Category Archives: horror

Battling Darkness

Battling Darkness is a documentary from 2013 which takes a look at the way the church deals with Exorcisms and how they’re portrayed by Hollywood on film.

Virginia Madsen was listed as taking part, I’ve half an interest in this kind of thing anyways and so naturally I was interested and found a copy, and…

… Well, let’s just say if I’d found a copy just for Virginia Madsen I might be a tad disappointed.

Which is to say, yes, she takes part in it… Just, not for very long. At all.

Battling Darkness is a 48 minute 2013 documentary that gets at spiritual warfare; the kind that’s about demons, exorcists, theology, and psychologists and all without pretending it’s anything but framed in a Christian worldview

It opens with a premise: the “visage of Satan” all but died before The Exorcist landed in 1973, and since Linda Blair’s possession, the world’s been obsessed with evil as both spectacle and reality.From there, we get quick cuts and talking heads. Psychologists, Exorcists, Pastors, and Linda Blair herself, all asking “is what Hollywood shows is Biblical or just sensationalism at its finest?”

They trot out the usual suspects for this kind of thing: Tony Campolo, Neil Anderson, Hank Hanegraaff, plus a Vatican certified exorcist, Father Gary Thomas And yeah, they toss in psychology, ask questions about possession versus mental illness, but the answer inevitably steers back to spiritual warfare as fact, not metaphor.

The trailer promises “examined with objectivity and insight”, but the lineup makes the tone clear: this is less “balanced academic inquiry” and more “Christian voices explaining the spiritual realm.”

(if you are reading between the lines here and thinking this kind of thing is wasted on me, then you’re right)

So what does it deliver?

If you’re already inclined to believe that demons are real, it’s a tidy little package: half-hour, familiar faces talking at you (note, not to you), some clips of exorcisms, a handful of psychologists for spice and seasoning.

You’re not getting peer reviewed studies or push back from prominent secular psychiatrists, this is all about getting you confirmation.

It’s what it says it is. No surprise reveals, no ideological sleight of hand.

If you walk in expecting clinical nuance, you’ll leave bored and / or annoyed by the absence of rigorous skepticism.

If you’re deep into evangelical spirituality or curious about what Christians consider spiritual warfare, it hits the expected notes. SURPRISE!

Virginia Madsen’s input is minimal, a quick comment on how dark The Exorcist is as a film, and that’s about the only contribution she makes to the whole thing – It’s a bit bizarre she’s in it at all, but… There we go.

Worth watching? Only if this is your lane. Long enough to provoke thought, short enough not to overstay its welcome.

Just don’t mistake it for a forensic or medical investigation.

It’s faith first, questions second which is comforting if that aligns with your worldview, frustrating if not.

As you may have guessed – I’ve little time for this kind of fluff – I don’t mind more balanced approaches, but things like this only serve to reinforce a view that already exists and either way, are a complete waste of time.

Availability:

You can find it on YouTube, and other places – I’ve not found it anywhere to buy though.

Trailer:

< Previous

Home

Next >

Prey for the Devil

Although Prey for the Devil falls very firmly on the “Virginia Madsen films I don’t really want to watch” list, I sat down to watch this one with a little bit renewed hope that it might not be as bad as it seems. Mainly because The Haunting in Connecticut had taken me by surprise, and in my mind they’re the same kind of film.

I was wrong – They aren’t the same kind of film – But, I digress.

Released in 2022, Prey for the Devil tries to put a fresh spin on the somewhat tired exorcism genre, blending the old tropes with a few new twists and a little slip of flair.

In this world, demonic possession has become so prevalent that the Catholic Church reopens schools for teaching exorcism rites. Typically, nuns aren’t permitted to perform exorcisms, let alone be trained in them, but Sister Ann (Jacqueline Byers) catches the eye of Father Quinn (Colin Salmon), who sees potential in her and agrees to abandon the old ways and train her.
But it can’t be that simple, Sister Ann’s investment in the exorcism world is personal. Her mother was possessed when she was a child, and she has never fully recovered from the trauma. It isn’t long before her quest becomes a little too personal, before you can bless some Holy Water she finds herself face-to-face with the same demon that terrorised her family years ago: quelle surprise

Virginia Madsen takes on the role of Dr. Peters, she’s a Psychiatrist who insists that most “possessions” are schizophrenia and adds an element of doubt, and perspective, to the supernatural goings on. She plays the role pretty straight, it’s sort of her Mum thing in a more professional setting. There’s a warmth to her that “gets it” when it comes to what Sister Ann is going through, and has gone through previously. It’s a small role, but she makes the most out of it and you won’t come away with any complaints about her.
Which is nice for Virginia, but what about the rest of the film?

