UNLIMITED STREAMING
WITH PRIME VIDEO
TRY 30-DAY TRIAL
Home > Fantasy >

Warlock: The Armageddon

Warlock: The Armageddon (1993)

September. 24,1993
|
5.4
|
R
| Fantasy Horror Action Science Fiction

Every six hundred years, a great evil has the opportunity to escape and unleash Armageddon. A group of five stones has the power to either free the evil, or banish it for another six hundred years. An order of Druids battles with a Warlock determined to unleash his father upon the world.

...

Watch Trailer

Cast

Similar titles

Reviews

t_atzmueller
1993/09/24

The original „Warlock"-movie had much going for it: it had a compelling storyline that seemed to have jumped straight out of a comic book. Director and crew were obviously enthusiastic, producing a film that had all the best traits of cheap, yet dedicated horror-flick. And last but not least, it had an excellent cast, the chemistry being near perfect. Especially Julian Sands as evil incarnated had a charm and presence that one couldn't help but to root for him, despite all his mischief.Indeed, "Warlock" has the stuff that made it a cult-movie. Sadly, same cannot be said about its sequel. First, apart from Julian Sands, none of the original cast has returned. The well-worn though charming time-travel aspects (works almost every time, doesn't it?) are not present, the warlock has even lost his ponytail! It's almost like we're watching a similar, though not the same character as the super-smooth male-witch of the first part. It's not that the rest of the cast is bad either – having veterans like R.G Armstrong, Joanna Pacula and Zach Galligan – but Lori Singer and Richard E. Grant are missed greatly.Same goes for the special effects: true, "Warlock II" is slightly gorier than its predecessor and, true, the effects where still pre-CGI and hence had a more natural feel than 99 percent of the SFX today, but none of the scenes could match the magic that the original "Warlock" had.Speaking of Zach Galligan, compare "Gremlins" to "Gremlins 2": yes, the sequel was disappointing because it couldn't live up to the first part, but in the end, alright, it wasn't a bad movie. In the end, what saved the movie is the direction of Anthony Hickox who is in the same league with Miner; a veteran of cheap, straight-to-video horror flicks with a heart (minor trash-gems like "Waxworks", "Full Eclipse" and "Spaceshift" are testament to that).In retrospect, it's not even a bad movie if it had stood on its own. Especially if compared to the horrid "Warlock III" which, if you're a "Warlock"-fan and haven't seen it yet, I can only recommend: avoid it like… well, like a warlock avoids salt! I'll join the general consensus (of the time of writing – things may look different if you happen to read this in a hundred years or so), and give the film five points from five – and if I'll watch a few more contemporary horror flicks, infested with CGI and lifeless actors, I may even give it six or seven.

More
leathaface
1993/09/25

I thought the sequel to Warlock was okay. The first relied heavily on the story, which was a about a unfortunate 90's working girl who is tormented by the son of the devil when a witchhunter chases him through time to the present day. It sounds far fetched, but it is surprisingly well-written. This one is about the return of the Warlock, this time he's trying to collect 7 coveted runestones that, once collected, will spell out the true name of his demon father and ultimately destroy the world (hence the title, "The Armageddon"). This one is much campier and much, much gorier than the first. I love Anthony Hickox though, I just can't help it. He's like Brian Yuzna, crazy, far-fetched stories, campy dialogue, tongue-in-cheek humor (check out Waxwork 2) and lots of over-the-top (but tasteful enough to usually avoid being unrated) gore. A boy learns that he is a descendant of a long line of "druids", a group who has been covertly fighting the evil and superhuman for centuries. Instead of brawn, he must strengthen his mental power in order to face a final showdown of good and evil. Julian Sands once again hams it up and makes you hate him, while unleashing his unholy rage in some of the most creative kill scenes ever. I won't give much away, but he is reborn through a beautiful woman in a very painful manner, and the folks possessing the runestones get put through hell, let me tell you. The deaths are very gory, SFX-filled and creative, just watch what happens to the art collector. He becomes part of his own collection, so to speak.If you liked Children of the Corn 3, Hellraiser 3, the Waxwork series and can take campy dialogue with a grain of tolerant salt, then rent this movie for solid entertainment (for 85 minutes or so.)

