From the director who brought us Mad Max comes a modern-day fairy tale of sorts that examines the age-old battle of the sexes. Alex (Cher), Jane (Susan Sarandon) and Sukie (Michelle Pfeiffer) are three single women who live in the sleepy New England town of Eastwick. Since all of them lack a man in their lives, and are dissatisfied with the ones who are in town, they wish for a handsome stranger to visit. Miraculously, their wish is granted when Daryl Van Horne (Jack Nicholson) strolls into town and succeeds in turning their lives (and the town's) upside down. For the most part, I thought that the story was very effective in setting up its characters and giving them depth, even Daryl. The three women who are the titular "Witches of Eastwick" were all distinct personalities and had situations that made you care about them. Generally speaking, the performances were all very good, although Jack Nicholson towers above the rest of the cast as he brings his brand of insanity to what is essentially the devil in human form. Even the whole "witch" thing was dealt with rather subtly, as the women only become witches by finding the power within themselves. It is this struggle between male and female power which forms the core conflict of the film, and it is a compelling one even though it has been many times over in various forms. The townspeople are also given some development, although probably not enough to warrant the attention provided them. There are references made to the Salem witch trials, and the wife of the town's newspaper editor (Richard Jenkins...with hair!) acts as the mouthpiece for morality when the the three "witches" start their relationship with Daryl. Despite this interesting aside, I think it detracts a little bit from the main conflict. Moving on, I also thought that John Williams' score was fantastic and had this magical/mysterious quality that really meshed with the story and visuals. It's not his best score, but it was still a very good one. There were also a number of special effects by ILM which I thought were also well-done, especially considering this was made in 1987. Overall, I thought this was a very entertaining and funny movie that presented a well-worn theme in a fresh way. The only detraction, I think, is that there's a bit of a mean streak in regards to the portrayal of the male characters which might turn that half of the audience off. Still, this is a quality film that shows off director George Miller's versatility and the acting talents of its cast.
Add a Review
-
brchthethird7 January 2015
-
carlykristen10 October 2006This is a genre blending film I found at Fry's Horror section for only $2.49 retail. It can be described as a supernatural Battle of the Sexes with horrific, comedic, and dramatic elements with a bizarre love story/ orgy at the center of it. The 3 "witches" (Cher, Susan Sarandon, and Michelle Pfeiffer) make a request for the perfect man who is delivered to them in the form of Daryl Van Horne (Jack Nicholson) aka the Devil. According to Daryl, when a man is encountered by a strong woman, his manhood goes limp. The woman is called a "witch" and set on fire. This is used to make women scared of men and scared of themselves. Daryl's attention allows the 3 women to embrace their sexuality, fertility, passion, and ambition. Eventually, they realize they no longer need men for anything, including Daryl. This culminates in the ultimate showdown with man vs. women. The SFX quality was good enough to win the BAFTA Award in 1987. The music by John Williams earned him an Oscar and Grammy nomination. Nicholson gives an incredibly over the top performance that was good enough to win both the NY & LA Critics Choice Awards. There is a lot of back story to this as well. Bill Murray was originally set to play Darryl and Cher and Sarandon switched roles once they walked onto the set. The studio execs hassled the director so much that Miller halted production. When they threatened to replace him with another director, Nicholson said he would walk away from the production. This ended the feuding. Favorite Quote: Almost all the dialogue. Cher asks Nicholson's character if he is married. To which he responds, " I don't believe in it. Good for the man, bad for the woman. She dies, she suffocates. Then the Husband complains that he is f*cking a dead woman and he is the one that killed her. Where is your Husband?" Cher replies, "Dead." DVD Extras: Full Cast & Crew Bios, a set design feature entitled " Conjuring Eastwick", a "Bewitching Look Back" at the history, Awards, Commentary, Interviews, and a Trailer (which indicates there are deleted scenes missing from the DVD. There should also be the numerous alternate endings they had shot). Bottom Line: Bewitching tale (pun intended) with something for everyone. Rating: 8.5/10
-
claudio_carvalho28 November 2015In the traditional and conservative Eastwick, the sculptress Alexandra Medford (Cher), the shy musician and teacher Jane Spofford (Susan Sarandon) and the journalist Sukie Ridgemont (Michelle Pfeiffer) are best friends. Alexandra is a widow; Jane is divorced since she can not have a child; and Sukie is divorced because she frequently gets pregnant and has five children. They are sexually repressed and one night, they describe the characteristics of their ideal man while drinking. There is a storm on the town and the mysterious Daryl Van Horne (Jack Nicholson) appears in town and buy a notorious mansion. NJobody can recall his name, but he seduces the three friends. Meanwhile the pious Felicia Alden (Veronica Cartwright), who is married with Sukie's boss Clyde Alden (Richard Jenkins), has a weird accident and feels that Daryl is the devil. When Felicia dies, Alexandra, Jane and Sukie realize that there is something strange about Daryl. But what can they do?