Well. It’s… Not good. I mean. It’s – There is something in the film. I don’t actually think it’s that bad of an idea for a film, but somehow it gets lost with a lack of original thinking. It’s nearly good, but it fails so hard that it becomes hard to watch. It’s the usual stuff you’ve seen before and ultimately it lets itself down. It’s not that you’re angry at it, but you’re disappointed.

I wanted to like it. I was rooting for it, I wanted it to hit me with something that would make my jaw drop. But, it didn’t. And it could have, I know it could have. It was so close.
So. With a heavy heart, it’s hard to recommend this one just as a watch.

Availabilty:
Good. No problems finding this on DVD or Blu-Ray in whatever country you’re in it would seem. Also available on multiple streaming services depending on your location, or access to a VPN.

Trailer:

< Previous

Home

Next >

Better Watch Out

“Better Watch Out” I smirked to myself as I pulled it off the shelf, thinking I was clever. I’m not very funny, or clever as it turns out, but easily amused if you can’t tell.

This one was never going to be on top of my “to-watch” list. A Christmas Comedy Horror? Yeah, no. Put the words “Christmas Comedy” together in any context, and I’m already half checked out. Add “horror” into the mix, and… No.

But then there’s Virginia Madsen. And this site. So, yeah, here we are. Again.
Released in 2016, Better Watch Out is a [ahem] Christmas comedy-horror flick that made some waves in certain circles when it first hit. It didn’t quite break into the mainstream, but it had enough buzz to pique my interest. The film stars Olivia DeJonge as Ashley, a babysitter, and Levi Miller as Luke, her 12-year-old project for the night.

Luke has a bit of a crush on his 17-year-old babysitter, Ashley, and in classic horror-trope style, he’s convinced that with a little setup of a cozy horror movie marathon and “protection” from scary noises outside, he’ll be able to win her over. It’s a cute idea, or creepy, and definitely cringey.

As the plot unfolds, things take a dark turn. Instead of your typical lighthearted teen “romance”, strange things start happening outside the house. It soon becomes clear that things aren’t what they seem. If you’re familiar with the site, you know I’m all about leaving surprises intact. So let’s just say there’s an early twist that changes the whole tone of the story and turns it into something way darker than a typical “home invasion” setup. In it’s defence, it’s a Christmas horror film that actually pulls off a fresh take, blending horror, comedy, and psychological thriller in surprisingly balanced doses. And, that’s pretty high praise coming from me with this kind of film.

Virginia Madsen plays Deandra Lerner, Luke’s mother, and while it’s a relatively small role, she makes her presence known in those brief appearances, mainly in the beginning and end. Obviously, with Luke needing a babysitter, Deandra’s offscreen for much of the film, but Virginia brings her usual mix of warmth and just-right suburban-mom vibe, briefly.

No Oscars for anyone here, but thanks to Virginia Madsen, a touch of class.
Films like these are never going to change my mind about the whole sub-genre of them – BUT – As I said, this one gets a nod for at least trying to do something different. The twist I didn’t really expect and so maybe a nod, and a smile.

Bah humbug.

Availability:

Good on DVD and Blu-Ray – You shouldn’t have any problems with this one at all.

Trailer:

< Previous

Home

Next >

Give Me an A

Give Me an A is a film born out of necessity. It’s not a film that has been years in the making or a script that’s been bouncing around Hollywood for a decade.

