IMDb > Warlock III: The End of Innocence (1999) (V) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Warlock III: The End of Innocence
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Warlock III: The End of Innocence (V) More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 4:[1] [2] [3] [4] [Next]
Index 34 reviews in total 

16 out of 20 people found the following review useful:

Pathetic compared to the previous Warlock films

Author: C G from United States
20 July 2007

The first Warlock film with Julian Sands and Richard E. Grant was great - original, fun, a bit gory, and suspenseful. It had pretty well defined characters, and a plot that moved. (I bet the movie would have been terrific if it's budget had been about 3 times bigger for special FX.) I Feel the second installment Warlock: The Armagedon, was okay, but a bit cheesy with the magic druid theme going. Though the plot was a bit dodgy because they weren't chasing after the warlock, the improved FX and magical scenarios made the movie palatable.

This third installment though is pathetic. The editing is horrible, the film drags on and on for the first 40 minutes or so. The lead character is very flat, and the Warlock is also quite flat. Although that is kind of how the warlock character has always been portrayed, calm, cold, and collected, which worked when the other leads where quite animated, but is terrible here with the boring lead. At least there are the side kicks in W3 to spice things up, as the two leads are excruciatingly lame characters.

As the film is slow at the beginning, one doesn't know if it is going to be about the house, or about the Warlock. And I think that where they missed it. If they had focused less on the "haunted house" aspect early on, and more or flashbacks with the warlock, it may have turned out better.

If you are a fan of the previous two Warlock films its worth renting, but prepare yourself for boredom and disappointment.

If you've never seen the previous Warlock films, skip this one, rent Warlock (1989) and enjoy.

Was the above review useful to you?

12 out of 18 people found the following review useful:

No no no no

Author: Keydjes from Tumba, Sweden
11 April 2001

This is not a Warlock-movie.....where did this come from??? This is a cheap horror movie that can't even scare a child. There was no plot, no story and absolutely not one good actor. I am a fan of Bruce Payne but this was crap, he is not a Warlock. Even if Julian Sands is not the best actor of all, he is the Warlock and I am so glad he didn't do this one because this is terrible. I don't have the words to say how bad it was so instead of just repeating myself I end it here. Another film that should never had been done.

Was the above review useful to you?

12 out of 19 people found the following review useful:

In a word? Lame.

Author: Elswet from .: Fiendish Writings in the Dark :.
17 September 2003

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

As far as sequels go, this one rates right down there with Pet Semetary 2 and Exorcist 2. Lame, Lame Lame!!!

This movie had absolutely NOTHING to do with the first two movies. And, unfortunately for Julian Sands fans, he wanted too much money to do this third installment, and so the studio hired some lame a** to play his character. Never a good move in a sequel, and that little studio stunt drags this already wavering "B" flick down into the trenches of the "D" category. Dirt. Disgusting.

Deplorable. Detritus. Dire.

I hate this movie. It represents everything that has ruined the industry. Shoddy acting, horrible casting, non-existent directing...the cast of characters wanders aimlessly through this horrid piece of garbage seemingly with no direction whatsoever.

This is not even a movie. It's a flick, and nothing more. Don't waste your time, or resources on this one.

It rates NOTHING -0/10- from...

the Fiend :.

Was the above review useful to you?

10 out of 16 people found the following review useful:

A Tale of Witchcraft And Warlocks.

Author: Shaithis from Winnipeg, MB Canada
11 January 2000

One movie I was not too fond of was Warlock featuring an actor I really couldn't stand...Warlock featuring Julian Sands. It was quite a predictable, if not quite boring film.

One day, I'm not sure if I saw it on a pay-tv channel or what, but I watched Warlock: Armageddon. I really thought it was neat, original, and especially smart. So when I saw yet another sequel, I was hesitant, but picked it up anyways.

What I received was not as original as Armageddon, but it did have its entertainment value. I remember long ago when Witchboard had the same effect, but it did not hold up over time, and I can't say I think this one will either.

The creators of this film have done a wonderful job on what looks like a not too huge direct-to-video budget. A major selling point was the presence of 'Hellraiser's' Ashley Laurence (I'm a sucker for a cute tough girl that can defeat demons) as I have not seen her in anything since 'The Lurking Fear'. Once again, in typical Ashley Laurence fashion she's the main chased after girl who must defeat the demon (or shall we say warlock).

Bruce Payne grew on me through the film. At first I must admit I even thought Julian Sands would be better. But his calm demeanour really intensified the scenes and gave some nice atmosphere.

The film, yes is quite a stereotypical one. But it did have interesting elements placed in it. I really liked the druid aspect that Armageddon brought, and while it isn't really showcased in this film, there is a good witch, and a nice young aspiring good witch that try to battle the Warlock. Unfortunately it is in a minimal amount of the film.