"The Witches of Eastwick" is a sexy and original film with a strange combination of horror and comedy. Jack Nicholson is comfortable performing another totally incorrect character. The sinful witches are represented by three gorgeous actresses. The special effects are great and responsible for funny scenes. My vote is seven.
Title (Brazil): "As Bruxas de Eastwick" ("The Witches of Eastwick") -
G-Man-2512 July 1999John Updike probably panicked when he saw what screenwriter Michael Cristofer and director George Miller did to his book.....but this movie is all the BETTER for what they did! Careening wildly between scenes of light fantasy, full-bore horror and extreme gross-outs, this film is wildly imaginative and terrifically entertaining. With Jack Nicholson as the devil himself, things just don't get any better than that! Actually, the whole cast is very well-chosen and all give great performances.
A great cult film...can't wait to see and hear those barfing scenes on DVD! Four stars!!!! **** -
Jack Nicholson gives his funniest and one of the finest performances as Mr. Darryl van Horn, the mysterious and wicked man who arrives to the quiet and sleepy little town of Eastwick after three women, the Blonde Souki (Pfeifer), the Redhead Jean (Sarandon), and the Brunette Alex (Cher), best friends and witches dreamed him up as a man who can bring some changes and excitement in their lonely lives.
Several great actors have played the Prince of Darkness during their careers but Nicholson was born to play a "friendly" devil that can seduce any woman with no exception by becoming exactly what she wants him to be. The scenes where Nicholson seduces Alex (Daryl Van Horne: Well, if that's how you feel about it, then that's how you feel about it. Is THAT how you feel about it?), Jean, and Souki are among the sexiest I've ever seen.
The movie has too many vomiting scenes for my liking, and the visuals are sometimes too screaming but Nicholson is delightful. I never thought that playing cello could lead to such flaming results and I used to play it. 7/10 -
smatysia9 December 2000What fun Nicholson must have had with this! He really hams it up here. Very good supporting work by Cher, Susan Sarandon, Michelle Pfieffer, and Veronica Cartwright. The plot is a little bit impenetrable. The "witches" are at first unaware of their power. I suppose I should read Updike's novel, but the one book of his I did read sucked. Anyway, I recommend the film, for it seems a bit different than normal Hollywood formula.
-
moonspinner5526 November 2002Cher, Susan Sarandon and Michelle Pfeiffer play single gals in New England (with untapped psychic abilities) who fall in lust with the new man in town: a fat, balding, horny character with a high charisma-rate and a smile of temptation. The picture has a sassy opening and some ribald humor but is incredibly uneven, both a fantasy and a frolic while at the same time attempting something deeper (and embellished with special effects that make it seem weighty and lumbering). Jack Nicholson's rampant dementia is good for a few laughs early on, and the ladies are lovely, although Pfeiffer's character appears to get lost in the editing. Slick but shallow, with a noisy third act--complete with a second vomiting scene--that collapses like a house of cards. **1/2 from ****
-
ma-cortes2 December 2022Alexandra Medford, Jane Spofford and Sukie Ridgemont are three dissatisfied women living in the small town of Eastwick, New England. Alexandra (Cher) is a sculptress and single mother, Jane (Susan Sarandon) is a newly divorced music teacher incapable of having children, and Sukie (Michelle Pffeifer) works as a journalist. Then a strange, wealthy , overweight , menacing but nonetheless charming man (Jack Nicholson) knows their deepest desires and makes them come true with descent excess . In turn , the three women blossom emotionally and sexually , getting their sexual liberation. Something wicked this way comes !. Three Beautiful Witches, One Lucky Devil !. Three Beautiful Women !. One Lucky Devil !.