[ahem] Before I go any further, let me make it clear: this isn’t a space to debate the political implications of what I say next. This film is a direct response to one of the most heated legal and media debates of the last few years. I fully support the film-makers’ right to express their outrage and defend their stance, but I’m not interested in engaging in conversation about it here. [/ahem]

With that said, let me give you some background on the film:

Roe vs. Wade was a landmark Supreme Court decision made in 1973, recognising a woman’s constitutional right to have an abortion without excessive government interference. It established that women had the right to make personal decisions about their reproductive health, particularly during the first trimester, and it set a legal precedent that protected those rights for nearly 50 years.

The problem?

Roe vs. Wade was overturned in June 2022. For millions of American women, it felt like a slap in the face. A basic human right, to be crystal clear – a freedom over one’s own body – was taken away. To say that this left people in shock is an understatement.

Reactions were varied, but one woman, Natasha Halevi, knew how she wanted to respond. Using her creativity and art, she set out to make a film that tackled the enormity of the decision.

And thus, Give Me an A was born. Conceived and completed in just three months, the film had its first release at the end of September 2022. Quite the impressive feat.

Give Me an A is an anthology film, made up of 16 short films woven into a single narrative. Each short uses a different genre, but the theme remains the same: women’s rights and what it means to have their reproductive rights stripped away. These stories explore where we’ve been, where we are, and where a decision like this could lead.

Breaking up these shorts is a group of cheerleaders. But these aren’t the stereotypical, bubbly cheerleaders you might expect. At the start, they seem happy-go-lucky, but as the films play out, you can see their demeanour shift. They go from passive, excited spectators to determined young women, warriors, even. By the end of the film, there’s no doubt that these girls aren’t here to play.

Virginia Madsen plays their coach, guiding them through this emotional transformation. She’s barely on screen, but her presence still matters. Normally, I might call this a waste of her talent, but in this project, nothing goes to waste. Every contribution feels deliberate and meaningful.
It’s an odd film, but a necessary one. The messaging is clear for all. I would hope at least. But here’s where I have my doubts; the people who need to see this most probably won’t watch it. They’re often complicit in their own ignorance, and that’s a real shame. Each short is designed to make people think about what’s right and wrong, but the people that support this film will likely already be on the side of women’s rights.

That said, I believe the film absolutely needs to exist. It’s a beacon of solidarity for the countless women out there who need to know they aren’t alone in their frustrations.

In many ways, this is a film that shouldn’t need to exist. But here we are. I could rant about why that is, but I won’t. And, trust me, I’ve already moderated myself quite a bit while writing this.

Would I recommend this film? All day long to those who should, or need, to see it.

Availability:

Not as great as it should be. It’s available on some VOD channels and as a Blu Ray release courtesy of Vinegar Syndrome.

Trailer:

< Previous

Home

Next >

Red Riding Hood

Aha! An angsty, teen-driven reimagining of a classic folk tale, just what I was looking forward to when starting this whole Virginia Madsen website.

Said no one. Ever. Not even me.

This Red Riding Hood remake from 2011, directed by Catherine Hardwicke and produced by Leonardo DiCaprio, boasts a cast that isn’t exactly scraping the bottom of the barrel. Amanda Seyfried, Gary Oldman, Julie Christie, and yes, Virginia Madsen are all on board. On paper, this should be half-decent.

I don’t think I need to explain Red Riding Hood. Little girl. Red cape. Big bad wolf. Big teeth. You know the drill.

Amanda Seyfried plays the red-caped heroine before red capes were really a thing, and she’s got two brooding hunks competing for her affection: Peter (Shiloh Fernandez), the bad boy woodcutter, and Henry (Max Irons), the good boy blacksmith.

The problem? Valerie’s heart belongs to Peter, but her mom, Suzette (Virginia Madsen), has arranged for her to marry Henry. Why? Well, because her mom promised, and it’s medieval times, where arranged marriages are the norm. Also, plot.
Then, just to add more plot, their village is terrorized by a werewolf. Enter Father Solomon (Gary Oldman), the grizzled werewolf hunter, with, a giant metal elephant. No, really.

Oieeee. If all this sounds a little sardonic, it’s because… Well, it is.

No, I did not enjoy this film. In fact, I switched it off halfway through. I remember seeing reviews that compared it to Twilight, which I’d half-forgotten about until the whole thing reminded me way too much of Twilight.

