The Witches of Eastwick (1987)

A really enjoyable, unsettling story. The acting is ticking like a fine Swiss watch, and what an interestingly unique plot. I thoroughly enjoyed these three Eastwick witches and that really evil guy. This movie is near the top of its genre...whatever that is. Jack Nicholson is at the top of his game (when is he not)? Susan Sarandon, Michelle Pheifer and even Cher, show some excellent chops as well. Director, George Miller did such a good job bringing these folks into the fold of this orchestration. I would like to think that the cast makes this movie, but so many times I have seen flicks with a great cast and nothing else, thereby tanking an entire project. Directing, casting, producing and all that other filmmaking stuff is all masterfully mixed and delivered in a spectacular package of neatness. I can deal with watching this movie about a hundred more times.

In 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")

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.

I suppose having Jack Nicholson play the usual Jack Nicholson character was thought by some to be a casting coup - and a masterpiece would be born. Cher. Sarandon. Pfeiffer. A real casting coup. All they needed was a script.They didn't get it with this dreck. The Hayes Code is long gone, but movies like this tell us why codes evolve in the first place: hideousness built on wretchedness heaped on tastelessness served on poor writing pretending to be clever and wry. With Satan as obnoxious centerpiece.When anything can be filmed and standards evaporate, shock shlock results - attention earned not by great dialogue, clever sets, smart comedy, but by puking, mocking, and dialogue out of a bad True Detective parody.Satan comes into the lives of three women in small-town America. In one choice vignette, he gives a mocking, foul speech in a church. In another, he gives a mocking foul speech . . . Well you get the drift. Foul speech, puke, foul speech, puke, interspersed with not the slightest bit of cleverness. A high school film project effort where the teacher never showed up to advise.Hideous.