A group of friends, all of different stereotypes (one is a musician, another an artist, a witch, a kinky sex kitten, and a kinky muscled possible ahem jockish-type character?) head to an old house which is scheduled to be demolished. Ashley Laurence, whom in this film is an orphan, never knew her birth parents. It is their old house. What follows is your basic what has happened in the past will now repeat in the future. It is only up to this small group of friends to stop it (and whatever clues and artefacts are found around the house).

I recommend this film to anyone who likes mild witchcrafty-type horror films for a light viewing. It's not like the other Warlock films have been Shakespeare, and this one is the same.

Was the above review useful to you?

7 out of 12 people found the following review useful:

Single word summary...... "Huh?"

Author: toxiemite from Melbourne, Australia
6 November 2003

I praise the first Warlock film...... who wouldnt? I even defended the second one because too many sad people winged about it. Geeze, it wasn't that bad!....... was it?

So should I defend this third installment?.... Hell No!!! .... I just cannot seem to peice together any possitive words in my head to maybe lift this review up a notch.... in fact maybe it's better that I dont even talk about this tele-movie-esque film at all.

Instead may I suggest that someone put pen to paper and create a fourth Warlock film that blends the first two formulas into one. Being that Redfern seeks assistence from the Druids to battle against the Warlock.... none other than Julien Sands.... none of this Bruce Payne nonsense.

(No offence Bruce. You were great in Passenger 57... but you just aint no Warlock)

So to sum up Warlock III: End of Innocence...... Miserable waste of time. Part 4 would be a classic.... if it existed! 2 out of 10

(it gets a 2 because it had at least some balls to even be made at all)

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Third times a charm, but not really...

Author: Paul Magne Haakonsen from Denmark
29 December 2015

You have to understand that it is not sound to have a "Warlock" movie without the man himself. And I am of course talking about Julian Sands. And you know that there is something amiss by the movie cover already. But in Bruce Payne's defense then he did fight valiantly at an uphill battle.

While this third movie obviously has better effects than the previous two movies, given the latter year in which it was made, it just suffered from a lack of an elaborate storyline. It was just too simplistic. And it just didn't have that characteristic "Warlock" quality to it.

The story was just too forced, especially since the warlock character just shows up at the house without any background story of where he came from or why he was there in the first place.

The cast did good jobs with their given roles, even Bruce Payne. But he just wasn't "Warlock" material. Yes, he does have some similarities to Julian Sands, but he just didn't cut it. It was the devilish charm and characteristic imp-like look that were missing.

"Warlock III: The End of Innocence" comes off as a mediocre movie that tried to milk the rest out of a franchise that ended with the second movie "Warlock: The Armageddon".

Having seen it, it can be checked off the list, but it just lacked that particularly devilish magical ingredient to qualify as a proper "Warlock" movie.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

Highly underrated effort

Author: slayrrr666 ( from Los Angeles, Ca
9 October 2007

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

"Warlock III: End of Innocence" is an above-average film with a few flaws.


Attending Sommerville College, art student Kris Miller, (Ashley Laurence) finds out that an ancestral home is being torn down and is sent in to remove items. Trying to convince boyfriend Michael, (Paul Francis) and friends Jerry, (Jan Schweiterman) Scott, (Rick Hearst) Lisa, (Angel Boris) and Robin, (Boti Bliss) to come along, she goes to the house alone and stays there. Feeling something about the situation isn't right, they all show up to help her out. As they clean up the house, stranger Phillip Covington, (Bruce Payne) arrives and immediately takes an interest in them, which they don't understand anyway. When he starts toying with their emotions and plying them against each other, which soon has them all at each other's throats. Realizing that he has an ulterior motive at play, she is soon forced into a final showdown with him.

The Good News: This here wasn't all that bad. The house here is quite creepy and can drudge up some really great suspense from it. There's a lot of really dark hallways, dark rooms and incredibly creepy atmosphere from how the place is really like really build up beautifully. That it plays around with it's supernatural feel quite well makes the most positive point. There's a whole slew of scenes that improve the film by how well it handles the supernatural. From the early hauntings of off-screen noises and banging, the subtly changing room damages, the constant flash-cuts of something appearing out of nowhere to give a shock to those who witness it and much more in here are all quite nice to behold. The ending is completely full of it, as there's the forest chase leading up to it, the final confrontation in the tower is continuously full of such scenes and the middle section contains some pretty impressive ones as well. A good mirror-gag is always quite nice, and this one contains a really good one. The deaths here, while not that spectacular, do show some supernatural flair. Being choked out by a person across the room, being frozen in place and then shattering into a million pieces and being blown off a ladder from a suddenly-bursting window do have some really great moments that come from it's supernatural tone. The last good positive is the quest to discover the source to defeat him. This is a really nice little mystery that is nicely spread out over the film, contains enough logical steps that it goes over smoothly and really does end up with some great thoughts as it comes off like being obvious without being insulting for being so smart. That is quite fine when it really comes up with good stuff.

