to the town. This town is your average small-town where everyone knows your name 'cheers' style. Lommel does capture that small-town feel very successfully and I found myself drawn into the complex web of ignoramuses inhabiting this town. The only smart one in my opinion was Dr. Worley (Donald Pleasance), Pleasance always provides an utterly fantastic performance in any work he does and he didn't let up in this movie. The ending is a perfectly blatant ripoff or homage if you will, of the Raiders of the Lost Ark. You would think Lommel would pay homage to another slasher flick but oh well. Otherwise this movie wasn't too bad, Suzanna Love is great as always but I wasn't to keen about her short hair, what do I know? It was 1983 and I guess that was the big 'thing' then. Witch fans will love this flick no doubt. Peace

Like another reviewer said, this one is actually better the second time around. Ulli Lommel and Susana Love are much better known for the Bogey Man, but I like this one a little better. It is charming little witch story, with some truly unintentional laughs thrown in (i.e. the Convenience Store Guy). It is crudely produced, but it manages to work up an understated feeling of mystery and tension.

The supporting actors, I assume many of them are local rural Wisconsin folk, manage pretty good, in earnest amateur way. Were there ever supposed to be witches in Wisconsin? In the town of Rhinelander there is a legend of a prehistoric dragon like creature called a hodag which has nothing to do with this movie, but when I saw that this was made in Wisconsin, it reminded me of a vacation from long ago. Anyway, this movie is about the curse of Devonsville, where a few hundred years ago some townsfolk slayed some witches in mildly horrific manner (cue Rush's Witchcraft from Moving Pictures 1981). Fast forward to 1982 and some outsiders come to Devonsville and are perceived by the local intolerant inbred as evil/sexy/a threat to their collective blandness. Menace ensues, followed by an awkwardness. Will they also meet their doom in ways that mirror the earlier deaths, or will they triumph over these dullard yokels?

Susanna Love is great as the confused outsider. As is the case with The Bogeyman, she exudes a certain naive warmth. Donald Pleasance is pleasing as always. Like Ms. Love he has a very mannered way of delivering his lines that is kind of fun. And the aforementioned towns people are obviously dedicated to the project, if a little green. Say what you will about Ulli Lommell, at least he made a solid effort with this little picture. Solid entertainment if you like this kind of thing.

Going back to the Rush song, is it possible that the filmmakers heard the song and thought it would make a good movie? Probably not.

Ulli Lommel's Devonsville Terror(1983) is a good modern day horror tale about witchcraft and a town's dark past coming back for revenge. Sadly for the people of Devonsville, history does repeat itself. Three woman are drawn to this cow town for unknown reasons. One of them is a school teacher (Suzanna Love, despite her short ugly haircut still looks hot). The women's reaction towards the sleazy male town folk doesn't earn them any points, causing them to raise suspicion amongst them (like that squirly shop keeper had any chance with Suzanna Love!). That's when the fun begins. This movie is one of those "you either love it or hate it" types. There is no fine line with this one. Recommended (depending on your taste of movies). Ms. Love co-wrote and produced as well.

P.S. This movie has some nice gory set pieces.

THE DEVONSVILLE TERROR is one of many low budget horror flicks that director Ulli Lommel was making in the early 1980s, his video nasty THE BOOGEY MAN being the best-remembered of them all. This one's a typical witchcraft story, of the kind that seems to have been filmed over and over again over the decades in America. A bunch of witches are killed by Puritans and swear vengeance; in the modern day, an innocent young woman is possessed by the spirit of one of the dead witches and the cycle of revenge begins. This is familiar small town material, with a fair bit of atmosphere but not much in the way of plotting or originality. There are nice roles for an always-reliable Donald Pleasence and Robert Walker Jr., while Suzanna Love acquits herself well as the feisty lead. However, it's all a little staid, a little forgettable, at least until the hilariously over the top climax, which rips off the ending of RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK but is even more gruesome - something I really enjoyed.

