Watch Warlock: The Armageddon For Free

Overrated

Crappy film

This story has more twists and turns than a second-rate soap opera.

It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

First off, let me say that you can watch "Warlock: The Armageddon" without having seen the first "Warlock" movie. Of course you will have more depth to the warlock character, if you have seen it, but you will not miss out on anything if you haven't.This sequel is as good as the first movie in the series.Again, the role of the sinister warlock is portrayed by the charismatic Julian Sands. And in this movie the character is much more dark and evil, far more twisted than the warlock portrayed in the first movie. Julian Sands is so perfect for the role of the warlock.The cast is good, and the roles of the druids are good, both for the young druids and the elderly druids.The movie has a bunch of cool effects and wicked magics, something that have to be seen. However, it is not all good though, the scene with the knife went horribly wrong. That knife is perhaps the worst CGI effect I have seen to date.For fans of adventure genres or for people who like to play D&D games, this movie provides good entertainment. And like the first "Warlock" movie, this also have enough entertainment for more than one watching. I never grow tired of it, at least!

Julian Sands again stands out as the evil oozing, soft spoken disciple/ son of Satan in this slightly less well done sequel to "Warlock." The problem is mostly one of a script that could have been a little more exciting and with a few more thrills. The level of gore just was not as necessary to the story line. Given all that it was still a very watchable film. I have noted one error in the listed credits. Charles Hallahan is listed as Ted Ellinson, the father of the female lead in the story. Actually that part was played by Bruce Glover(best known from "Diamonds are Forever.") Hallahan actually played Ethan Larson. The opening scene was somewhat confusing. SInce the Druids were supposed to stop the birth of the Warlock, why were they the ones at the birth, and who were the others that slaughtered most of them?

How the hell do they come up with this stuff? Dig this: Once every 600 years, for five days following the solar eclipse, God is actually powerless. During this short period of time, the Devil has the chance to take over the earth if – and only IF – his son, the Warlock, manages to bring together five magical stones and involve them in some sort of satanic ritual. The only individuals that are able to prevent the Warlock from raising the Armageddon are carefully selected druids; people that have to die in their human form and get reborn as Godly warriors. What the hell?!? The biggest advantage of low-brained cheese horror is that you never require seeing the original in order to enjoy the sequels. I recall seeing "Warlock" long time ago, but I don't remember much, except that the basic plot outline was entirely different than the events featuring in "Warlock: The Armageddon". Julian Sands (still a regretfully underrated actor) once again stars as the Warlock, and he emerges – fully-grown – from the womb of poor woman just because she disposes of the first stone. His journey starts in New York, and our anti-hero has to travel all across the USA for gathering all the stones before he's expected in sunny California for the actual showdown. "Warlock: Armageddon" is a surprisingly entertaining B-movie, mainly because it's fast-paced and featuring quite a large amount of gory killing sequences. Julian Sands' performance also contributes a lot to the fun-factor of this movie, as he portrays his Warlock character as a truly obnoxious bastard who walks up the catwalk in the middle of fashion shows and deliberately runs his fast car over cute innocent bunnies. Naturally the script contains a lot of stupid dialogs and absurdly grotesque situations, but still one particular sequence is effectively eerie and disturbing, namely when the Warlock enters the traveling freak show to collect his third stone. In the "House of Wonders" he encounters a creepy midget and some genuine medieval torture devices. The 'heroic' characters are pretty lame and their extended druid-trainings (reminiscent to the Jedi-Knight training) are the least interesting moments of the entire film. Okay entertainment for undemanding horror fans.

This film upon first glance was a one of a string of films i have recently seen, that looks, in the TV guide, like it could be pathetic to the point that it is funny to watch due to the year it was made and by the description. The words used "horror sequel", "son of devil" and made in 1993, simply branded it a must see film between me and my mate Mark.This film turned into one of the funniest films I have ever seen and to say it is a horror would be a mockery to all horror films. However place it within the genre of comedy, and it is up there challenging with the best of comedy films.The basic storyline made it easy to understand i.e. did not have to concentrate, which is good because i was crying with laughter too much.It follows the old theme of the evil being lead back to the main characters at the end, via the collection of 6 stones, randomly placed around the world, from Circuses to museums.Excellent acting from the son of the devil, made me believe that he actually was the son of the devil and his ways of murdering the stone holders was humorous to say the least, except for the one in the circus where that brought genuine fear to my mind.A well written script with such instances as rabbits being run over and hair being pulled off makes for an exciting and humorous viewing of one of my favouritist films of all time.Simply an 8.5/10 due to effective blood ridden moments, great acting and funny moments.Hail the guy that created this masterpiece