Very loosely based around John Updike novel about three lonely women , bored by their dreary life in a sleepy , small New England town find that they can make bizarre things happen . Trio starring are fine as the explosive women who conjure up this perfect man , Jack Nicholson in the most manic part of his career to date . The four set up home together , but after a succession of mishaps , the girls realise that the decadent idyll has to come to an end . Here stands out Jack Nicholson who in spite of his overacting wildly as Mephisto , he's really amusing and funny . Along with three seductive and charming actresses : Cher , Susan Sarandon , Michelle Pfeiffer . Being nicely accompanied by a fine support cast , such as : Veronica Cartwright , Richard Jenkins and Carel Struycken of The Addams Family. For three-quarters of the movie , director George Miller lends a bombastic violent edge to the effort , sometimes at the expense of the story , as he triumphally welds a strong comic element on to a taut , truly threatening atmosphere , but the last twenty minutes resulting in calamitous set pieces , diving straight to the bottom of the proverbial barrel with a final grossy orgy of FX.
It displays a colorful and glamorous cinematography by excellent cameraman Vilmos Zsigmond , shot on location in Cohasset , Massachusetts . Special mention for the great maestro John Williams , the veteran and stylist composer who is still composing delivers a jaunty and rousing musical score , as usual. The motion picture was professionally directed by George Miller. Here ¨Mad Max¨ filmmaker Miller meets Hollywood in this unrestrained , vomit-filled treatment of John Updike's novel. Miller takes over the filmmaker's chair for this trip and he brings more effects , more money, and more crass but attractive frames than his previous Australian movies . Miller is author of the excellent post-apocalypse ¨Mad Max¨ trilogy along with the writer and producer Byron Kennedy. The first was ¨Mad Max¨ (1979) with Mel Gibson . Followed by a sequel titled ¨Mad Max 2, the Road warrior¨ with Gibson , Bruce Spence , Vernon Welles and Mike Preston . It's continued by ¨Mad Max beyond Thunderdome¨ with Gibson , Tina Turner, and finally ¨Max: Fury Road¨ (2015) with Tom Hardy , Charlize Theron, Nicholas Hoult . Rating : 6/10 . Decent comedy but neither notable , nor extraordinary , but acceptable and passable. The flick will appeal to fans of the magnificent starring quartet : Jack Nicholson, Cher , Susan Sarandon and Michelle Pfeiffer. -
nycritic6 April 2005Before HARRY POTTER and DESPERATE HOUSEWIVES and after BELL, BOOK, AND CANDLE, THE WITCHES OF EASTWICK came out and charmed the pants off moviegoers including me who, when we saw the film in theatres, loved not only the fantasy element, but also the great interplay between the actors.
Loosely based on the John Updike novel of the same name, THE WITCHES OF EASTWICK concerns the shenanigans of three housewives, all close with each other, who live in a sleepy New England town and dream of having a man come to their lives. What they don't know is that their empathic desires materialize not a knight in shining armour, but... Jack Nicholson? Surely you jest. Cher, the first to meet him, loathes him -- her verbal assault is something that belongs in an Edward Albee play. But he matches her word for word and bests her. Susan Sarandon, playing completely clumsy and repressed, gets ravaged in a bombastic way that would make any woman go nuts. And Michelle Pfeiffer in her breakout role meets a tender man who wishes he could be a woman.
The key her is not the story: that the Devil has his own designs as Darryl van Horne and that he may have some eventual opposition from the town is predictable -- it's the way Nicholson embodies his role as van Horne. Pacino would do an over-the-top performance in THE DEVIL'S ADVOCATE years later; Nicholson prefers to change his demeanor with regards to the women he gets involved in, and his Devil is almost an overgrown boy who just wants to have fun and enjoy life. Seeing him sharing screen time with such different actresses is worth the entire movie -- he oozes chemistry with all of them, he makes you believe he's that charming and sweet or passionate and maybe irrepressibly vulgar, full of his own cat-like sensuality. He's having fun, but making it known it's also not a one-note performance.
Performances are what save this movie from its overblown ending and 80s production values: to watch Veronica Cartwright stealing her scenes, perfectly comfortable in playing these types of roles, go from concerned to completely mad, is a hoot. That she also may be a latent witch... is possible. Cher tackles her role like a total feminist and brings a lot of her own blunt self; Susan Sarandon does wonders to what in her own words was an underwritten part, and Michelle Pfeiffer glows.
