Connect with us

Movie Reviews

Movie Review – Witchboard (2024)

Published

on

Movie Review – Witchboard (2024)

Witchboard, 2024.

Directed by Chuck Russell.
Starring Madison Iseman, Aaron Dominguez, Melanie Jarnson, Jamie Campbell Bower, Antonia Desplat, and David La Haye.

SYNOPSIS:

A young woman becomes obsessed with an antique pendulum board, opening a gateway for an evil spirit to enter our world.

Advertisement

Kevin Tenney’s 1986 movie Witchboard was a flawed-but-fun slice of ‘80s cheese that wasn’t without its charms and became something of a VHS rental hit. It told the fairly simple story of a love triangle and a young woman becoming obsessed with a Ouija board as those around her died mysteriously, and for a 15-rated horror movie in the 1980s it was fairly grisly and starred Whitesnake music video siren Tawney Kitaen for extra teenage male fantasy points.

So now we have the remake and, to be fair, Witchboard was a movie that could have benefitted from another telling, updating the mullets and multi-coloured punk fashions for something less garish. Unfortunately, it has been remade in the 2020s, a decade that has its own tropes and characteristics that will likely age it as quickly and negatively as the knitted cardigans and big hair of the 1980s did with the first one. At least that original movie was entertaining.

What Witchboard 2024 has in its favour is a director with a bit of a pedigree. Chuck Russell can easily be credited with reinvigorating the A Nightmare on Elm Street franchise and setting the direction that series would go with Dream Warriors, and his 1988 version of ‘50s classic The Blob normally falls in just under The Fly and The Thing as a remake that improved on the original. In this case, however, Russell’s magic touch just isn’t there, the director setting up scenes of occult horror only to be let down by a lacklustre cast that cannot seem to emote and CGI that would have (possibly) been great if this movie had been made in 1997.

Instead of the Ouija board of the original we have a pendulum board, which is ostensibly the same thing, only you dangle an item such as a necklace over it and it moves the necklace in the direction of an answer to your questions. The board has been possessed by the spirit of Naga Soth (Antonia Desplat), a witch who was the target of fanatical witch hunter Bishop Grogan (David La Haye) in 17th century France, and is found in the woods by Emily (Madison Iseman) after it was stolen during a robbery in modern-day New Orleans.

Emily is a recovering drug addict, and with her boyfriend Christian (Aaron Dominguez) they are opening a restaurant in the city’s French Quarter. After Christian’s ex Brooke (Melanie Jarnson) – who happens to be an expert on the occult – confirms what the mysterious board is for, Emily starts to use it, at first for innocent things like finding a lost ring, but things get weird when accidents start happening to those around her and Christian. Seeking Brooke’s help, they are introduced to Alexander Babtiste (Jamie Campbell Bower), a New Age Pagan who seems to have extensive knowledge of the board and what it can do, although his motives for helping Christian and Emily may not be entirely honourable.

Advertisement

Taking just the bare bones plot of the original and adding to it, Witchboard is messy and needlessly long, collapsing under the weight of its own ambitions long before its 112-minute running time is up. To their credit, the filmmakers have made a solid backstory for how the pendulum board came to be, and the opening scenes set in 17th-century France are the best of the movie, with Chuck Russell capturing the chilling and exciting atmosphere of a witches’ sabbath being broken up by vengeful clergy. Reminiscent of the flashback scenes in Rob Zombie’s Lords of Salem (but without the naked witch body suits), whenever the movie reverts back to the 1690s it immediately becomes more interesting, making you wish the whole thing was like this.

Unfortunately, whenever we are in the modern-day Witchboard is crammed with far too many flawed characters played by bland actors – which is pushing it – with too many plot contrivances to make the story feel anything other than forced and bloated. Madison Iseman is the standout, taking what is essentially the Tawney Kitaen role from the original and making the dual-personality of Emily when she is under the board’s spell the focal point, and she injects a lot of personality into what she has to do, especially when Emily is being possessed by Naga Soth.

