Season of the Witch

Season of the Witch (2011)

4% on Rotten Tomatoes (out of 91 reviews)

Runtime: 95 minutes

Directed by: Dominic Sena

Starring: Nicolas Cage, Ron Perlman, Claire Foy, Christopher Lee

From: Rogue/Relativity/Atlas

Here’s my first-ever review of a movie released in 2011, and to be honest, I doubt I’ll be saying too much about it. Sure, I could spend a lot of time ranting about the Troglodytes I had to watch the movie with when I went out to the Cineplex to check it out, but I’ll spare you that; it’s just the usual idiocy that took place with people and movie theatres. Sigh.

I’ve heard about the movie for awhile and it sat on the shelf for at least a year, which is usually a bad sign for a completed movie to sit unreleased for so many months. I wasn’t sure what to make of it from the previews. Most of the movies I’ve seen that take place so long ago aren’t so great, like The Last Legion or Pathfinder (maybe one of these days I’ll review those, mainly because I doubt too many people have checked them out… even though trust me, they really aren’t worth seeing!) so that gave me pause. But, I wanted to get out one night and that was the only thing out that interested me, so I decided to give it a chance.

In short, the movie isn’t as awful as the critics are saying. Problem is, it’s mediocre at best in every which way, from story to the special effects to the action. But, I guess I shouldn’t say “every” which way, as at least Cage and Perlman were amusing at times and their chemistry was fine. If only they had a better movie to work with…

In short, Cage and Perlman play knights during the Crusades (and personally, I wish for more *good* movies about that time in history) who quit the gig when Cage accidentally does something bad. They travel along but then stumble upon a village which is suffering the effects of the Black Plague. They blame it on a witch, who happens to be an attractive young lady (Foy). They and some other people have to transport her to another city in order to stop her powers, or some such nonsense. To give more away would ruin the threadbare story.

So, I say that if you really want to see the movie, wait until it comes out on DVD/Blu-Ray. It’s not worth theatre prices. Like I said, it’s not awful, but it’s not that memorable either and nothing really stands out. Is it better to be bad or to be dull and soul-crushingly average? I'm not quite sure.

Anyhow, I'll be back Friday and for at least a week or two I'll be reviewing some foreign films in order to do something different.