It's a dark night, there is a full moon poking out from behind the clouds. An on screen caption informs us that it is 'Devonsville, 300 years ago'. A posse of witch-finders condemn a woman named Jessica Maulding (Morrigan Hurt) as a witch, the head executioner (Paul Bentzen) reads from a script urging the woman to denounce the devil & witchcraft. Several pigs are unleashed & start to eat her alive. They move onto yet another woman named Mary Platt (Barbara Cihlar) who they also claim is a witch, they tie her to a large wooden wheel, set it on fire & roll it down a hill. The witch-finders night is still not over as they prepare to execute one final accused woman named Rebecca Parsons (Leslie Smith) who they tie to a stake & set her on fire, as she burns a demonic apparition rises into the lightening filled sky & places a curse on the town & it's inhabitants. We then get an on screen narrated paragraph of text that reads 'Dr. Warley's Journal #73. It has been 300 years since the Devonsville inquisition. Perhaps the long ordeal of the Warley family may be nearing it's conclusion. Only evil will out evil', yet another caption informs us that it is 'Devonsville, the present'. A new strong minded & opinionated school teacher named Jenny Scanlon (co-writer Suzanna Love) arrives in the sleepy New England town of Devonsville. Around the same time two more strangers move to Devonsville, a new DJ at the local radio station named Monica (Deanna Harris) who preaches & fights for womens rights on her show & a new female tenant in a log cabin named Chris (Mary Walden) who is an ecologist studying pollution in the area. Some of the townsfolk lead by local store owner Walter Gibbs (Paul Willson), Aaron Pendleton (Bill Dexter) & his son Ralph (Micheal Accardo) begin to resent the three women & their ideas. As the 300th anniversary of the Devonsville inquisition approaches they believe that maybe Jenny, Chris & Monica are reincarnations of the three witches tortured & murdered all those years ago sent to avenge the crimes & sins of their ancestors!

Photographed, co-written, co-produced & directed by Ulli Lommel the Devonsville Terror has virtually nothing to recommend it. The script by Lommel, star Suzanna Love & George T. Lindsey is very slow after the promising opening sequence. Nothing much happens until the very end & as a whole the film feels somewhat padded even at a short duration of just over 80 minutes. The script has an obvious & clear message about persecution & prejudice as the townsfolk of Devonsville convince themselves that Jenny, Chris & Monica are the reincarnations of witches by jumping to conclusions, being very small minded & set in their ways. Unfortunately this reasonable idea for a plot is poorly realised on screen with the entire film becoming a chore to sit through as nothing happens for long stretches, most of the characters are underdeveloped & forgettable. There is also another problem with the story, surely the original inquisition was right as Rebecca placed a curse on the town which means she was a witch! The same contradiction applies to the climax as well. One more thing, when Jenny finds a snake in her bed that wasn't there earlier why does she not question it & who put it there? In fact it's never mentioned again, as are many other little bits that happen here & there that are just dumped & forgotten about like Gibbs murdering his wife Sarah Louise (Joanna Andruss) & receiving a dodgy death certificate from Dr. Warley (Donald Pleasence) which is also totally ignored for the remainder of the film. The special effects are generally terrible, especially when a ghostly apparition is seen & those laser beams coming out of Jenny's eyes at the end look awful. There are a couple of good gore scenes, someones head explodes & another's head gorily melts in quite an impressive effect. The film was shot in autumn & is band, colourless & dreary throughout. The cinematography is flat & unimaginative. The acting is poor, even though he gets near top-billing on the credits Donald Pleasence has nothing more than a cameo as Doctor Warley who never leaves the confines of his comfy wood panelled office! Inbetween bouts of removing maggots burrowing into his skin with tweezers he hypnotises the locals to gain information on the curse & then just disappears from the film completely. Overall I think The Devonsville Terror is a poor film that I personally found incredibly boring & uninteresting. I can't really see anyone getting much entertainment from The Devonsville Terror (I certainly didn't) & therefore I cannot recommend it. Probably best to give this one a miss!

Typically I dislike films about witches (with the exception of Dario Argento's horror classic Suspiria), but The Devonsville Terror is quite amusing. The script is disastrous, the performances are over-acted, and the special effects are anything but special. The plot is devoid of any significant twists or surprises. The audience anticipates the impending events faster than do the characters, and the conclusion is accomplished suddenly and sloppily. However, I can't deny that this film makes me curiously happy when I watch it. Something about the lighting and overall appearance of the film. The soundtrack is also quite good, and gives the film an eerie quality. I particularly like the scene where Walter Gibbs' face melts (the special effects are primitive but cleverly done using wax melting in time-lapse). That scene always gives me the creeps. The storyline, despite its uncreative, allows the characters to really show their true colors. Walter Gibbs' character specifically is quite gross, and almost matches with his looks. A film worth trying, and for those who are skeptical, Donald Pleasence of John Carpenter's Halloween also stars.

