The Witches of Eastwick (1987) review or how I much preferred the series ;-P

Whew, I’m finally up to date on my film diary *grin*


The Witches of Eastwick (USA, 1987)

Seen: Sunday, 23rd May 2010
Runtime: 118′
Director: George Miller
Cast: Jack Nicholson, Cher, Susan Sarandon, Michelle Pfeiffer, Veronica Cartwright
Production House: Warner Bros. Pictures, The Guber-Peters Company, Kennedy Miller Productions
Plot: (from imdb)

Three single women in a picturesque village have their wishes granted - at a cost - when a mysterious and flamboyant man arrives in their lives.


Rating: -1 (Disliked It.)

Impressions In Short
Ironically, just as with Eastwick it was Darryl Van Horne that hooked me, here it was Darryl Van Horne that repulsed me :] It’s not just that Jack Nicholson’s performance is very different, but the character itself is written in a very different vibe.

More About the Film
I think firstly, the story works much better when it has time to develop slowly. In the series the witches discover their powers slowly, their friendship develops gradually and it takes Darryl much more time to be accepted into their circle.
But my main bug with this film is Darryl :] He annoyed me so much I even considered rating the film -2. In the end I decided on -1 because I did sort of enjoy the story, plus I rather liked Cher and Michelle Pfeifer (Susan Sarandon not so much - too exaggerated).
In this version Darryl effortlessly woos three women and he only needs one meeting with each to get them in bed with him. The thing is that considering how Darryl is written and performed that just doesn’t make sense to me. Nicholson does have a huge screen presence of course, but his version of Darryl isn’t all that magnetic, so why would all those women throw themselves at his feet? I see what attracts him to those particular girls, but I just don’t see what attracts the girls to him - especially three such diverse ones (which I assume means they would all be attracted to very different types of men). Yes, all three of them are desperate for a man, who would “get them”, but that’s the thing - IMO he’s just as chauvinist as the rest of the men in their lives. I couldn’t make up my mind whether the way that Darryl is supposedly so understanding and appreciative of them as women was comical or offensive :] My top most “WTF?” scene was Darryl telling Suki that he always wanted to be a woman. When she asks him why he answers that because they can have babies and produce milk. Is that all being a woman means to Darryl then? And why on Earth would that line charm Suki? Ugh…
It was a huge contrast to the way they did Darryl in the series. I suppose part of the reason I find the Darryl in the series much easier to stomach is because when he’s being very lewd and rude he generally doesn’t score (which is more realistic I think ;-P) and it helps that Paul Gross is much funnier than Jack Nicholson when he’s being lewd ;) The girls are a lot more distrustful towards him as well. He really does have to put a lot of work into earning their trust. Also, Paul Gross works very well as a female wet dream kind of thing - he’s got the classic tall, dark and handsome kind of looks and they really made use of this in the series. Like the Darryl in the movie, the Darryl in the series is into the whole “I understand women” thing, but it works much better. When he invites the three of them to dinner and declares he loves being “one of the gals” he’s much easier to believe - he really seems to enjoy and join into their gossip.

Er, IMO nope - watch the series instead ;)

Leave a comment