More
cool_cool_1
1993/09/26

Warlock: The Armageddon (1993) would be a total waste of space if it wasn't for Julian Sands as the Warlock, his scenes are great fun to watch, all the other characters in this film are awful and boring.Julian Sands is the Warlock who is on a mission to get hold of 6 magical runestones that will enable Satan to raise hell on earth, Only 2 people have the power to stop him, 2 teenagers who have inherited druid warrior power!!! The boy who plays the main "hero" is such a geeky wimp, it's an insult that this dweeb would have this power to stop the mighty Warlock!!! Like i said before, this film is a one man show, the scenes with Julian Sands are funny, entertaining and the way he kills off various people with lots of clever special effects makes it great fun to watch.But overall i give this movie 5/10, coz all the other scenes were so dull.

More
slayrrr666
1993/09/27

'Warlock: The Armageddon' is a more than capable sequel to the original film.**SPOILERS**A druid ceremony is interrupted and five sacred stones are stolen and buried, hoping to never be used again. Today, high school teen and future warlock Kenny Travis (Chris Young) is having a series of problems involving his girlfriend Samantha (Paula Marshall) and the school bully Andy. (Craig Hurley) Kenny's father Will (Steve Kahan) tells him of his destiny, but he would rather get along with Samantha. The Warlock (Julian Sands) is reborn and goes off in search of the five sacred stones that are needed to bring his father back to Earth. One of the stones is held by fashionista Paula Dare (Joanna Pacula) and acquires it forcefully. Kenny learns that he comes from a long line of druids who protect the world instead of destroying it and that only he can defeat the Warlock. Will and his Warlock friend Franks (R.G. Armstrong) teach him to learn the ways of the druids to fight the Warlock, who continues on a bloodbathed path to find the stones. With Samantha coming along to help, Kenny takes on the Warlock for the fight of mankind.The Good News: I'm really glad this one is a bloodbath. The first one was a very decent effort that featured very few gore effects, but this one contained several impressive kills. Being impaled on a series of spikes from a torture chamber, having an eye ripped out, having more than twenty slash marks all over their body, and being dropped over thirty feet onto a skylight, then falling trough with blood splattering on the onlookers are just some of the scenes which are more violent in here than in the first one. The elevator scene, with the stabbing, was the real killing highlight because of the suspense it involved. Because there was a couple false movements where something didn't happen when it was believed to have been, then it suddenly happens does shock the first time viewer. However, than is the only main jump in the movie. Sands really seems to have fun in the role as he actually kills people in this movie. He almost becomes a sort of Freddy-ish killer in this movie, as he does have a few pretty funny comments to his victims, but they just don't seem as good as Freddy's lines. He does kill with abandon, so it does come as a surprise when he kills them. The actual method of killing the Warlock was pretty creative, with the whole scene carrying out pretty entertaining way. The battle shifts back and forth as no one has a clear-cut advantage over the other and it never loses your interest.The Bad News: There was a serious lack of jumps in this movie compared to the first one. The first one was pretty clever in how it build up suspense in it through the use of camera, scene layout, lighting, etc. This one simply abandoned that in favor of simply showing images that could've been scarier, but instead seems rather dull. If you get used to the violence, this becomes a very shock-less movie over time. The Freddy lines do need some work, as only a few are actually pretty funny. If only they would've taken the same approach, then part three would've been the laugh-fest it could been.The Final Verdict: It could've been a whole better than what it was, but as it stands, this is a very entertaining film. It has a lot more blood and gore than the first one, so gore hounds will love this one. Seek it out if you like the first one or if supernatural films about witches and warlocks are up your alley.Rated R: Graphic Violence, Graphic Language, Brief Nudity, and a brief sex scene.

More