Great fun, fantasy at its purest form, THE WITCHES OF EASTWICK makes you want to draw a 'D' in the sand and see what happens. -
This movie had good stars in it and they did a really good job with the scenes. Their acting was top notch. The plot, I could not tell you what this movie is about very well at all. The best I can figure is that the three main female characters obviously have some powers, or not at first. They somehow summon this guy that is supposed to be their dream guy or something or not. He proceeds to show them their powers, and kill this woman and then the girls turn against their dream guy and they have a final showdown with said guy. It sounds a bit messed up and it is. The story is not very clear what the heck is going on at all, still the performances make up for this flaw in the movie and they have some rather funny scenes in this flick too. If only they could have explained a few things better then perhaps it would have been an all around good movie. I suppose the book might have cleared up stuff a bit better, and when it was transferred over to film a lot of the crucial elements were lost in translation. Still, the movie really has good acting from Jack, Cher, Susan and Michelle.
-
Maziun20 September 2014I have a sense of humor. I like many different kinds of humor. I like more or less sophisticated comedies. I'm open for experiments. I really wanted to like "Witches of Eastwick". I tried really hard . I've even seen the movie twice , but I simply don't like it.
On paper this movie looks interesting. Directed by George Miller ("Mad Max") with all-star cast – Jack Nicholson ("Chinatown") , Susan Sarandon ("Atlantic city") , Michelle Pfeiffer ("Dangerous liaisons") and Cher ("Mask") plus unusual idea (three women with magical powers versus Satan). So , what went wrong ? The movie is simply unfunny.
I liked the performances of the cast. The special effects look really good even after all those years. As I said earlier the idea for this movie is original and interesting. The movie does say something about mentality of small town society and the desires of women.
The movie however is no fun. It's supposed to be horror-comedy , yet it fails as both horror and comedy. It's not scary , but what is worse is that is not one bit funny. I honestly don't see where all the jokes are. Where are the moments when I was supposed to laugh ? Can somebody tell me ? I can't even say that this movie has forced humor , because I don't see ANY humor here. The whole movie feels like the movie makers were having fun with special effects , but nothing more.
"Witches of Eastwick" are dull compared to "Beetlejuice" or "Gremlins". The whole movie is too self indulgent and self serious to be funny. I give it 2/10. -
Quinoa198414 May 2003George Miller (Mad Max) creatively sets the stage for a story of three witches and one Lucifer, who are in regular human form, in a small, uptight New England town. Of course, for a tale like this one can try to suspend disbelief, and it has to be when dealing with the supernatural. Thankfully, Miller has great casting tastes- Cher, Sarandon, and Pfieffer are wonderful in their roles, each with an acute, potent sexuality that was at their peaks in the late 80's. And then there's Mr shark grin himself, Jack Nicholson, who gives another superb layer to the performance of the dark prince. There are other actors who have portrayed the man downstairs- Al Pacino in Devil's Advocate was the devil as lawyer, Billy Crystal was himself in the Woody/Dante sequence in Deconstructing Harry, even Elizabeth Hurley in Bedazzled.
But rarely have they had this much outright fun and charm with the role, enough to almost make me, a man in his 20s, charmed too. Maybe it's the eyebrows. Nicholson gives one of his best over-the-top performances as the "horny-little devil" Darryl, who comes into town during a storm and cooks up more than that for his avid female guests. Of course, he doesn't have control for long, when the girls find they have powers of their own. When the movie gets overly fantastic (which is a number of times) it gets a little hard to take, yet the acting is above par, and the special effects are a delight. -
v_haritha_in13 August 2014What a fun little movie. Reserved Jane (Susan Sarandon), sassy Alex (Cher)and lovable Sukie (Michelle Pfeiffer) are good friends in a small, conservative town, Eastwick. They are all widowed or divorced and dream of a tall, dark and handsome foreign prince to come riding on a black horse and sweep them of their feet. What they don't know is they are witches and when they all wish for something together, it is granted.
There is some all round good acting. The three leading actresses are amazing as the average single working women who just happen to be witches. The movie manages to give them interesting personalities. Jane in particular has a really comedic character arc.
But it is Jack Nicholson who steals every scene he is in. His Daryl van Horne is the devil himself who has come as an answer to the witches' wishes. He is over-the-top, funny and despicable all at the same time. This character is a good addition to his collection crazy-guy roles.