The Bad News: This one doesn't have a whole lot of problems, but this one does have a couple. One of the big ones is that the Warlock doesn't feel powerful or imposing. This one could've easily taken it out and replaced it with another creature and this wouldn't have suffered at all. It never decides to really unleash the powers it claims to have beyond only a few brief scenes where it plays around with the surroundings, but this one doesn't really have as imposing a Warlock that the others do. The other flaw is that the film, since it does have a tendency to skip off into a supernatural sequence quite easily, can feel quite confusing at times. This also jumps around between the past and present, making the complications even further more confusing. This one can take a few tries to really get less complicated, so the first time through can be a little tough. Otherwise, they don't screw up the film much.

The Final Verdict: Not necessarily the worst entry in the series, but it does have enough positive remarks to made it redeemable. Recommended for those who have a flair for low-budget types or are a fan of the series, while those who don't take much stock in the flaws won't have much of a good time.

Rated R: Graphic Violence, Graphic Language, Nudity and a mild S&M scene

Was the above review useful to you?

7 out of 13 people found the following review useful:

a pimple on the but of the warlock series

Author: n00msy ( from Montana USA
24 February 2002

Just bad, had nothing to do with the other movies the original warlock wasnt even the same dude and didnt follow the series at all. It almost took away from the Warlock movies, almost stopped watching it. guess I should have read the box before I watched it.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Ummmm, good things to say: Slightly less lousy than the first sequel.

Author: oneguyrambling from Australia
24 September 2011

It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest to find this was a script for a totally different film that with a few clips and revisions was turned into a 'Warlock' pic. In fact for much of the running time I was reminded frequently of The Prophecy films, even the music was pretty much a rip of the early Prophecy stuff.

The short version has a young woman with no immediate family inheriting a large run down home in the middle of nowhere. Initially she goes alone to sift through the home hoping for clues regarding her family heritage, but her boyfriend and boneheaded friends – among whom is a part-time witch and an S&M fetishist couple – show up unannounced to join in the fun.

Imagine our surprise when around half way through the film a pasty guy in a big black coat shows up to talk just like Julian Sands (but is really some guy named Bruce Payne, even Sands didn't need the cash this bad) and to look at people through his eyebrows in menacing fashion for a while. That surprise is short lived of course, and once the paint by numbers plot is mechanically laid out and we realise what the Warlock is intent on doing the film becomes nothing more than a serial killer flick where vacuous teens are outmatched by a calm killing machine with supernatural powers.

Why the Warlock is really there is irrelevant – it's about Chris's bloodline and a certain amount of human sacrifice is involved – in reality it is an excuse to throw every el-cheapo horror film cliché against the wall and see what sticks.

Not much this time.

We have mirrors that provide a distinctly more eerie reflection, banging shutters and whispered voices, visions and dreams with Hollywood production values (!) and of course the turn, turn, turn, there he is 2 inches away from you scare.

It's all very perfunctory and altogether unnecessary. I must admit thought that even though this was san-Sands I kinda enjoyed this more than the lazier W2, perhaps it was the Prophecy allusions? Warlock 3 is a better effort than Warlock 2, which was in itself a pale imitation of the only so-so original. When considered by themselves they are little more than dodgy B movies and a dated reminder of what direct to VHS horror once represented: a couple scares, some nudity and gore (come to think of it things ain't that different). But when considered as an overall work they are a prime example of how one mediocre movie can be converted into three – with the sequels both lousy – and yet still be extracting money and over 4 hours from this bozo almost two full decades on.

I am sad.

Final Rating – 4.5 / 10. Another lousy sequel, though this is slightly less lousy than the last.

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 8 people found the following review useful:

Ashley laurence vs Bruce Payne it's like a dream come true.

Author: Scorpion Man ( from Hull, England
29 January 2002

Here's how it goes, 300 years ago an all powerful controller of satanic forces (Bruce Payne) tried to bring about the end of civilisation... of course it didn't work, but now the time has come for another attempt. Searching for clues to her family history the young decendant of the Warlock's arch enemy visits her newly inherited house where the Warlock lies in wait. To raise from hell the poison bride who will plunge the world into unimaginable evil, the Warlock must sacrifice the descendant of a witch born on a blue moon to the devil. Rather luckily for him, the girl is such a decendant born on a blue moon, not so luckily for him she is played by Ashley 'The demon basher' Laurence; the one person the armies of darkness could never hope to defeat. To make things a bit more interesting he can't simply kidnap her and do the ritual like other Warlocks, instead he must be given something by each of her closest friends who must then give her up to him. The acting is perfect (as Bruce Payne & Ashley Laurence always are) and although the scenery is designed to look a bit daft the special effects and cool music more than make up for it. Horror at it's best.

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 1 of 4:[1] [2] [3] [4] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Plot summary Ratings External reviews
Plot keywords Main details Your user reviews
Your vote history