Customer Reviews

Witchfinder General (1968)

5 star:		(8)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

England has a civil war between the Royalist and the Parliament Party that are fighting for power over the country. Matthew Hopkins and his aid John Stearne exploit the situation of the war as they travel around finding witches to kill in the name of God, which in essence is a way for them to live out their sadistic behaviors. Many poor individuals fall under brutal torture by Hopkins and Stearne which often leads them into confessing witchcraft. The two servants of God make one mistake as they kill a priest that is good friends with a soldier and also rape the soldier's future wife. Conqueror Worm
(UK Title: Witchfinder General) is a fierce horror film with historical implications to the failure of Christianity and witch hunts. The film will leave the audience with distaste for the action of humankind that was sanctioned by Christian Church. In the end, Witchfinder General offers a satisfactory cinematic experience that gives a cause for the audience to ponder our past, current, and future actions.

... or maybe the best horror western ever. What you make of this will depend on two things. How much you like old British horror and how much you know about the production of this particular film. When you realize that this is the last production of a young talented Director, Michael Reeves, who died (25 - accidental overdose) on the path to being one of the all time greatest film directors, and that this is his third, last and best film, you will under its value (as an example of his talent watch the shot in this film of young children cooking potatoes in the ashes of a 'witch' that has just been burned). It is a notch above your average late 1960s early 1970s horror films. In fact it is a notch above nearly every British film making it one of the British modern classics.

The story is based on the real life times and crimes of the lawyer and Witchfinder General - Mathew Hopkins, who set about destroying alleged witches across England with the full power of the law. This film depicts the various acts of torture and trials conducted on witches making it an extremely important historical document (as a note the Western influence comes from the gallant long countryside horseback riding shots, mobs in the villages and things like gallows being erected in the same vein as the cowboy movies in the USA of that era. It WORKS extremely well!) It is also certainly the best rendition of such grim persecutions to date on the screen (US viewers should think Salem Witch Trials x 100).

There is an interesting plot involving a young soldier whose fiancée's father - a priest, is put on trial for witchcraft while the soldier is away. When the soldier returns he vows to track down Hopkins for the crimes he has committed against his wife and father and so the movie is essentially a story of revenge as this soldier chases Hopkins across the countryside passing through villages where Hopkins has been.

Some find this film hard to watch because of this subplot but stick with it because after the first twenty minutes or so the film really takes off. This is also Vincent Price in his best role ever and some would say his best work although the production values are somewhat low (a very restrictive budget with a young director practically making it by himself). Many of the scenes are underexposed, dirty, bad cuts, lots of zooms (a no-no in cinematography these days), daft credits that almost underexpose Hopkins face in the background and other elements of film making associated with tight finances. However ALL of the fight sequences and torture sequences are very well done. In fact some of those scenes had to be cut!

The real gem in this movie though is to know how much it has been through. The director set out to make one of the most violent films ever conceived in the UK. The UK censors immediately cut it to ribbons saying that it would shock the viewers too much. Also the US censors agreed that the violence should be toned down considerably but agreed that the US version could contain different takes with nude women. This led to several versions of the film over the years.

This review refers to the superb DVD version of the film. You can only currently get it on PAL but it contains 2 versions of the films, excellent bonus materials including documentaries, Empire Magazine's Kim Newman provides excellent production notes (best seen on any DVD to date), trailers and biographies. It is dirt cheap. Get it!

Anyway the DVD has 2 versions - The Directors Cut (featuring NO nude women and all the restored cuts) and the Export Version (featuring nude women and all the restored cuts). The VHS version is CUT. However this decade one scene was restored that was originally omitted from the screen version - of the infamous boot in the eye sequence. So all new VHS versions of the film have this restored... but the DVD has also restored - (1) A priest being tortured, (2) A women being slapped, (3)An extended version of the river dunking, (4)A witch missing her eye being tied up and burnt alive, (5)A woman being tortured and (6) the notorious axing sequence. Unfortunately these cut scenes had to be restored from a poor quality tape recording in the Director's own personal collection, so these cut scenes look very different from the quality of the actual film - however this is only a minor point given that the film is over 30 years old and was made on a shoe-string budget. The fact that we get to see these cuts at all on a DVD in SUBLIME for fans!

So for the first time ever - The Fully Restored - Witchfinder General as it was meant to be seen is now available!

CLASSIC!

As with any movie coming out of a less edit-heavy, production conscious tradition, one must allow it to have lapses in logic or continuity in places. For its time and genre, the movie works and, I would echo others, it is refreshing to see Vincent Price plumb his artistic depths... sadly, it would not be too much after this movie that he would be mocking his art in the campy TV show, The Hilarious House of Frightenstein.