(Catherine Hardwicke would also be the one resonsible for bringing us the first Twilight film, she was reportedly fired after the first one, some might think this was an attempt to take on that franchise…)

Virginia Madsen does her best here, but even she couldn’t salvage it. Her hair and makeup are… a choice. And while her acting is solid, it’s all very soap opera (as is most of the cast, to be fair). I’ve said before how often her talents are wasted, but after watching this, I now truly understand how much wastage is possible.So, would I recommend Red Riding Hood? No. Unless you’re a die-hard Virginia Madsen collector, and even then I’d ask, “Do you really need this on your shelf?”

This is one for collectors only, to be filed away and probably never watched.

Availabilty:

Good. Because nobody wants to buy it… OK – So, yeah – It’s on DVD and a Special Edition 2 Disc Blu-Ray. You won’t have problems finding it currently.

Trailer:

< Previous

Home

Next >

Dead Rising: Watchtower

Dead Rising Watchtower is an original film from Crackle made in 2015 back when it was still a SONY thing. It’s based around the Dead Rising games from CAPCOM which was first released in 2006.

The game would have moderate success and spawn several sequels and add ons for those sequels. The first game’s protagonist, Frank West, would prove popular with audiences, being more of an everyday man than your typical gaming hero. He’s tough, gritty, grizzled, gnarly and is a photojournalist who also sports a wicked sense of humour, he’d be more relatable to most other gaming leads at the time.

Dead Rising Watchtower is not based specifically on any of the games, but instead places itself between the second and third games timeline wise.

It’s not the most original ever zombie film – Not necessarily a bad thing, I mean – There is only so much you can do with a zombie outbreak. Even the first Dead Rising game wasn’t the most original concept in the world other than its uniqueish gameplay element of being against the clock.
The characters in the film are mostly new characters for the film. The main protagonist of the first game, Frank West does feature as a supporting character but he’s not really a part of the main plot other than to provide a sort of commentary.

Virginia Madsen plays Maggie, she’s an original character for the film, although she does share some similarities to characters from the games universe. Of course, this isn’t Virginia’s first dance with Zombies, oh no. She faced off against them once before in the 1987 film, Zombie High. Well, kinda.

Can Dead Rising Watchtower fix the sins of the past and reinvigorate the world’s trust in Virginia Madsen zombie films? Can it reassure the world that all films based on video games aren’t terrible?

Well. Uhm. Erm.

Anyway…The film deals with the Zombie outbreak after it began. Internet Reporter Chase Cater (Jesse Metcalfe) alongside his Camera Operator Jordan Blair (Keegan Connor Tracy) are covering stories of people who are escaping the latest outbreak of the Zombie virus in East Mission, Oregon.

It’ll be no surprise for anyone to learn that things go wrong, the military get involved with some shady behind the scene population control stuff and it all kind of goes downhill from there.

I’ve said and or complained about films wasting Virginia Madsen’s talents before, and this one is no different. If you’ve seen the film, then you’ll know how hard this is to say without spoiling anything, and if you’ve not seen the film then thank me for this later;

Her death scene. That scene had no place in this movie. That scene should have been in a far better movie then this. That scene was both a waste of talent and a good movie scene.

Damn.

But, bonus Zombie Virginia Madsen afterwards…

But, still…

Virginia Madsen as Maggie in Dead Rising: Watchtower, now a zombie, holding hands with her daughter, who is also undead. They walk together into the open world beyond a dark warehouse, silhouetted against the daylight. In the background, an explosion erupts, sending debris flying. The scene is somber yet eerie, as the two zombies step into the light...

Bad and sad times indeed…

I say her talents are wasted in context of the spoiler, but truth be told she’s the adult in the room on this one and while none of the acting is particularly bad the main cast is made up of familiar faces from TV in similar roles to what you normally see them in, not a bad thing but not in the same league as Virginia Madsen either.

The movie itself isn’t that bad as far as films based on video games go. I mean, it’s unlikely it was ever going to be winning any awards, but the story is decent enough and fits in well with the universe it inherits from the games. It’s also fair to point out that the film can be enjoyed without any knowledge of the games, it does a good job of this.