The trouble is Christian is a very dull ‘hero’, which is telegraphed when you first see him collecting mushrooms in his man bag, and whereas Brooke had the potential to be the character with something about her – after all, she is an expert on all things occult, which just doesn’t seem to sit well with her overall personality – Melanie Jarnson’s performance can only be described as one-note, the note being a similar vocal tone to that of a record being played at a slow speed. Which leaves Alexander Babtiste (which is too close to Clinton Baptiste to not make him even more hilarious) as our other main character, and if Witchboard was in desperate need for a bit of scenery-chewing then Jamie Campbell Bower provides it, although you sometimes have to wonder if he knows he is the same movie as the other cast members as none of them seem to gel together.

There is some tasty gore here and there, although picking out the practical effects from the CGI is easily done as the computer generated visuals were clearly made using a processor that is close to being obsolete, and there is a very macabre tone throughout, even when the movie seems to be channelling The Devil’s Advocate (again with that late ‘90s vibe) with its depictions of glossy black magic and stylish occultism. It is just a shame that we didn’t get a witchfinding movie set in the 17th century as that is where this movie is strongest, but as a remake of Witchboard it is very disappointing, filled with awful characters, bad acting, pointless plot threads – such as Emily’s heroin addiction past, and the few scenes with her former supplier that could easily have been chopped out – and far too many ideas fighting for room in a script that cannot sustain them.

There is a solid occult horror in here somewhere that a bit of editing and streamlining could probably have brought out, but if Chuck Russell – the man who brought Freddy Krueger out of the shadows – couldn’t find it then what chance do we have of seeing it?

Advertisement

Flickering Myth Rating – Film: ★ ★ / Movie: ★ ★

Chris Ward

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=embed/playlist

 

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Movie Reviews

MOVIE REVIEWS: “Mercy,” “Return to Silent Hill,” “Sentimental Value” & “In Cold Light” – Valdosta Daily Times

Published

on

MOVIE REVIEWS: “Mercy,” “Return to Silent Hill,” “Sentimental Value” & “In Cold Light” – Valdosta Daily Times

“Mercy”

(Thriller/Crime: 1 hour, 39 minutes)

Starring: Chris Pratt, Rebecca Ferguson, Kali Reis

Director: Timur Bekmambetov

Rated: PG-13 (Violence, bloody images, strong language, drug content and teen smoking)

Movie Review:

Advertisement

“Mercy” is a science fiction movie based on one of the more common themes of moviedom lately, artificial intelligence (AI). This crime thriller cleverly creates an intriguing story using technology and the justice system, yet it fails to be consistently interesting and intelligent throughout. The conclusion is less significant than the initial setup, as the concluding scenes become typical action sequences.

Detective Chris Raven (Pratt) of the LA Police Department is a huge supporter of the city’s new judicial courtroom. Crimes are now judged by an AI program (Ferguson) in the Mercy Court. The court is run by an artificial program that makes decisions based on all of the evidence before it without any prejudice. Detective Raven is all for this system until he is convicted of killing his wife. Now he must use all of the data, including the AI‘s ability to tap into everyone’s electronic devices, security cameras, and even into government files, within reason, to prove he did not murder his wife.

Mercy is an interesting movie. It entertains throughout, even when the story gets sloppy and characters’ actions are irrational. This mainly occurs during the final scenes. The movie tries too hard to insert unneeded narrative twists. This is disappointing because the story is interesting. What makes it fascinating is that it happens in real time. This is the most brilliant facet.

All the other theatrics are unnecessary. Director Timur Bekmambetov (“Profile,” 2018; “Wanted,” 2008) and “Mercy’s” producers should have just kept the ending simple, no plot twists or superfluous action sequences.
Grade: C (This flick needs some mercy. Let the trial begin.)

“Return to Silent Hill”

(Horror: 1 hour, 46 minutes)

Advertisement

Starring: Jeremy Irvine, Hannah Emily Anderson and Robert Strange

Director: Christophe Gans

Rated: R (Bloody violent content, strong language and brief drug use.)

Movie Review:

“Return to Silent Hill” is about one man’s quest to return to the love of his life. The problem is she has moved on to the afterlife. Meanwhile, audiences lose part of their life watching this movie, which is unlike any of the two prequels in this series. This one is a psychological horror that bores.