The premise is silly and the movie knows it. Hence, it gives us lot of hilariously silly moments. The climax is one good laugh-fest. A good movie to watch if are looking for some light entertainment. -
gcd7020 October 2007George Miller's star-studded fantasy about three women who conjure up the man of their dreams, in the form of 'Daryl Van Horn' (Jack Nicholson), is trashy and rather absurd for the most part.
While Jack Nicholson absorbs his role well, the plot remains ridiculous and one can never believe that any of these supposedly intelligent women could fall for the obnoxious character he plays. For a comedy, it lacks humour, and the premise itself isn't even funny. Veronica Cartwright, in a ludicrous role of a very ill woman, is very good as is John Williams' lively score, but not much else is worth a look in this major disappointment.
Sunday, November 15, 1992 - Video -
tfrizzell3 July 2004Three lonely New England women (Cher, Susan Sarandon and Michelle Pfeiffer) dream of a man to satisfy their every need as they suffer from isolation with their husbands constantly away. That man---Jack Nicholson (always on a lucky streak it seems). Wicked little comedy with Jack going over the top and having great fun with the helter-skelter material. The women (Cher and Sarandon in particular) match his intensity and the star power makes up for the crazed screenplay and unsteady direction by George Miller. Overall I liked "The Witches of Eastwick". I am not quite sure why I did, but once again Nicholson proves that if there is just enough substance available that he can raise mediocre film-making techniques and share the spotlight with his fellow co-stars. 4 stars out of 5.
-
The_Void19 October 2006The Witches of Eastwick blends a number of genres, including fantasy, horror and comedy, and somehow blends them all into a mostly coherent film about lust, sin and the age-old idea of 'be careful what you wish for'. I have to say that the film isn't really what I expected, as the title suggests witchcraft and this film is more angled around the drama surrounding the loneliness of its three central women, with some tentative satanic themes thrown in. Director George Miller has seen fit to cast all the central roles with strong personalities; and while Jack Nicholson stands out the most, the themes of the story and the other performer's aren't lost under his star profile. The plot centres on three New England women (Cher, Susan Sarandon and Michele Pfeiffer) who, bored with their lives, inadvertently conjure up the man of their dreams. Soon after, their town of 'Eastwick' is graced by the presence of Daryl Van Horne (Nicholson), a wealthy and handsome man who manages to satisfy the desires of all three women. However, Daryl has his own sinister motives...
It has to be said the plotting is rather hit and miss, as the film features great slices of acting; such as the scene between jack Nicholson and Cher in his bedroom, but then this is offset by a lot of very silly instances, and what could have been a great film is marred by a too prominent sense of humour. Jack Nicholson is a delight to watch, however, as he lights up the screen at every opportunity and ensures that the film is always at least worth watching. Cher is my pick of the female leads as she provides the strongest and most memorable female character in the film. Both Susan Sarandon and Michelle Pfeiffer are decent enough, but don't particularly stand out. The themes of the plot don't come across too well, and at times I wondered whether this film actually had a point to make or not. The director also seems to keen not to show any nudity, and this is a shame as The Witches of Eastwick features prominent themes of lust throughout, so some nudity wouldn't have gone amiss. But even so, despite many flaws and inconsistencies; The Witches of Eastwick is fun enough for a single viewing. -
In the small American town of Eastwick, where Christian values of morality and family life serve as the law, strange and violent events begin to occur with the arrival of a new, big city, millionaire charmer by the name of Darrell Van Horn (Nicholson). His entrance is seemingly brought on by the wish of three single women, who are supposedly Witches (played by Cher, Pfeiffer and Sarandon), who can make anything happen by wishing it at the same time. Soon we see Van Horn seducing and having a polygamous relationship with the three witches, which leads to happiness, laughter and disaster. Who exactly is this Van Horn character and is this the beginning of a new era in family values? Like its other 80's contemporaries, such as Working Girl and Fatal Attraction, The Witches of Eastwick doubles as a social commentary on the state of women in a male dominated society, as well as a simple point A to point B story. Here, the focus is on the new breed of middle aged single women, who can be mothers and career women and still have time for a cocktail at the end of the day, without the need for a providing husband.