It’s pretty easy to reccomend this if you’re a fan of Virginia Madsen, zombies and or video games, it’s not going to bore you to death and easily passes the time. There are far worse films from both genres you could be watching.

Even if you aren’t then it’s still a passable way to kill some time. And, if you do like this one then there is a sequel to be watched as well in the form of Dead Rising: Endgame. No Virginia Madsen in that one though I’m afraid…

Availability:

Good. Easy to find on DVD and Blu-Ray at the time of writing, and for cheap. Some streaming services also have to watch, rent or buy depending on your location or access to a VPN.

Gallery:

Dead Rising - Behind the Scenes 11 images

Trailer:

< Previous

Home

Next >

Karen Benjamin

The Portrait

I think of all the “new to me” films I’ve watched as part of this whole thing, The Portrait was one that was pretty close to the bottom of the list.

I’m not a fan of this particular type of horror, and I could tell from the trailer what kind it was going to be. And, you know… That’s OK – I won’t ever rubbish a film just because it’s not for me, but it doesn’t make me feel any better about watching them either. Truthfully, if Virginia Madsen’s name wasn’t attached I wouldn’t entertain it. BUT – I also had The Haunting in Connecticut in mind, I thought that was going to go one way and it didn’t, so…

The Portrait isn’t classed as horror, more a psychological thriller, but it amounts to the same thing in my mind. It’s a British film from 2023 and was released straight to digital markets.

Alex (Ryan Kwanten) suffers in an accident, he survives but he remains in a pretty much catatonic state and has no real memory of his life before. He’s alive but his interaction with the world around him is minimal at best. His wife, Sofia (Natalia Cordova-Buckley) is doing her best to look after him but is struggling.

In an attempt to jog his brain and his memory back into gear she takes him back to his family home in the hopes that being there will spark, something.

Not long after they arrive she comes across a portrait in the attic painted by a long dead relative of her husband. The thing is, he’s a dead ringer for her husband and Sofia becomes more and more convinced that something else is going on here the more she stares at it.
Not long after moving in, cousin Mags (Virginia Madsen) comes calling to check in. She seems to know a lot more about the family history and lets Sofia in on a few chilling details of the man in the portrait. It turns out he was gifted, but not so much of a nice chap – In fact he was pretty much run out of town not long after the portrait in question was finished.

From there, it’s pretty much Alex getting more and more out of character, Mags getting more and more mysterious and Sofia getting more and more concerned until things escalate and, well – Yes.
There aren’t many surprises to be had from this film unfortunately.

Virginia Madsen in this, isn’t at her best. But she doesn’t have much to work with either. Mags is almost like a Scooby Doo villain in this one (and not a good one like she played in Where’s my Mummy?), you know she’s up to no good – She might as well put a sign around her neck and ring a bell. All those sly and knowing looks she gives while employing every means of avoidance she can muster. You know the one.
Did I like it? – Well. I didn’t hate it. Would I recommend it? Well. Kind of, I mean if you like this kind of film, and I know lots do, then there are far worse examples of it out there you could go with, it’s actually quite a well made film. I think for me the story lets it down mainly.

Availability:

So far it’s not had a physical release so you’ll need to purchase it digitally if you want to see it. It’s available on Amazon Prime, or check your usual service to see if they have it.

Trailer:

< Previous

Home

Next >

Candyman (2021)

But wait! I hear you scream. “Virginia Madsen wasn’t in the new Candyman film!” you continue.

Yes, yes I know she wasn’t, but at the same time she technically is and all the other Virginia Madsen filmography pages include it so I am as well.

The 2021 version of Candyman is a sequel, reboot and or continuation of the original 1992 film. Once again the legend of the Candyman is investigated, this time by a young artist by the name of Anthony McCoy (Yahya Abdul-Mateen II). He eventually comes up with an art piece for his exhibition entitled “Say My Name”, a reference to the Candyman legend.

This causes two art critics at the exhibit to start messing around and being clever and they inadvertently summon the Candyman back into existence, but this isn’t Daniel Robitaille, this is Sherman Fields (Michael Hargrove), another young man accused of a crime and unduly punished for it.

