38 reviews
- Scarecrow-88
- Sep 18, 2010
- Permalink
This movie is a time filler. If you having nothing better to do, watch it. But if you want a quality flick, this isn't it. All it is, is a platform for t & a, and that's about it. The story is not much to be desired, but it IS good mindless fun, take notice on the mindless part. This is good to watch when there's nothing on TV and Showtime is showing it AGAIN. As for the Craft ripoff debate, it's not a ripoff, but it does try to be fun in a Craft way, but fails poorly. If you can see it for free, go for it. But don't waste any money seeing it.
- Boondocksaint1
- Apr 4, 2000
- Permalink
"Little Witches" follows a group of girls at a Catholic boarding school in Southern California who are holed up together over the Easter vacation. Some rowdy, some bored, and some sexually repressed, they group together and begin dabbling with the occult, and unleash evil beyond their imagination.
Often footnoted as the cut-out bin-equivalent to "The Craft," "Little Witches" is drawing on a lengthy tradition of Catholic schoolgirl occult exploitation that has been a trend dating back to the television films of the seventies—"Satan's School for Girls" and "The Possessed" come to mind. In fact, "Little Witches" is really not all that different from those films, aside from the fact that its straight-to-video release allowed for gratuitous nudity and other material that would've never made it on television. In spite of this, the film very much feels like a made-for-TV movie, with indolent cinematography, a distracting musical score, and anemic performances from just about all involved.
In short, yes, this is a terrible film, one whose main attraction for many is the abundance of female flesh and sacrilegious antics. The flip side? There is definitely an audience for it, and though I can't necessarily count myself as one of them, I can understand where people find the charm in it. The film is peppered with fun scenes, and the over-the-top ending is reminiscent of the hokiest of the "Children of the Corn" sequels. Jennifer Rubin plays the authoritative nun/mother figure of the film, while a young Clea DuVall has a small part as one of the sorores Satanae; Sheeri Rappaport plays the ringleader of the girls, while Mimi Rose plays (unconvincingly) the film's moral center. Zelda Rubinstein also makes a rather amusing token appearance.
Overall, "Little Witches" is a generally weak film that is also a vainglorious B-movie triumph in some sense. It's technically quite abysmal on most accounts, but it also oddly seems to be aware of this. There is fun to be had for the right frame of mind (or right viewer), but at the end of the day, it's still a cheap and easy Satanic sisterhood flick that, while more gratuitous than its peers, does not rise above them. 4/10.
Often footnoted as the cut-out bin-equivalent to "The Craft," "Little Witches" is drawing on a lengthy tradition of Catholic schoolgirl occult exploitation that has been a trend dating back to the television films of the seventies—"Satan's School for Girls" and "The Possessed" come to mind. In fact, "Little Witches" is really not all that different from those films, aside from the fact that its straight-to-video release allowed for gratuitous nudity and other material that would've never made it on television. In spite of this, the film very much feels like a made-for-TV movie, with indolent cinematography, a distracting musical score, and anemic performances from just about all involved.
In short, yes, this is a terrible film, one whose main attraction for many is the abundance of female flesh and sacrilegious antics. The flip side? There is definitely an audience for it, and though I can't necessarily count myself as one of them, I can understand where people find the charm in it. The film is peppered with fun scenes, and the over-the-top ending is reminiscent of the hokiest of the "Children of the Corn" sequels. Jennifer Rubin plays the authoritative nun/mother figure of the film, while a young Clea DuVall has a small part as one of the sorores Satanae; Sheeri Rappaport plays the ringleader of the girls, while Mimi Rose plays (unconvincingly) the film's moral center. Zelda Rubinstein also makes a rather amusing token appearance.
Overall, "Little Witches" is a generally weak film that is also a vainglorious B-movie triumph in some sense. It's technically quite abysmal on most accounts, but it also oddly seems to be aware of this. There is fun to be had for the right frame of mind (or right viewer), but at the end of the day, it's still a cheap and easy Satanic sisterhood flick that, while more gratuitous than its peers, does not rise above them. 4/10.
- drownsoda90
- Jan 27, 2017
- Permalink
In today's world of high-profile Hollywood special effects flicks, B-movies are very underrated and under-appreciated. Oscar material they are not, but they don't try to be. I, personally, have a love for B-cinema, whether it's B-horror, B-action, or B-science fiction. They're movies without big budgets, without big stars, and have poor scripts and poor acting, yet can be just as much fun as big Hollywood movies. A well-made B-movie is humorous, schlocky, tittilating, and most of all entertaining.