The little town of Devonsville, 1683. Three slightly eccentric, yet innocent women are gruesomely tortured and executed. Devonsville, 1983…around the same time three hundred years later 3 single women come to settle in the town that is still congested by Puritan, superficial villagers. The 20th century-inhabitants of Devonsville simply seem like reincarnations of their forefathers and they quickly begin to suspect the newly arrived ladies of witchery. The gorgeous new teacher (Suzanna Love) in particular.

Ulli Lommel's The Devonsville Terror is cheap 80's taking on the gruesome subject of the Inquisition and witchery, a horror sub genre that I personally cherish highly. Obviously, the atmosphere and tension doesn't come near the classic titles in this sub genre, like 'The Witchfinder General' or 'Mark of the Devil' but it does feature some chilling scenery and ingenious horror moments. Veteran horror actor Donald Pleasance stars as the town's doctor who constantly has to pick living worms out of his own flesh (due to a curse placed on his family, centuries ago). The film is overall decent and certainly worth a watch if you're an undemanding horror lover. Too bad about the bad ending, though…Well, it isn't exactly a BAD ending. More like an unsatisfying one. Just when the plot takes a vicious new twist, the end-credits start rolling over the screen and you're left behind with an empty feeling in your stomach.

I watched this film completely sober, which is never a great idea when you're watching low-budget horror films. But this one was alright. The plot was firmly established, the death scenes were obviously amateur but at least creative in their methods. And Donald Pleasance, who can really do no wrong (I watched this film about a week after seeing "Alone in the Dark" - I should have made it a double feature). Other critics of this film might say it is not original. Maybe so, but the director and the actors were able to establish a "creepy level" unparalleled in any other film. Almost every two minutes some character acted in a way that weirded me out. What was made into a 90-minute film should have been a Twin Peaks-esque television show. The only thing really missing in this film is a woman talking to a log. Were there plot holes and other flaws? Sure. The laser beams from the eyes were a bit unusual, and the weekly meetings with the drunk priest, and the unexplained need for hypnotized people to be naked, and the obvious fact the wormy arm was not a real arm... but I digress. A fine film ion its own right - 6 out of 10.

One of the biggest problems I have with this film - apart from the fact that it actually exists - is that, in the hands of finer craftsmen and with a stronger budget, it could have been quite good. The premise, while familiar, could have been put to good effect: an accused witch's curse comes back to haunt the people of a small New England hamlet 300 years after she was wrongfully burnt at the stake. Ultimately however, 'The Devonsville Terror' just lays down and dies quite quickly, offering no suspense or horror whatsoever outside of a cheap play at being a bad exploitation film here and there (at the beginning and again at the end, where almost the same things happen) with a minorly repulsive 'shock' somewhere in the middle. The film is so cheap the producers don't seem to have even been able to afford to pay more than one of the female actors to go topless, blowing the budget instead on pulling unconvincing maggot stunts and a laughable torn by dogs sequence, stealing the melting head scene from 'Raiders of the Lost Ark', having a ghostly, horribly burnt face with a full head of hair float around and making the heroine shoot laser beams out of her eyes! An unintentional murder apparently releases the vengeful spirits of three women brutalised hundreds of years before; the superstituous, horribly-cliched small town hicks naturally think the spirits have taken possession of three female outsiders: a radio broadcaster, an environmentalist and the newly-appointed school teacher who hitch-hikes into town and falls foul of the townsfolk by telling her pupils that the Babylonian chief god was a woman. Eventually, after some extended film time where nothing very interesting happens, the locals decide to do them in. All the while the village doctor is trying to purge Devonsville of its curse by exposing his patients to seemingly meaningless hypnotherapy that exists only to allow more lame scenes of women being victimised. Apart from a rather nasty scene where one poor girl is dragged to death behind a pick-up, it would all be quite appalling if it wasn't so half-baked. Because it is, it's appalling for very different reasons.