As the killing and mystery surrounding them grow deeper, so does Anthony’s curiosity of Candyman, he begins to dig deeper and eventually ends up looking into the events of the original Candyman movie, specifically Helen Lyle.

And this is where Virginia Madsen does appear, well, her voice at least – Anthony takes a file from the local library which has all the details of Helen Lyle and her investigation years before. Part of that file includes her original audio tapes, and there it is. Virginia Madsen’s voice in the new Candyman film.

Tadah!

It’s a stretch, I know – But like I said, everyone else is doing it – So…

I obviously would not or could not recommend this film based on Virginia Madsen’s role, and her acting here is literally something we’ve seen her do before. So, yeah. It is what it is here.

If you do want to check it out for this alone then the scene takes place at about 39 minutes into the movie in the movie.
The film itself? – Well – Yeah, if you liked the original film then you should get along with this one just fine. It hammers it’s point home with the least subtle brick you can imagine, but it’s worth a watch all the same. It’s a good continuation of the Candyman mythos and I hope they’ll make more going forward.

Availability:

Good, it’s relatively new and can be picked up on DVD and Blu-Ray quite easily.

Trailer:

Candyman

Candyman, Candyman, Candyman, Candy… No. Wait.

… Candyman surely needs little to no introduction, it is without doubt what most of the general public probably think of when they hear the name Virginia Madsen.

And if, for some inexplicable reason, they don’t know her name you can probably go with “she was the one in Candyman” and most people would get a sudden expression of realisation on their face, and hopefully remember the name Virginia Madsen forever more.

Candyman is a film from 1992, it was written and directed by Bernard Rose and taken from a short story by Clive Barker, “The Forbidden”. The Candyman himself is played by Tony Todd, the film follows the story of Helen Lyle (Virginia Madsen) as she investigates the mythos of various Urban Legends for her college thesis. As part of her research she comes across the Candyman story and the folklore around it.
The Candyman is given credit for a series of killings in the modern day, which seems preposterous to Helen.

The more she learns about the origin of the Candyman, the deeper she gets invested in the lore until she eventually meets the literal man, the myth and the legend.

At its core, it’s a slasher flick as was all the rage at the time. But it’s an intelligent one, it’s not simply a gorefest as many as its contemporaries were at the time. It’s got an underlying meaning behind it all which goes deeper than most.
Candyman, or should we call him Daniel Robitaille, isn’t a traditional monster in the true sense of the word, he was wronged and while he does seek his vengeance it isn’t without justification. I think many of the other “Slasher” flicks more or less all feature a protagonist who was “evil” before they became the monster.

Or at least the ones that instantly spring to my mind at least, Freddy Krueger, Jason Voorhees and Michael Myers – I’m not sure if that’s just my age showing there though – The newer wave of ‘Slasher’ movies don’t seem to follow the same tropes.

As Virginia Madsen herself told The Moving Picture;

“I think it would be different if Tony Todd’s character were a monster. But he’s not a monster — he’s a phantom. He is like Dracula, a romantic phantom. He’s beautiful, he’s seductive, he wants you to join him in immortality.”

Not going to lie – I don’t know how much I can add to the whole ‘Candyman’ thing here, and I don’t know if I even want to after going deeper into search results than I normally would while researching this. I mean, wow… There are some interesting takes on it out there.
Hell, after reading some of the stuff about the film and its implications I’m not even sure I’m qualified to write about the film on a site about collecting other films from one of the actresses in it.

And, that’s all this site is – So, I’ll leave those conversations and observations for another site on another day.

As for Virginia Madsen as Helen Lyle? Spot on. While there is no doubt that the film would have seen the same levels of success without her, I do genuinely think Candyman does benefit from having someone of her caliber play this lead role. It’s pretty well known at this point that the way Bernard Rose directed some of the scenes in Candyman was unconventional to say the least. In the scenes which have Candyman and Helen together, Virginia would be hypnotised beforehand which kind of gives it / her an ethereal quality for want of a better way of putting it.

Is it worth a watch if you’ve never seen it? – Well, yeah – Candyman has its detractors and was originally released to mixed reviews but I think over time more and more people have come to appreciate the film more than ever. It’s often referred to as one of the best adaptations of Clive Barkers work on film.
The Candyman legend would continue in two direct sequels, Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh (1995) and Candyman: Day of The Dead (1999) and more recently a fourth entry into the franchise reverting back to the original title Candyman (2021) which could be considered both a reboot and a sequel.