Jane Simpson's Little Witches is all of these. It contains everything that makes B-movies so much fun: Creepy horror, blood and gore, a low budget, hot catholic school girl babes, and loads of bare flesh. A truly entertaining and well-made B-movie. The term 'good bad movie' certainly applies to Little Witches. I'll be looking for Sheeri Rappaport in more films after this one.
Jane Simpson's Little Witches is all of these. It contains everything that makes B-movies so much fun: Creepy horror, blood and gore, a low budget, hot catholic school girl babes, and loads of bare flesh. A truly entertaining and well-made B-movie. The term 'good bad movie' certainly applies to Little Witches. I'll be looking for Sheeri Rappaport in more films after this one.
Having just re-watched "Little Witches", I was disappointed. It's nowhere near as good as I remembered.
Of course, I mostly remembered the nudity, which the movie well-advisedly does not skimp on. But it's not a softcore flick, so there is an attempt at plot... an attempt which absolutely fails.
Other than the basic set-up which can probably be gleaned from looking at the DVD box - that is, a group of Catholic schoolgirls get involved in "witchcraft" - I don't know what the movie was about. There is something about hunky construction workers on the school grounds who dig up a corpse or a relic or something and the girls use the dig site in their rites. Also, predictably, the sexpot schoolgirl goes evil and the goody-two-shoes girl goes heroic in the end.
The acting in the movie is better than it really deserves. In particular, Mimi Rose, who plays the good girl, makes her into a character you can believe in, and there seems to be more going on behind the bad girl's performance than just going through the motions. The movie also has legendary character actors Jack Nance and Zelda Rubinstein but doesn't benefit that much from their appearance other than a couple of good scenes. Rubinstein only does one scene. She was an actress with a unique and powerful presence who added an pearl of strangeness to every movie she appeared in. If they had made her, say, the principal of the school and had her appear in multiple scenes in the movie, that could have established an atmosphere that would have suited the movie's try-hard spooky hijinks. It may even have elevated them to something the audience might have cared about.
The music, also, is terrible b-movie synth slop, overbearing from beginning to end, and headache inducing.
I'm not sure why I liked this one so much the first time around. I'm watching the final scene right now and I don't even know what's happening. I didn't care enough to try to follow the plot.
Of course, I mostly remembered the nudity, which the movie well-advisedly does not skimp on. But it's not a softcore flick, so there is an attempt at plot... an attempt which absolutely fails.
Other than the basic set-up which can probably be gleaned from looking at the DVD box - that is, a group of Catholic schoolgirls get involved in "witchcraft" - I don't know what the movie was about. There is something about hunky construction workers on the school grounds who dig up a corpse or a relic or something and the girls use the dig site in their rites. Also, predictably, the sexpot schoolgirl goes evil and the goody-two-shoes girl goes heroic in the end.
The acting in the movie is better than it really deserves. In particular, Mimi Rose, who plays the good girl, makes her into a character you can believe in, and there seems to be more going on behind the bad girl's performance than just going through the motions. The movie also has legendary character actors Jack Nance and Zelda Rubinstein but doesn't benefit that much from their appearance other than a couple of good scenes. Rubinstein only does one scene. She was an actress with a unique and powerful presence who added an pearl of strangeness to every movie she appeared in. If they had made her, say, the principal of the school and had her appear in multiple scenes in the movie, that could have established an atmosphere that would have suited the movie's try-hard spooky hijinks. It may even have elevated them to something the audience might have cared about.
The music, also, is terrible b-movie synth slop, overbearing from beginning to end, and headache inducing.
I'm not sure why I liked this one so much the first time around. I'm watching the final scene right now and I don't even know what's happening. I didn't care enough to try to follow the plot.
Workmen uncover a mummified body under an all-girls Catholic boarding school. Some girls sneak into the underground cavern to drink communion wine and they find a mysterious book after a nude dance. They start exploring the world of witchcraft with it.
This is basically The Craft except worst and with nudity. Sheeri Rappaport is a compelling performer. Most the actors are fine. It's the weak writing and the weak directing that is the most problematic. The monster makeup and special effects are bad. It's a B-movie, a drive-in double-bill but not much more than that.