In 1980, movie maker Ulli Lommel made an impression with audiences thanks to his movie "The Boogeyman", but in subsequent years his films slowly became unwatchable. Though "The Devonsville Terror" was made just three years later, already Lommel's inability to even get remotely close to his earlier success was evident. I admit it's not among the worst of Lommel's movies. Lommel does manage to generate a little atmosphere - you really feel the cold and isolation of this small town. And the opening sequence is okay. But after that opening sequence is over, viewers will have to suffer through the next sixty or so minutes with practically NOTHING of significance or importance happening. Eventually things do start moving a little again, but as it turns out, this last part of the movie is too little and too late. By the way, if you are thinking of watching this movie because Donald Pleasence is in it, be warned - it's clear that his limited footage (with all of his scenes taking place in the same location) was knocked off in just one or two days of shooting.

This movie have some certain characteristics that kinda make you wonder a bit. "The Devonsville Terror" is a very interesting movie to watch. I saw this movie one time, and I got hooked. After seeing it again, I liked it still. Suzanna Love("The Boogeyman") plays a teacher from out of town who enters Devonsville, a town with a very dark history. 300 years ago, witches were persecuted. One of them put a curse on the town. She was wrongly perceived by the towns folks. The descendants of founding fathers still live in the town which they live their conservative ways. When Jenny Scanlon (Love), and two other women come to reside in town for the winter, the hostility between them begins to sink in. When one of the locals killed his wife, he takes interest in Jenny. The town doctor(Donald Pleasance) is inflicted with an ailment which was brought on by the curse. He is seemingly the only one who is not like the other men. When the others started to attack the other two women, Jenny is the incarnation of the wrongly accused. When they tie her up, the wife of the town leader decided to do away with him. Jenny displayed her fury on the others, and ended up moving on. Some cheese factor was shown. The scenes remind me of "Scanners" , " The Fog" and others to mention. It's not bad. I liked it! 2 out of 5 stars

This movie had a nice old feeling to it as the commentator before me said, but that's it. The story is stupid, the acting is mediocre, and the effects are horrible. And the whole arm/worm thing is disgusting might I add. And many of the things just look fake....I love horror movies, and on a scale of 1-10 compared to Children of the Corn (which was made just a year after this;1984)...I'd give it a 1.5 for the lonely feeling, and the .5 for effort.

Every time I see a film like this, I become less of a fan of the genre. The idea of a witch coming back from the grave for revenge centuries after being put to death is not a bad idea; but it's featured in too many films and it's rarely, if ever, done well. Despite sounding promising, The Devonsville Terror is yet another bad example of this type of film. A big clue to this film being bad is the director - Ulli Lommel was the genius behind the awful Video Nasty The Bogey Man and it's even worse sequel Revenge of the Bogey Man three years later. His directorial skills didn't improve for this film either, although it's probably a minor improvement over his last two. The film starts with the killing of three possible witches. Anyone familiar with this stuff will know what's coming next as the story advances three hundred years and there are three new women in town. Naturally, it's no coincidence and pretty soon the villagers, who seem to be stuck in the same century that the witches were originally killed in, come to believe that three are back for revenge...

One of the plot devices used in this film is a storyboarded voice-over in which certain things are explained. This sums the film up completely as the guy they got reading it sounds completely bored and the rest of the film carries on that same lacklustre tone. The standout member of the cast is Donald Pleasence, who unfortunately carries on with "starring in drivel" theme that the formerly great actor started after starring in Halloween five years before this film. His character is the most interesting in the film and he suffers from a curse that means he continually has to remove worms from beneath his skin (...but still practices as a doctor). This is really the film's only good idea but it's not well done as the director simply shows the same bit of film again and again to portray it. The plot has several holes in it and it seems that Lommel didn't have enough money to complete the film as it is short and there's a lot left out. There's no atmosphere, suspense or tension in the film; which kills the horror elements and despite the odd splash of gore, this is a very underwhelming horror movie that I would not recommend to anyone!

Well I've been watching a lot of really weird stuff but this one is worser than awful. Pityful. The plot is so stupid it's hard to believe; special effects are crappy and hilarious; characters are stereotypical to the extent that the moviegoer feels offended; nothing makes the least sense in this movie which is a pile of badly rearranged commonplaces of horror. More than this the setting is squalid and depressive, and the whole movie looks close to some very ugly TV series. Expect boredom to its highest. A completely unexplained end stops the audience's sufferings. And there is Donald Pleasance in the cast, too. Yuck.

