FieCrier Witchcraft 10 ended with LAPD Detective Lutz returning home from England, with the papers necessary to join Interpol's Bureau 17 if she wished. In this one, there's no mention of that, so it seems she chose not to do so. She's reunited with her partner Garner, who had stayed home during her trip, as well as her short skirts and high heels.Will Spanner is back, with his fiancé Kelly Jordan. I'm supposing this is his girlfriend Keli of parts 5, 6, 7, and 9. However, she doesn't seem to remember having met Lutz and Garner before, or having learned of Will's witchcraft skills, which Keli had. Will and Kelly go to visit her atheist sister Colleen at the Catholic college where she is studying drama.Colleen is rehearsing for a role as one of the three witches in Shakespeare's Macbeth "Double, double toil and trouble; Fire burn, and cauldron bubble." In fact, writer/director Ron Ford said his original title for this was Witchcraft XI: The Weird Sisters. Their professor is not pleased with how they perform it, and he and the most assertive of the three women, Keri Burston, feel they should go to a ceremony and perform a real witchcraft ceremony to lend their performance credibility. There, they will try to revive three sisters who'd been executed for witchcraft who had tried to conjure Abaddon and open a gate to hell.The ceremony gives them all an opportunity (one of many) to take their tops off. Naturally, they're spied upon by three horny college guys, and when one of them dies, Detective Lutz and Garner show up to investigate. Meanwhile, the redheaded would-be Shakespearean Maria Fitzwater becomes possessed by one of the witch sisters.Things get worse, and Will and Kelly try to save Colleen, while Lutz and Garner continue to investigate. There's a lot of nudity in this one, from Kelly, the three lovely young college students (I was surprised this appears to be the only film any of the three have been in), and Lutz. There's considerably more blood and gore than most entries in the series, including a face chomping, and someone being torn limb from limb.Certainly not a great movie by any measure, but fairly entertaining, and I've found them to grow on me a bit the more titles in the series I see. Acting in this one isn't as bad as in some of the other later titles. There's a curious cameo by early film star Anita Page as a nun who knows something about the three witches; IMDb's page for her has a number of photos of her from the '20s and '30s. The sound is definitely better, with the dialogue being pretty clear at all times, whereas in some others it was poorly recorded or drowned by the soundtrack.

bfan83 I love the Witchcraft series! They have everything a bad horror series needs! Death, sex, nudity, bad acting, bad writing, and bad directing. Oh! And the beautiful Stephanie Beaton! God, this woman is beautiful! I found this movie to be gorier then the others for some reason. But I credit that to Ron Ford(who also played the killer in The Bagman!) One thing that did p*** me off, was that this movie had more sex scenes than any of the others! I definitely think this series has become total soft-core porn! They definitely need to retire this series!

mattymatt4ever I rented this movie from Netflix with no high expectations and got what I expected. It's a laughably bad horror film with laughably bad acting and a laughably bad story. But this one leaned a lot towards softcore porn. B-horror movies are known to be rife with female nudity, but this movie has a naked breast in practically every scene. And this is the R-rated version! Assuming there is an unrated version, I can't imagine how much skin there'll be in that flick. As a matter of fact, without the witchcraft plot and a couple of gruesome f/x, this could be passed off as soft porn. Like soft porn, the characters find any excuse to take off their clothes and get it on.Rather than cringe throughout the film, I just decided to have fun with it. I'm an aspiring actor, so I looked at it is an instructional video for "What Not To Do When You're Acting." I would try to take notice the moments where the actors make a facial expression, which are few and far between. So it's kind of like playing a road game where you're trying to point out every license plate from a certain state. In this case, it was like driving around New Jersey and trying to point out all the Texas license plates. I would try to compile a list of who the worst actors were and the who the best were (or lesser of evils). The laughably bad acting distracted me from the plot. Yes, it has a plot (I didn't say it's a good one, though). But whatever I was missing couldn't have been much.Besides, when a hot, ample-breasted chick pops up topless in almost every shot, what am I doing complaining? However, the director could've made the lesbian scenes more erotic. The scenes would last pretty long, but all the girls do is kiss. And that sleep-inducing score also distracted me. Rather than having an erotic score that intensifies the eroticism of the sex scenes, we hear this cheesy elevator music which belongs in a Lifetime movie. Though I had fun with the movie, after watching it I felt like I just fried a billion brain cells. I had to watch Alfred Hitchcock's "Frenzy" afterwards to restore my brain power.My score: 6 (out of 10)

knucklesblowthrower This movie is definitely soft-core porn. That's its downfall. Had this been a straight horror flick it would have been much better. Cinemax, HBO, and Showtime should pay attention to this. Notice:Soft-core horror flicks are bad. Worse than horror flicks. Worse than soft-core porn movies. If this movie is so bad, you may ask, how did I end up looking at it? Well, a friend popped it in, then left the room. You may think, to subject someone to this horrible movie, he's not that good a friend. The jury's still out on that verdict. The sexual interludes actually made this film worse. I was actually checking my watch during the sexual interludes. If this happens to you during a soft-core porn flick that's a very, very bad sign. In fact if this movie had just resorted to removing the sexual interludes I no doubt would have scored it higher than a 1. But I bet you're wondering, how do the sex scenes in a soft-core porn flick make it worse. If anything that's supposed to make it better, right? For Witchcraft XI, WRONG! If you haven't seen this flick yet and want to (though if you do, I feel very sorry for you, my friend), you may want to skip the next sentence and read on, cause I think I may be dropping a spoiler. This is why the sex scenes made this movie worse: In one scene one of the witches resurrects one of her sisters, then they proceed to get naked and have sex. I actually had to stop and say, "What the F***!" And I don't care if it is a soft-core horror flick, Spirits holding you down, pulling your shirt up, and raping you is never a good idea in a movie. Almost as bad as the tree-rape scene in whatever movie it was. I did have to admit that Officer Lutz deserved it more than anyone else, a payback so to speak for her being such a Queen C*nt throughout the movie. And with those hoish clothes she wore, more suited to a streetwalker than a police officer, I kind of had the feeling something sick like that would happen. I mean, when the first scene of a movie is a sex scene, you know two things. 1. That it's a soft-core porn flick. 2. That it's gonna be one good movie. Well, I was right about the first thing, but horribly, horribly wrong about the second. If you value a critic's opinion (and most people don't), then listen to what I have to say. I've seen plenty of horror flicks and plenty of soft-core porn flicks as well. If you're a fan of either (I happen to be a fan of both), avoid Witchcraft XI (and the other Witchcraft movies if they're any bit as bad as this embarrassment) like it's a person with the flu and you haven't had your flu shots. It's that bad. If you see this movie, I promise you will regret it.