Advertisement

Artist James Sunderland (Irvine) decides to return to Silent Hill, a place where many people died during a devastating illness that nearly enveloped the entirety of the city’s population. What is left there is a horror show of freakish creatures, all with violent intent. Still, Sunderland searches for the love of his life, Mary Crane (Anderson).

Think of this movie as a slow suicide, where a guy goes back to retrieve his dead girlfriend. To do so, he must travel to the modern land of the dead that Silent Hill has become. This one is a type of swan song by the main character, and the movie becomes less scary while lackluster romantic notions wander aimlessly.

Grade: D (Do not return to see this.)

“Sentimental Value”

(Drama: 2 hours, 13 minutes)

Starring: Renate Reinsve, Stellan Skarsgård, Inga Ibsdotter Lilleaas and Elle Fanning

Advertisement

Director: Joachim Trier

Rated: R (Language, sexual reference, nudity and thematic elements)

Movie Review:

“Sentimental Value” is a Norwegian film that won the Grand Prix in France’s Cannes Film Festival and was nominated for nine Academy Awards, including Best Motion Picture. It is a solid drama filled with symbolism and family connections. It is brilliant performances by a talented cast under the direction of Joachim Trier (“The Worst Person in the World,” 2021).

This screenplay is about Gustav Borg (Skarsgård). He is a father, grandfather and a famed film director. He stayed away from his two daughters, actress Nora Borgwhile (Reinsve) and historian Agnes Borg Pettersen (Lilleaas), while he was creating works as a filmmaker. The director comes back into the lives of his daughters after the death of their mother. Their reunion leads to a rediscovery of their bond at their family home in Oslo.

Advertisement

Stellan Skarsgård is always a solid actor. He takes his roles and makes them tangible characters that seem like you know them, even when they’re speaking a foreign language. That is the quality of his act and why he gets nominated for multiple awards each season.

“Sentimental Value” is a valuable movie filled with enriching sentiment. It is an enjoyable film for those who value a good drama. The acting and original writing alone make the movie worth it. “Sentimental Value” starts in a very simple way, but everything in between, even when low-key, remains potent. Joachim Trier and writer Eskil Vogt have worked together on multiple projects such as “The Worst Person in the World” (2021). Their pairing is once again worthy.

Grade: A- (Any motive valuable movie.)

“In Cold Light ”

(Crime: 1 hour , 36 minutes)

Starring: Maika Monroe, Allan Hawco and Troy Kotsur

Advertisement

Director: Maxime Giroux

Rated: R (Violence, bloody images, strong language and drug material)

Movie Review:

“In Cold Light” sticks to a very straightforward story, primarily taking place over a short period. The problem is the story leaves one in the cold. Audiences have to guess what is being communicated because this movie uses American Sign Language (ASL) without subtitles. For those moviegoers who do not know ASL, they are left deciphering characters’ actions and facial expressions during some pivotal scenes.

Ava Bly (Monroe) attempts to start a legit life after prison. Her life changes when Ava’s twin, Tom Bly (Jesse Irving) is murdered while seated next to her. As her brother’s killers pursue her, Ava must evade law enforcement, which contains some crooked cops led by Bob Whyte (Hawco).

Advertisement

For a brief moment, this movie hits its exceptional moment when Oscar-recipient Helen Hunt enters the picture as a motherly Claire, a crime boss who seems more like a social worker/psychologist. Her long scene is wasted as it arrives too late.

French Canadian director Maxime Giroux’s style has potential in his first English-language film, but it does not fit a wayward narrative. A rarity, this crime drama has characters commit many dumb actions at once.

Moreover, Giroux (“Félix et Meira,” 2014) and writer Patrick Whistler forget to let their audiences in on their story. They allow much to get lost in translation, especially during heated conversations between Monroe’s Ava and her father, Will Bly, played by Academy Award-winning actor Troy Kotsur (“CODA,” 2021).

Grade: C- (Just cold and dark.)

More movie reviews online at www.valdostadailytimes.com.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

Movie Review: ‘Goat’ – Catholic Review

Published

on

Movie Review: ‘Goat’ – Catholic Review

NEW YORK (OSV News) – “Goat” (Sony) is an animated underdog sports comedy populated by anthropomorphized animals. While mostly inoffensive, and thus suitable for a wide audience — including teens and older kids — the film is also easily forgotten.