The Midnight Movies version of this DVD is highly censored. The graphic scenes that made this film controversial (and interesting) have been cut. The introduction has been shortened, the music is edited and the ending is some alternate take that lessens the impact of the final act of vengence. The other reviewers are commenting on an older version of the film that is apparently no longer available. It is the version I remember seeing in the theatre and on VHS sometimes called "The Conquerer Worm." Even the commentary included on the DVD references the more complete version.

Despite the censorship, it is still a good Vincent Price movie. It just isn't the GREAT horror movie I remembered.

first off, i'll come out and say that i don't care about the petty feuds between Vincent and the director, or the star and director of any movie! from what i've learned, Reeves was acting like he was a hot shot and by 1968 Vincent was a LEGEND and knew his way around acting and when he questioned the director about something, Reeves coldly replied that Vincent was clueless and his entire career was meaningless. now, had this been a stuffy or an egotistical celebrity i wouldn't have a problem but my god, Vincent Price? He was one of the least egotistical people in the profession and he didn't take himself seriously, and because of this it allowed him to spoof himself in the later years and have fun with his image. Reeves also never visited or checked up on Vincent after an accident happened on the set: Vincent fell off a horse and Reeves purposely ignored Vincent hoping the anger would come across on film! this 1968 film on witch-craft and Matthew Hopkins shows what a great actor Vincent was. Who else had the versatility to do this intense film but yet a year prior he was cavorting around as Dr. Goldfoot in two films as well as appearing as Egghead on the TV show "Batman"! Vincent is often ignored and his LONG career (1935-1992) is constantly being down-played by critics who prescribe the silly notion that horror movies are bad and anyone who gets a kick out of them are bad for society. such garbage! Matthew Hopkins, as played by Vincent, isn't lovable or hammy as we all love Vincent to be...this is probably the only role of his where the viewer has no sympathy and you cheer on his eventual comeuppance and this one is a doozy! it IS a horror movie because it has all the elements: violence, evil, blood, death, intensity, scream queens, and atmosphere...and because this is an AIP film there are several shots of nude women but it's all in context of the story so don't anyone out there yell "X rated" or something silly like that. This movie inspired Vincent's 1970 film "Cry of the Banshee", which i also love. another witch-craft/voo-doo film from this era from Vincent is the wonderful "Oblong Box". but "Conqueror Worm" a/k/a "Witchfinder General" is fantastic.

I can only say that it is a great movie and the only way to make it better would be for it to be presented on widescreen on DVD.

This film, set in 1645 strife-torn England has Price in a serious role very different from his usual tongue-in-cheek horror flicks. This one is more of an historical drama with violent episodes than a true horroe film. Price plays Matthew Hopkins, a lawyer and witchfinder who journeys from town to town seeking and killing suspected witches, usually women or royalists or Cromwell's supporters or papalists or just about anyone else who is different.
While keeping to the letter of the law, Price and his henchman certainly break the spirit with their cruelty and sadism. THe plot revolves arounf two young lovers, RIchard and Sara, caught in Hopkins web. Sara's uncle, a priest, is accused of witchcraft and is tortured and jailed. Sara, to save his life, seduces Hopkins but eventually is also accused of witchcraft and jailed and tortured. Richard vows revenge against Hopkins. Several more people are burned, hanged, tortured, etc. before the inevitable end.
The film is violent and disturbing. I'm not sure if it's disturbing because it is violent or because it is not violent enough since the real actions that took place would have been more horrific and evil than what could be displayed on film.
It's an upsetting film. Price is good as the zealot who hides behind the law for carrying out his evil intentions. John, his henchman, is a sadist who simply enjoys torturing people and gets away with it. The film is authentic in its portrayal of English life during the Civil Wars with its harsh cruelty, depravity, breakdown of social order, etc.

I saw this movie when I was just 13 or 14 and I have to admit, it was pretty darn scary. This may have been what we now call a "sleeper" ~ I'm not sure what made me go to see it back then. But, then, that was when dirt was new. Enjoy.

The rating is for the film itself, not this version.Perhaps Price's best performance.This film merits a 'restoration' on DVD.Use the orginal title.Lose the narration.And, most importantly, replace the synthesized score with the orginal music.Tim Burton professes to 'love' price so much; why doesn't he champion this film?

Oh dear the ravages of time have rendered this worm very weak. I saw it as Witchfinder General in the UK years ago and the audience cheered when the revenge hit the floor. But now it looks very much a Hammer Horror B movie. Endles shots of horses galloping. Very nice if your an equestrian but it does not further the plot. Lovely scenery and Cromwellian housing does not make a good film. Based on fact they say. Well this is one film that should go the way of the witches. It has appalling acting with women making feeble tears and cries. And some of the wigs are gloriously illfitting and clearly made of straw. Perhaps they are Cromwellian. Burn burn burn.