THE WITCHES OF EASTWICK (1987) ** Does Jack Nicholson dominate three aging but single lovelies, or does he just marginalize director George Miller? Depends on which plot you're following. Jack does all his great stuff, surely not type-cast as the Prince of Darkness, but in the order he chooses. I mean, yes, we all know that this is a man who has no difficulty bedding elite femmes e'en whilst his gut hangeth over and megastoned bovine characteristics fill the psychological space that other princes call couth. So that part's no problem. The difficulty is that he doesn't wait. He comes out with both barrels smoking, like Updike's plot, then they run out of ammo about the same time, which is where the climax should go. So Jack smirks and smiles and does a great body language tantrum and cajoles, and if Susan Sarandon, Michelle Pfeiffer and Cher aren't taken in by it they're at least intimidated, but that closing twenty minutes seems like Jack doing a Saturday Night Live skit of Johnny Carson in divorce court, or himself conducting an acting school on ether. Which is to say that it's not without its charms or even entertainment value, but there's no great urge to ever watch it again. Actually, it's probably the best part of the movie, in no small part because it doesn't belong with the rest. Sidney Pink might have best directed the big Jack head replete with giraffe neck that metamophosizes into a worm. Saddest, even Sarandon steps to the side to watch, thereby leaving the film without the strong female counterbalance that's the least that should be present in a film allegedly about the predominance of the female spirit.
back to Brilliant Observations on 1776 Films home
go back home, or send me email
no more reviews! I want to buy your novel!