The amiable proceedings center on teen goat Will Harris (voice of Caleb McLaughlin). As opening scenes show, it has been Will’s dream since childhood to play for his hometown team, the Vineland Thorns.

The inhabitants of Vineland and the other areas of the movie’s world, however, are divided into so-called bigs and smalls, with professional competition dominated, unsurprisingly, by the former. Though Will stoutly maintains that he’s a medium, those around him regard him as too slight and diminutive to go up against the towering bigs.

Despite this prejudice, a video showing Will more or less holding his own against a famous and arrogant big, Andalusian horse Mane Attraction (voice of Aaron Pierre), goes viral and inspires the Thorns’ devious owner, warthog Flo Everson (voiced by Jenifer Lewis), to give the lad a shot. Though Will is understandably thrilled, his path forward proves challenging.

Will has idolized the Thorns’ sole outstanding player, black panther Jett Fillmore (voice of Gabrielle Union), since he was a youngster. But Jett, it turns out, is not only frustrated by her situation as a star among misfits but scornful of Will’s ambitions and resolute in helping to deprive her new teammate of playing time.

Advertisement

Given such divisions, the Thorns’ fortunes seem destined to continue their long decline.

“Roarball,” the invented game featured in director Tyree Dillihay’s film, is essentially co-ed basketball by another name. As produced by, among others, NBA champion Stephen Curry, the movie — adapted from an idea in Chris Tougas’ book “Funky Dunks” — is an unabashed celebration of hoop culture both on and off the court.

Viewers’ enthusiasm may vary, accordingly, depending on the degree to which they’re invested in the real-life sport.

Moviegoers of every stripe will appreciate the fact that the script, penned by Aaron Buchsbaum and Teddy Riley, shows the negative effects of self-centeredness as well as the value of teamwork and fan support. Plot developments also showcase forgiveness and reconciliation.

Will’s story is, nonetheless, thoroughly formulaic and most of the screenplay’s jokes feel strained and laborious. Still, while hardly qualifying as the Greatest of All Time, “Goat” does provide passable entertainment with little besides a few potty gags to concern parents.

Advertisement

The film contains brief scatological humor and at least one vaguely crass term. The OSV News classification is A-II — adults and adolescents. The Motion Picture Association rating is PG — parental guidance suggested. Some material may not be suitable for children.

Read More Movie & TV Reviews

Copyright © 2026 OSV News

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

Vishnu Vinyasam Movie Review – Gulte

Published

on

Vishnu Vinyasam Movie Review – Gulte

2.5/5


01 Hrs 59 Mins   |   Romantic Comedy   |   27-02-2026


Cast – Sree Vishnu, Nayana Sarika, Satya, Brahmaji, Praveen, Murali Sharma, Srikanth Iyyengar, Satyam Rajesh, Srinivasa Reddy, Goparaju Ramana and others

Director – Yadunaath Maruthi Rao

Advertisement

Producer – Sumanth Naidu G

Banner – Sree Subrahmanyeshwara Cinemas

Music – Radhan

Advertisement

Since 2023, with three commercial hits and one critically acclaimed film, Sree Vishnu has established himself as a minimum guarantee hero and built a loyal audience. To continue the success streak, he chose yet another romantic comedy film, directed by debutant Yadunaath Maruthi Rao. ‘Aay’ fame, Nayana Sarika, played the female lead role and Radhan, scored the music for the film. After creating enough curiosity among the audience with the teaser and trailer, the film was finally released in theatres today. Did Sree Vishnu, deliver yet another hit with a romantic comedy film? Did Nayan Sarika, score a hit in Telugu, after AAY & KA? How does the debutant director, Yadunaath Maruthi Rao, do? Did the music director, Radhan, come up with memorable songs and score? Let’s figure it out with a detailed analysis.

What is it about?