This is basically The Craft except worst and with nudity. Sheeri Rappaport is a compelling performer. Most the actors are fine. It's the weak writing and the weak directing that is the most problematic. The monster makeup and special effects are bad. It's a B-movie, a drive-in double-bill but not much more than that.
- SnoopyStyle
- Jul 1, 2021
- Permalink
A group of girls at a Catholic boarding school get mixed up in the occult.
While I think it was great to see Jack Nance as the priest, and a nice cameo from Zelda Rubinstein, and heck... we even have the debut of Clea DuVall... this just was not a great movie and seems like little more than an excuse to show a group of young women naked.
I kept thinking this was a cheap version of "The Craft". Now, the plots are not very similar. But a group of young women getting into witchcraft in the mid-1990s during the Wiccan craze? Suspicious. (And actually, this film came out the same year as "The Craft", so maybe the biggest issue was just poor timing.)
While I think it was great to see Jack Nance as the priest, and a nice cameo from Zelda Rubinstein, and heck... we even have the debut of Clea DuVall... this just was not a great movie and seems like little more than an excuse to show a group of young women naked.
I kept thinking this was a cheap version of "The Craft". Now, the plots are not very similar. But a group of young women getting into witchcraft in the mid-1990s during the Wiccan craze? Suspicious. (And actually, this film came out the same year as "The Craft", so maybe the biggest issue was just poor timing.)
- saint_of_all_liars
- Dec 30, 2007
- Permalink
In the grand tradition of B horror movies, this one does have nudity (not to disappoint the male viewers) and stereotypes its characters like crazy, but it was good and actually scary. These were mostly unheard-of actors but they all did a good job. Clea DuVall has gone on since to do other movies: The Faculty and She's All That to name a few. Sheeri Rappaport, Mimi Reichmeister and Jennifer Rubin all were excellent. This movie was a very very effective contribution to the horror genre.
- jlbat-674-76175
- Jul 10, 2012
- Permalink
I loved this movie..... It had the right ammount of rage and teen angst in it. The whole freaky nun thing was silly, but none the less added to the entertainment value of "little witches" I would say, go rent it...it's a good laugh.
- Lacywhitus
- May 2, 2002
- Permalink
- insomniac_rod
- Nov 22, 2006
- Permalink
This is not a great movie, much less a good one. But it was destined to go direct to video, so I shouldn't waste my time gnawing on the film's stupidity.
For all the guys out there...this movie has some great nude scenes. The girl who played the lead has that Katie Holmes sort of look. And she does a striptease in the film. Way cool!
If you feel like watching something witty and suspenseful like The Craft, this is not the one to watch. But if you feel in the mood for gratuitous nudity...check this one out!
For all the guys out there...this movie has some great nude scenes. The girl who played the lead has that Katie Holmes sort of look. And she does a striptease in the film. Way cool!
If you feel like watching something witty and suspenseful like The Craft, this is not the one to watch. But if you feel in the mood for gratuitous nudity...check this one out!
- mattymatt4ever
- Mar 28, 2001
- Permalink
Cheesy SFX. Nun poisoning. Catholic school girls performing black rituals in the nude. ...What's not to like?
Check out Clea DuVall, from the highly cool and woefully underrated THE FACULTY.
Check out Clea DuVall, from the highly cool and woefully underrated THE FACULTY.
This movie is absolutely terrible. If you want to see a movie that deals with the same content (witchcraft) yet has a much better story line, see "The Craft." However, if you want to see a movie dealing with many many nude teenage witches, this is probably up your alley. Sorry, it was just terrible.
- marc.melvin
- Jul 8, 2000
- Permalink
I mean, was this a student film?
So, I was looking for a fun witchy flick to watch on my day off. What I got was a train wreck masked as a movie.
I don't know much about the production of this, but I really hope that there is an excuse for how terrible it was. Low budget? I saw that they only had 2 weeks to film, so maybe that had something to do with it.
The lighting was low and sporadic. The sound was about the same, with poor choice in music. It was both unintriguing, distracting, and predictable.
The acting was as bad as a high school play... maybe worse, depends on the high school. The acting was HORRIBLE. I didn't believed any of the performances. It was almost like they picked people off the street with no skill or experience and threw them into this film on a whim.
Even the plot of this was boring and I found myself looking for other things to entertain my time while this movie was playing in the background.
Guys will love this though. There's plenty of naked girls to go around.
So, I was looking for a fun witchy flick to watch on my day off. What I got was a train wreck masked as a movie.
