A Disappointing Continuation

Instead, you get a movie that's enjoyable enough, but leaves you feeling like it could have been much, much more.

The film was still a fun one that will make you laugh and have you leaving the theater feeling like you just stole something valuable and got away with it.

A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

This drive-in schlockfest has Pamela Franklin starring as a Los Angeles woman who moves to a bizarre small town in Northern California with her husband (Michael Ontkean) where he is to be employed for a toy company. The longer she spends there, the more disconcerted she becomes over the influence his boss, Mr. Cato (Orson Welles), has on the townspeople, which consist exclusively of young, fresh-faced hippies with a taste for all things occult."Necromancy" had a troubled release history and was apparently re-edited to some degree in the early 1980s and re-released as a softcore film under the title "The Witching Hour"; the cut of the film I saw was apparently an early R-rated cut under the "Necromancy" title that is allegedly close to writer-director Burt Gordon's original vision, if you want to call it that. "Necromancy" as a whole feels like a "vision" of sorts-a hazy, drugged-out romp through Manson family-era California, with a supernatural twist. It suffers terribly from disjointed editing and a general lack of cohesion, which is disappointing given that the narrative is actually quite straightforward.The film will remain an eternal curiosity for Welles's involvement, though his role is minimal and his presence generally underwhelming. The lovely Pamela Franklin (who many genre fans know and love from "The Innocents" and "Legend of Hell House") is a formidable lead and does what she can with the material; a strappingly handsome Michael Ontkean plays her husband and is less impressive but still has a likable screen presence; and Lee Purcell (later of Wes Craven's TV schlocker "Summer of Fear") is aptly doe-eyed and dead-faced as a distant member of the town/coven trying to revive Welles's dead son.The film has a clever albeit rather standard twist that gives it a fun bite considering most of it is rather straightforward despite its acid-trip aesthetics. In the end, the film suffers greatly from serious disjointedness (presumably because it is so badly edited), but there are some ominous, utterly bizarre (and sometimes eerie) visuals throughout that are distinct to the era. Ultimately, what we have here is a drive-in-calibre occult flick, which, depending on who you are, may or may not be a complete delight. For visuals alone, I feel it's worth watching, though it does present itself as a serious case of "what might have been." 7/10.

If you go to a town named Lilith to live, you should not be surprised that the town is run by devil worshippers. If Orson Welles comes to you in a robe and his name is Mr. Cato, you should not be shocked to learn that he wants to use you to raise his son from the grave. What is surprising is that for a movie promising rituals and raising the dead, Necromancy isn't all that exciting.Directed by Bert I. Gordon (War of the Colossal Beast, Picture Mommy Dead), the master of rear projection, this film is all about Lori Brandon (Pamela Franklin, The Legend of Hell House, And Soon the Darkness), a woman who has recently lost a child. She moves with her husband, Richard (Michael Ontkean, Sheriff Harry S. Truman from Twin Peaks) to the aforementioned town of Lilith to start over again.On the way there, they get in an accident and kill a woman, but it's totally glossed over because this is 1972. Life was cheap. At least Lori gets a baby doll out of this accident.There used to be a sign in my hometown that said, "What Ellwood City makes, makes Ellwood City." The town of Lilith makes one thing: the world's finest occult paraphernalia. There's one great scene here with Lori sees her image inside a tarot card, a really evocative scene thrown away in a film that is otherwise less than memorable.If you've seen Rosemary's Baby, you know exactly how this is all gonna turn out. If you are the star of a 1970's horror movie — especially if you are Donald Sutherland — expect to die. Horribly.Much like the devil, Necromancy goes by many names, such as The Witching, A Life for a Life, Horror-Attack, Rosemary's Disciples and The Toy Factory. When Paragon Video re-released it on VHS in 1982, they chopped out tons of story and dialogue to insert scenes of nude witches like Brinke Stevens and even more Satanic rituals.As much as I love Orson Welles — we'll have a whole month of his films at some point, I'm certain — this is not his finest hour. He has some fine speeches, but the material is Mrs. Paul's level. Beneath him.

The only previous Gordon film I had watched was the kiddie adventure THE MAGIC SWORD (1962), though I followed this soon after with EMPIRE OF THE ANTS (1977); he seems to be best remembered, however, for his sci-fi work of the 1950s.Anyway, I happened upon this one in a DVD rental shop: hadn't I noticed Orson Welles' unmistakable figure on the sleeve, I probably wouldn't even have bothered with it – since I know the film under its original title, NECROMANCY! I'd seen a still from it on an old horror tome of my father's: the actor's presence in a film about diabolism seemed like a great idea which couldn't possibly miss, but the end result – particularly in this bastardized edition – is a disaster! I honestly felt sorry for Welles who looks bored and, rather than in his deep and commanding voice, he mutters the inane demonic invocations almost in whispers!! The plot is, basically, yet another retread of ROSEMARY'S BABY (1968): a couple is invited to a remote community under false pretenses and soon discover themselves to be surrounded by diabolists. The girl, played by Pamela Franklin, ostensibly has supernatural powers (passed on from her mother, who appears intermittently throughout to warn her – though, as delivered in an intense manner through clenched teeth, the latter's speeches end up being largely incoherent and the fount of immense hilarity every time she appears!) and is expected to revive Welles' deceased young son from the dead!! For what it's worth, Franklin – a genre regular, right down from her debut performance in THE INNOCENTS (1961) – isn't bad in her role (which requires some nudity and experiences several semi-eerie hallucinations during the course of the film); hubby Michael Ontkean, however, isn't up to the challenge of his John Cassavetes-like character. Some of the other girls look good as well – notably Lee Purcell, whose belated decision to help Franklin in escaping from town eventually proves her undoing.Events come to a head in an incredibly muddled climax, which sees the Satanists ultimately turning on Franklin and have her take the revived boy's place in the coffin (that's gratitude for you!). While the added scenes do stick out (the hilarious opening ceremony and other would-be erotic embellishments), the overall quality of the film would have still been poor without them; then again, this particular version is further sunk by the tacked-on electronic score – which is wholly inappropriate, and cheesy in the extreme!

A curious low budget horror film, it has two very talented performers at the head of the cast: Pamela Franklin, of 'The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie' and Orson Welles, of many great films. The script does not give either of them the opportunity to maximise their acting potential though, and in fact, the whole story is fairly predictable, quite ordinary or worse. Still, there are a number of atmospheric segments in the film, with fitting music and camera-work setting the mood. It is excessively dark, the odd sound effects are jarring and the cheap special effects do it no good. However, there are some effective moments in the mix. It is not a very good film overall, but it does have some interesting elements. And, for what it is worth, Franklin's acting at times is quite natural.