This movie was nothing but feminist man-bashing from start to finish.

Almost every misandric feminist cliché you could think of was in here. Every "independent" woman in the story becomes the target of the hatred of the men of Devonsville because she refuses to sleep with them. Every woman is an innocent lamb, trying to free herself from the shackles of servitude to her patriarchal oppressors in order to live a life of pure elation with her sisters, while nearly every man is a misogynist creep and potential rapist. The men deride the women who turn down their advances as lesbians. God, we are told, was a woman, until those nasty male supremacist monotheists came along and forced Judeo-Christianity on everyone. The witch hunts were carried out by cruel, sadistic men who had had their frail egos wounded by non-conformist women who wouldn't sleep with them.

Interestingly, all this didn't stop the director from including several gratuitous shots of his wife's breasts. Before watching this, I had no idea that it was necessary to take one's shirt off to do past life regression. Sex sells everything, I guess, including feminist propaganda films.

The movie had a rather different effect on me than what I imagine the writers intended, because I actually found myself cheering when the men tied the feminist radio talk show host to the back of a truck and dragged her to death.

Bad acting and bad special effects throughout with an ending ripped-off from Raiders of the Lost Ark.

About the only redeeming thing about this movie was that some of the outdoor photography was nice (though it might've been stock footage, for all I know).

This typically mediocre horror flick is only worthwhile if you are a die-hard fan of the genre. The acting is good enough, and the story was okay, but as usual, this is a horror film that is not the least bit scary, or even creepy. If there is one very good thing about this movie, it is the look of the picture. I'm sure I'm not alone when I say that horror films that were filmed 15 to 25 years ago tend to have a dark, cold, and often lonely feel to them, and that the quality of today's technology is actually a bad thing when trying to film a scary movie these days. But the great look of this film still doesn't mean that any of you should bother watching it...

Three women are killed, by pigs, a burning wagon wheel, and a burning at the stake, for witchcraft. Whether they were really witches or not is not clear, though as I've read someone else point out: there is a curse on the Doctor's family that appears to be real.

The Doctor, played by Donald Pleasance, has maggots poking out of his skin that he plucks out with tweezers. He continues to practice even though this doesn't seem very hygienic. He'd like to end the curse (understandably), but it's unclear what he does towards that end. He hypnotizes some people so that they remember their past lives, or their ancestors' lives, or maybe he's implanting suggestions.

Three women arrive in town about simultaneously: a radio host, an environmentalist, and a school teacher. The townspeople mostly don't like them, and begin to think they are witches, partly misunderstanding the women, partly making up lies about them.

There are some good scenes, and while a bit slow, its main fault seems to be holes in the story. There's a lot of information missing that is not of the sort that can be left as mysteries.

There's a really terrible demon or devil face that appears a few times. It looks sort of like what Bill Paxton's character turns into in Weird Science. There's also some bad voice-over at the beginning and end that is evidently supposed to be by the Doctor (Donald Pleasance), but sounds more like Kiefer Sutherland (who is not in the movie).

Devonsville grocery store owner Walter Gibbs kills his sick wife, thus invoking the spirits of three women who were executed as witches three hundred years earlier. When the town's newest arrivals - teacher Jenny (Suzanna Love), environmentalist Chris (Mary Walden) and DJ Monica (Deanna Haas) - upset the locals with their progressive feminist thinking, the superstitious menfolk begin to believe that the women are the reincarnations of the long-dead witches.

Ulli Lommel is the man responsible for the atrocious Boogeyman II (1983), but his next film, The Devonsville Terror (also '83), is surprisingly fun. The premise is trite, and the slow-burn approach might be off-putting to some, but the film is atmospheric, well acted and actually makes sense. It also features a solid supporting turn from Donald Pleasence as the town's doctor, some gratuitous nudity, and is top and tailed by gnarly violence, starting with the three executions - the first woman is eaten alive by pigs, the second is rolled down a hill strapped to a flaming cartwheel, and the third is burnt at the stake - and ending with some satisfying splatter - an axe in the head, an exploding noggin, and a Raiders of the Lost Ark style melting face - all of which goes to make it a more than reasonable time-waster.

6.5/10, rounded up to 7 for IMDb.

300 years after townies killed three witches, the citizens of Devonsville feels that crusading urge again when three new women (an environmentalist, a deejay, a schoolteacher) move into the community. Teacher Jenny (Suzanna Love) finds only local stud Matthew (Robert Walker Jr.) to be a willing dating prospect, which is bad because his ancestors were the ones who organized the witch killings. Meanwhile, Dr. Warley (Donald Pleasence) investigates the town's history to cure himself of the curse of having worms crawl out of his skin (really).

This was another childhood viewing I decided to revisit that holds up as well as one would expect an 80s Ulli Lommel flick could. This flick is just plain weird at points though and full of bizarre scenes like when Paul Willson shows up at Jenny's house and gives this long rant about love before playing his violin. Lead Love was married to Lommel at the time (and apparently writing the checks) with both players fresh off the success of THE BOOGEYMAN (1980). She is probably the main appeal here. The end is pretty amusing as Jenny is revealed to be a witch with superpowers and she causes heads to roll, explode and melt. Then she splits town, with her relationship with Matthew left with no resolution and a guy trying to ape Pleasence's voice doing a voice over. Pretty sure Pleasence did one day of filming as all of his scenes are shot in the same room and he is wearing the same outfit. Filmed in Wisconsin, this had Bill Rebane working on the production and captures some gorgeous fall foliage.

Weak, ponderous cheap-jack horror by Ulli Lommel that never really gets going and ends up with so many holes, unexplained details that only confuse and make things plod from one disconnected scene to another. So many questions, very little answers. The sloppy execution doesn't fair up any better, but the decent concept was never entirely realised and given minor treatment. Gladly there's an unpleasant side cooking up some hokey low-budget make-up FX with icky and over-the-top side-effects. Add a dash of gratuitous topless nudity too. There's an effectively bloody gore scene or two (and laser eyes?!) at the end, but it's all soon but forgotten with an uninspired ending. Watch as an memorizing Donald Pleasance slums about in a role, which he spends most of the time picking out maggots from his arm (due to a witch's curse) or hypnotizing patients to recall those good old times of witch-burning in Devonsville to hopefully rid him of this curse. The obscure superstitious framework manages to paint all shades of greys and help settle in a disquieting atmospheric tone. The rural country setting oozes organic creepiness and an ominously crawling score is another added addition. The alluring Suzanna Love is nothing more than sound and others such as Robert Walker and Paul Wilson are droningly okay. Far from terrible, just unwarrantably stilted modern-day (although there's reminiscent flashbacks of the past that we learn that there just might be a little more to the new teacher in town) witchcraft nonsense.

Director Ulli Lommel co-writes this tale of a witch hunt in the Colonial town of Devonsville, with a history of executing three local women on accusation of witchcraft. A new school teacher and two other liberated and progressive young women arrive in town about the same time. Their arrival ignites memories of over zealous vigilantes with pitchforks and three gruesome executions. Paranoia catches like wildfire and hysterical townsfolk flirt with a more modern witch hunt. Dr. Warley(Donald Pleasence), a local historian conjugates an old witch's curse as he compares current mores with the past. Other players: Suzanna Love, Deanna Haas, Robert Walker Jr. and Mary Walden. This movie is not that hard to like; it just doesn't build very much excitement.

I'm quite mad at myself. Watching this double-barrell ugly movie was bad enough, but I actually bought this one!! I like horror films, but I wish I would have rented this one before I bought it. (As if any video rental would be cruel enough to rent it out.) ANYHOOOO!!!, here is why the movie stunk so BAD! Film starts out looking like it might be a good flick. But after the opening scene where they burn the witches (wrongfully accused) at the cross, THE MOVIE TOTALLY FLATLINES ON YA!!! Nothing really cool or remotely errie even happens. I won't tell the ending(as if I could spoil it for you, HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! Hell, even the presence of Donald Pleasence (rhyme!!) doesn't even serve as a crutch for this dog! I think the worst part about this film is that it is so boring, you can't even make fun of it like movies like 1960's circa "Batman" or the Lou Ferrigno epic "Sinbad of the Seven Seas". Stay far far far far far far far far far away!!!