I don't know much about the production of this, but I really hope that there is an excuse for how terrible it was. Low budget? I saw that they only had 2 weeks to film, so maybe that had something to do with it.
The lighting was low and sporadic. The sound was about the same, with poor choice in music. It was both unintriguing, distracting, and predictable.
The acting was as bad as a high school play... maybe worse, depends on the high school. The acting was HORRIBLE. I didn't believed any of the performances. It was almost like they picked people off the street with no skill or experience and threw them into this film on a whim.
Even the plot of this was boring and I found myself looking for other things to entertain my time while this movie was playing in the background.
Guys will love this though. There's plenty of naked girls to go around.
But aren't they always? So a group of interchangeable girls find a demonic temple underneath their Catholic boarding school, and discover that a past group of students from 80 years ago tried the same thing and were all killed horribly.
Despite that, they try to summon the demon, for what reason, I'm not entirely sure. I guess so no one tells them what to do anymore.
Oh, when I say Hight School Girls, I mean girls in their 20s, because they never hire teenagers to actually play teenagers...
Look for guest appearances by that short lady from the Poltergeist films and Eric Peirpont from Alien Nation.
Despite that, they try to summon the demon, for what reason, I'm not entirely sure. I guess so no one tells them what to do anymore.
Oh, when I say Hight School Girls, I mean girls in their 20s, because they never hire teenagers to actually play teenagers...
Look for guest appearances by that short lady from the Poltergeist films and Eric Peirpont from Alien Nation.
I can not begin to tell you what a horrible movie "Little Witches" is... but I also cannot tell you what a huge "crush" (I am censoring myself there) I had when watching Sheeri Rappaport. Good God! She is a true beauty... and, yes, this is a horrible "Craft" rip-off. Unlike many, I enjoyed "The Craft" and its black humor, but besides Rappaport, there is little to like here. *Beware viewers, here you get to see an obese, jelly-rolled young actress dance fully naked around a well* DONT SAY I DIDNT WARN YOU!
Goth can be so much more sexy, so much more fun, and so much better. Half a star out of Four (the half comes from Ms. Rappaport).
Goth can be so much more sexy, so much more fun, and so much better. Half a star out of Four (the half comes from Ms. Rappaport).
- BlueFormicaHalo
- Sep 17, 1999
- Permalink
- Son_of_Mansfield
- Mar 8, 2007
- Permalink
- dutchchocolatecake
- Sep 27, 2013
- Permalink
Group of unexcited Catholic school girls, forced to board in for Easter Break decide it would be tons of fun to play with fire when they re-enact ancient voodoo/witchcraft curses. Poor (not to mention obvious) rip-off of THE CRAFT is lame pretty much the whole way through until the surprise climax ending and resolution. But, just because the last 2 minutes before credits is great, I wouldn't say that justifies BLOCKBUSTER rental prices. The movie is still lame.
- Access Sanctuary
- Jun 15, 2000
- Permalink
I have to say this movie deserves a lot more credit than it gets. It may have been made around the same time as The Craft, but it accomplishes a lot to set itself apart. The basic story is the same, naughty schoolgirls discover witchcraft, but the execution sets them apart. The girls in Little Witches are much more like real girls, unlike the polished cliches we get in The Craft. And while it may not have the special effects budget of a hollywood blockbuster, it does a great job with what it does have, a strong story and compelling characters. Modern, more "progressive" witches may find the views of witchcraft this movie carries to be archaic, but hey, dancing naked in circles is a favorite pasttime of witches. So even if the movie doesn't thrill you, you can at least revel in the nude scenes (if you're into that sort of thing, that is). Hands down a great find in the rental store, and it definitely deserves a dvd release of it's own.
- stooge999x
- Mar 26, 2004
- Permalink
This film has it all. The occult, Catholic girl's school, nudity, everything a male movie-goer could want. I haven't seen "The Craft" so I couldn't say if this film copies it or not. Mimi Reichmeister shines as the "good girl" who gets in over her head. She brings a fresh-faced innocence to the role. Too bad her career doesn't seem to be going anywhere.
Watching this movie was a waste of time....Nudity, for one thing....this was GROSS! Not only that, the storyline was quite dull and delusional. Rent something else if you see this movie on the shelf. I think "Dead-Alive" would be better than this! Heck, if you see this and don't have anything to rent, watch your television.