Vishnu(Sree Vishnu), works as a junior lecturer at a college, where Manisha(Nayan Sarika), works as the head of the department(HOD/faculty). Manisha, with her eccentric characteristics, intrigues Vishnu and both of them eventually fall in love with each other. When everything is going well for the couple to get married, Manisha informs Vishnu about a flaw in her Jathakam. What was the Dosham(flaw) in Manisha’s jathakam? How did it impact her prospects of getting married before meeting, Vishnu? Why did Vishnu initially get reluctant to marry Manisha, after hearing about her Jathaka Dosham? Will the couple sort out all the issues and get married eventually? Forms the rest of the story.

Advertisement

Performances:

Sree Vishnu, with his comedy timing generated a few fun moments that worked in favour of the film. However, in an attempt to appear effortless, he went overboard at times and appeared monotonous at a few places. Nayana Sarika got a good role and she delivered a good performance. She looked good throughout the film and appeared confident.

Satya, got a full-length role and he was able to generate a few laughs here and there with his comedy timing. Srikanth Iyyengar’s performance looked over the top and his portions looked rushed and very artificial. Srinivasa Reddy played a role similar to Mallikarjuna Rao’s role in Raviteja’s movie, Venky. He did an ok job but it seemed like he did dub for his role in the film? The film had Brahmaji, Praveen, Murali Sharma, Satyam Rajesh, Goparaju Ramana and a few others, in character roles. All of them made their presence felt but none of their roles gave the desired impact and extra mileage.

Technicalities:

Cinematography by Sai Sriram, is a major plus to the film. The visuals looked colourful, vibrant and gave a pleasant look to the film throughout. Radhan’s music should have been better. The songs scored by him were below par and the background score was pretty standard. Editing by Karthikeyan Rohini, was alright. He tried to cut the film with a very crisp runtime of around two hours and yet, ended up having a few repetitive sequences. Production values by, Sree Subrahmanyeshwara Cinemas, were decent and were within the limitations of a midrange romantic comedy film. Let’s discuss the work of the writer and the director, Yadunaath Maruthi Rao, in detail in the analysis section.

Advertisement

Positives:

1.⁠ ⁠First Half
2.⁠ ⁠Comedy Portions
3.⁠ ⁠Sree Vishnu & Satya’s Timing
4.⁠ ⁠Cinematography

Negatives:

1.⁠ ⁠Second Half
2.⁠ ⁠Lack of Strong Emotions
3.⁠ ⁠Music

Analysis:

Advertisement

The debutant writer and the director, Yadunaath Maruthi Rao, wrote a so-called peculiar characterisation of the female lead in the film and tried to generate enough fun moments using the comedy timing of his lead actor, Sree Vishnu and the lead comedian, Satya. Right from the word go, the writer intended only to make the audience laugh at any cost, and in doing so, he succeeded in parts but would have done a better job in other parts, especially the latter part of the second half. The film had at least five to six notable actors but for some reason, the director only concentrated on generating fun by using his lead actor.

The entire first half of the film unfolded without any major complaints. There were enough comedy sequences in the first half that engaged the audience in a fairly decent manner and the revelation of the conflict point during intermission, worked as well. However, after the initial few minutes of the second half, the film got into repetitive mode and the drama during the last thirty minutes was the film was written and executed in a very unexciting manner without any proper emotional depth. The twist during the climax was very predictable and it was narrated in a bland and rushed manner. Better care in writing and execution during the second half would have elevated the film’s overall graph.

The bare minimum that the audience expects from debutant writers and directors is original characters and characterisations, isn’t it? In Vishnu Vinyasam, to a crucial character, it was surprising to see a debutant director use the characterisation of ‘Jagadamba Chowdary’, a character from Ravi Teja’s movie Venky. Also, at just around two hours of runtime, the film makes the audience feel monotonous with a few repetitive sequences. One of the major negative points of the film is the songs. For a romantic comedy film to work, it is necessary to have at least one or two chartbuster songs. Unfortunately, none of the songs composed by, Radhan, helped the film in any way.

Overall, the core point of, Vishnu Vinyasam, has enough potential to become a very engaging romantic drama film. But, the half-hearted effort from the writer, director and the music director, ended up making it a decent watch. You may give it a try watching for a few well-executed comedy portions, Sree Vishnu and Satya’s timing.

Final Verdict – Partly Entertaining

Advertisement

Rating – 2.5/5

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Trending