While the film does work as a thought inducing critique on the perception of modern women and the men who have always tried to exploit them, as a whole, it lacks focus. At various points it tries to be a thriller, a satire and a serious look at modern America, but director George Miller never really manages to blend these different tones into one cohesive whole. As a result, the film seems a little confused. On the plus side though the whole cast give fantastic performances, especially Nicholson and Sarandon, who clearly seem to be having more fun playing their mischievous roles than others and the film does have quite a few dark "laugh out loud" moments.
For those of you looking for a fun, camp eighties movie, it might be a better idea for you to revisit Working Girl or Overboard, since you will clearly be disappointed by this picture. Fans of Nicholson and "Gurrrl Power"(in it's most radical sense) should definitely check this one out. -
filipemanuelneto20 November 2021I confess that I expected something different from this movie, but I didn't feel dissatisfied with what I saw. It's an interesting and very provocative comedy that brings to the screen much of the content of a novel that I've never seen or read. The film, however, works on the basis of provocation for the audience, and launches barbs well aimed at our concept of God and Devil, of Good and Evil, our construction of moral values, the way we see women (or how it faces itself). It's a good movie, but it seems bent on annoying.
The script is set in a small town where everyone knows everyone else, and where the arrival of a rich and eccentric new resident, who acquires a nearby mansion, is the reason for great confusion: he is strangely seductive in his way of being and speaking, and manages to charm three friends who end up romantically pairing up with him, which will cause scandal in the community, particularly in the more religious sectors. However, as they get to know him better, they begin to realize that they are capable of making what they really want to happen, and they will begin to learn to use these powers.
It is with the arrival of the new resident that the film starts to get interesting, after almost fifteen minutes of preparation, introducing the characters and creating the environment. Strangely, and although it is obvious who the witches are, this is never said or discussed openly among them: they never come out and when they talk about their powers they do so almost without actually being plainspoken about it. For me, this worked poorly because it doesn't make sense, especially in a very tight circle of close friends, where one could generally speak more openly about any subject. Thus, the film leaves the magic and witchcraft almost implied. Towards the end, it insists on some lines that are highly provocative and make many moral and ethical issues questionable, even questioning the logic of divine creation by leaving the question whether God created Woman intentionally or did she end up being a "failure of course" of the Creator. I believe that some issues really bothered the public.
There's no doubt that Jack Nicholson is the most striking face of this film, with an almost offensively sarcastic performance. He's ideal for the character, who combines cynicism and malevolence well with doses of charm that make us like him. As for the three witches, played by Cher, Susan Sarandon and Michelle Pfeiffer, I think they're great on their own and even better when they are together. It is quite visible throughout the film how the actresses understood each other and worked well together, and the quality of the interpretation reflects the effort and the combined work. Veronica Cartwright is, in my view, the actress who is responsible for giving the film a more regular villain, as her character, with tics of evident religious fanaticism, is the great opponent, both for the millionaire newcomer and for the three young companions who join him.
Technically, the film has many values to consider, starting with tasteful cinematography, with a penchant for good wide-angle shots and aerial view perspectives. Good colors and a judicious choice of sets and filming locations (in particular the mansion, which is beautiful) help the film to have a truly elegant look and aesthetic. The film also has many special effects, convincing visuals and sound, with characters flying and levitating, tennis balls that seem to have a life of their own, cyclonic winds that seem to hit only one character amidst everything else and that unforgettable vomit that seems taken away from "The Exorcist". The music is masterfully used, helping to set the mood, starting right away with the idyllic and surreal environments of the mansion, with opera arias and classical music skillfully combined with an original soundtrack that is average but fulfills its role. -
MOscarbradley10 June 2020Subtle, it ain't but George Miller's film version of John Updike's "The Witches of Eastwick" is extremely entertaining. Jack Nicholson, in a role you feel he was born to play, is Darryl Van Horne, 'just your average, horny little devil' who, it would appear, is conjured up by three New England women, (Cher, Susan Sarandon and Michelle Pfeiffer), one stormy night and whose presence in their lives turns them into 'the witches' of the title. He's magnificent and very funny but the movie goes to pieces before the end. What starts out as a satire on New England prudery and what, I suppose, could be called 'the battle of the sexes' just becomes another Faustian horror-comedy about selling your soul to the Devil but, at least on that level, it's great fun, (and you do get the impression that these witches are having a ball). Throw in Veronica Cartwright as one of those New England prudes who sees Nicholson for what he is and not just a great lay with supernatural powers and you have a female-centered movie of the first order. It may be no classic but it's a great guilty pleasure.