It’s almost a shame that the Helen Lyle character wasn’t followed up on, properly at least. I used to harbour some hope we’d get to see Virginia Madsen reprise the role at some point, but I think even I have to admit that it’s very unlikely at this point.

Availability:

Yeah, I think if you walked far enough you could literally trip over a copy of this film in one form or another. Freely available on DVD and Blu-Ray at the time of writing, with a special 4K release from Arrow Video also kicking around quite freely still.

Gallery:

Candyman - Production Stills 15 images

Trailer:

Press Kit:

< Previous

Home

Next >

The Prophecy

The Prophecy is a film I’d not watched in a very long time before starting this Virginia Madsen rewatch thing and I was quite looking forward to watching it again.

It’s a thriller from 1995 which brings the Angels of Heaven down to Earth to battle for the souls of humanity. It stars Christopher Walken as Gabriel as he stalks the Earth looking for an evil soul on Earth to use in his battle against Lucifer.

Which, means the film can’t go wrong. Right? I mean, Christopher Walken as a millitarised Angel in a fight of literal biblical proportions. Right?

The film is set in Los Angeles, we primarily follow Thomas (Elias Koteas), a Detective who used to full to the brim of Catholic faith but it was lost when he kept getting visions of an Angelic war up in Heaven.

In the modern day, two Angels have fallen to Earth. Simon (Eric Stoltz) and Uziel (not Eric Stoltz). Simon makes short work of Uziel which leaves Thomas with a crime and a body to investigate, he just happens to have connections to it all from his Catholic days. Handy.
Gabriel arrives on Earth in search of an Evil soul he needs to tip the balance of Good and Evil in the heavenly wars. To help him in his quest he stops a young man, Jerry (Adam Goldberg), from committing suicide. Jerry sets about destroying all evidence of Angels that have been left behind by Simon and Uziel. Meanwhile Simon has made his way to the funeral of a recently deceased Korean warlord. He takes the warlords soul and stashes it in the body of a very much alive young girl.

This is the soul that Gabriel needs for his war, obviously.

The soul is too much for the little girl to handle, she immediately falls ill. Her teacher, Katherine (our own Angel, Virginia Madsen) finds her and takes her home to care for her.

And then it’s all Angels, Demons, Lucifer and all other things biblical. I won’t go into detail as there is half an interesting take on it all stashed away in there somewhere if you’ve never seen it.

Time hasn’t been as kind to this one as I’d hoped. I mean, it’s not bad as such but you can’t help but wonder what more could have done with the material today. Christopher Walken seems somehow, as though he wasn’t quite ready to be Christopher Walken just yet.

It’s not that it’s bad, at all. I used to enjoy The Prophecy, and it’s sequels. But it’s just not aged all that well. By my standards anyways. I found myself a little disenchanted with it. Rose colour glasses at play methinks.

Virginia plays her part well, as always. She’s probably not given as much to chew on as she could have been but it’s not the first film to waste her talent and it isn’t the last one either. It is however good to see her each and every time she’s on screen.

The Prophecy would get two sequels featuring Christopher Walken, and then two more after that (which I’ve never seen) but Virginia wouldn’t return for any of those.

Probably for the best, although she had a good time on the movie and worked with people she really wanted to work with, the film itself didn’t sit that well with her according to her in an interview with The AV Club;

“That was not a real movie. That was, like, one of those completely ridiculous situations where they didn’t even have a whole script when we went in to shoot. But it was a good idea. The movie was a really, really good idea. And the director [Gregory Widen] was the writer of Backdraft, so we thought we were in good hands. Like, “Oh, he’ll be able to write it if it’s not done!” But it’s impossible to write as you go. That’s just something that never works, no matter how talented people may think they are.”

Might be for the best I’ve never seen the sequels then…

Availability:

Very good, available on DVD almost anywhere you can think of and had a 4K UHD release not that long ago along with the two Christopher Walken staring sequels.

Gallery: