Moustroll Good movie but grossly overrated

ThrillMessage There are better movies of two hours length. I loved the actress'performance.

Deanna There are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.

Billy Ollie Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

jacobjohntaylor1 Does any one other then me know a good horror movie when they see. This is a great movie. The first Witchcraft movie is better. But still this is a very scary movie. It has a great story line. It also has great acting. It is so underrated. It is one of the scariest movies from 1989.

BA_Harrison I had intended to watch all sixteen of the Witchcraft films as part of a 31 Days of Horror October challenge, but only two films into the series and I'm already faltering. The first was a cheap and uninspired Rosemary's Baby rip off with just a touch of barely passable gore in the closing moments; this sequel is just as cheap and dull, but replaces the graphic violence with just a smidge of gratuitous nudity, something that I understand subsequent sequels exploit further, becoming little more than supernatural flavoured soft-core sex movies.The Temptress takes place eighteen years after the first film, William now a frustrated teenager (played by Charles Solomon Jr.) desperately trying to have his way with chaste girlfriend Michelle (Mia M. Ruiz). Causing further trouble for their relationship is blonde witch Dolores, who tries to lure William to the dark side by offering her body to him, which he somehow resists. Meanwhile, William receives three strange gifts that assemble to form a chalice, his adoptive parents reveal themselves to be part of a coven, and Michelle is stripped to her underwear and molested by an unseen force. None of this makes much sense or is particularly entertaining, with terrible performances from the cast of unknowns and pedestrian direction from Mark Woods (this being his one and only movie).If the next few entries in the Witchcraft series show no sign of improvement, there's a good chance that I won't get through them all until the same time next year.

bigpappa1--2 I feel very strongly about the above line. This is just plain out butt awful. First the main charcters are supposed to be teenagers, but they look to be in their 30's. The Temptress character looks much younger than everybody else in the film. Then there is the wooden acting. The direction is even worse. And oh my God!!!! That d**m awful script. It looks like some person just had only a crayon and wrote some notes on a piece of tiolet paper and the rest of the crew just worked off that and improvised everything!!! Please. I beg you if you have not seen any of the films in this series, DO NOT WASTE YOUR TIME. They are all awful. Each one just manages to get worse than the other. As though that was possible. Followed by way too many sequels. I stopped watching after part 7, but I think they have reached a part 10 or 11. The first one was awful, so how the H**l did it get followed by so many more sequels? Rating: 1 out of 10.

aaronzombie WITCHCRAFT II, the first sequel to it's decent predecessor is without a doubt the worst horror film in history(So far anyway.) This time the baby from the original is grown up and living with foster parents. Suddenly an evil witch who looks like a Madonna wannabe stalks him to teach him his birthright...BIG deal! Extremely boring, terrible story, acting(Except for Charles Solomon as the teenager.), and laughable effects. Other films in the series to avoid: IV, VII, and VIII(I haven't seen X and XI(!)yet.) * out of *****.