-
star8330 July 2001I have to admit that this is one of my favorite movies. The two best things about this movie are the things that movies should have-a great plot and a great cast. The plot is original, funny, dramatic, and there is even a bit of horror. The cast is perfect, each person brings something into the movie-especially Jack. The three women characters bring strength, sensitivity, and sexuality, but the movie does not focus on one trait-women have all three, but its funny that this movie has a character for each character trait-the devil needed to have three for himself, when one man would only need one woman-a good man, anyways. But, my favorite thing about this movie is the plot. There is not one boring part to this film, and that's why I have to say that it is one of the greatest.
-
lisafordeay19 September 2022The Witches Of Eastwick is a 1987 black comedy starring Susan Sarandon,Cher,Michelle Pfieffer and Jack Nicholson. Three women named Alexandra Medford(Cher),Jane Spofford(Sarandon) and Sukie Ridgemount(Pfieffer)wish to find the perfect man as there are no right men in Eastwick as their previous lovers died. Things however take a turn when a suave man named Darryl Van Horne(Nicholson) arrives in Eastwick and takes a shine on the three women by seducing them.
The three women however discover that Daryll is really the Devil. Will they stop him before it's too late.
Overall it was a good flick with that Tim Burton vibe to it. If your a fan of any of the actors do give it a watch. -
emiliever24 August 2018Sadly enough I couldn't give it less than 1. The story is not only gross and weird but it doesn't make any sense. Then when it finally came to an end, the ending was even worse than I expected it to be. This movie is not funny at all, it's just awful. A complete waste of my time.
-
garyvines-012903 April 2023When I first saw that Cher was staring in this I was curious about it, granted I was only a teenager, but a movie about withes, with three leading ladies and a leading man, I was interested. Sometimes when too many movie stars are in one movie it doesn't work or it comes off too forced, but this one didn't. I love Cher's natural line delivery and it worked well for the character. Michelle Pfeiffer is anything but a shrinking violet, but she did that character well and even came of motherly and compassionate as her character was supposed to. Susan Sarandon did a 180 and went from prude to vixen and convincingly so. Jack Nicolson was magnificent, nothing more needs to be said.
The writing was interesting, the story was interesting, the setting was interesting and every time I have watched this movie since I have been captivated from beginning to end. Three friends are hanging out, a stranger comes into town and seduces them and unlocks some sort of magic in the air. A woman picks up on it, goes crazy and tries to warn everyone, all while breaking bones and puking cherry pits (an iconic scene occurs in the church and I've worked diligently over the year to memorize and recite the whole thing...I find it difficult not to recite when I'm in church with pews.) The friends try and get rid of him but it proves difficult.
See this movie, you may think it's stupid, and maybe it is, but it's a fun kind of stupid you'll want to watch again and again. -
I totally agreed with Cher when she told Jack Nicholson what she thought of him. I don't see what the fuss is about the "runt", he's got about as much talent as Pia Zadora.
The three leading ladies steal the show by playing it straight while Mad Jack as usual goes over the top. Cher(a better singer than an actress) reveals an equally famous midriff while mouthing one liners, as the most sensible witch, Susan Sarandon's limpid eyes are pools of emotive delight, she tells all through them and should have been given the lead in the spark-fest. Michelle Pfeiffer as the youngest witch with a brood of kids is zany but grounded as she tries to bring some semblance of order into her life.
This lethal combo outshine Nicholson's Devil winningly and you are left gasping at the climax, well directed, well acted and well watched!!!!
One Of My Favs'
8/10 -
paul2001sw-11 October 2013In John Updike's playful novel, 'The Witches of Eastwick', the "witches" are three ordinary divorcées considered such for two reasons: by others for their unconventional and active sex lives, and by themselves, as they start to fear that some occult games they engaged in have actually created the devilish new lover who appears in all their lives. This film starts reasonably true to the book; but soon descends into a terrible mess. The sexual element is downplayed, whereas the mystical element is taken increasingly literally. The move ends with an extended, excruciating sequence of supposedly comic horror; this is neither comic nor horrific, but moreover, stripped of the writer's subtlety, at least one scene becomes directly misogynistic. If the film's worth seeing at all, it at least gives one an exposure to its triple dosage of 19080s big hair; for a wry take on sexual politics, look elsewhere.