This Movie Can Only Be Described With One Word.

The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

Amazing worth wacthing. So good. Biased but well made with many good points.

It really made me laugh, but for some moments I was tearing up because I could relate so much.

I'm in the process of binge watching the Witchcraft franchise and am fast starting to think this is the worst movie series of all time.Here in the 5th part we see the return of William the warlock, except now he's played by a different actor as I'm sure the last guy had enough.He's spellbound by a rival warlock who uses him to collect souls for satan, or something.With some of the worst overacting I've ever seen and sex/nudity in every other scene this really pushes for the title of worst Witchcraft movie. I'm not sure it is, but it's certainly on par.I'd recommend the Witchcraft franchise thus far to people who like *Ahem*, people who are into *Hmmmm* guys and gals I don't like? *Shrugs*The Good:Boobs, what? I'm a simple manThe Bad:SFX that hurt my brainAntagonist is hammy to ridiculous levelsCringe inducingDull plotThings I Learnt From This Movie:I didn't know Ronnie James Dio was a warlockPoor girl, her top keeps falling off

Rather than comment on the lack of (insert any number of obvious points on what makes for a 'good' film here) as so many people often do with this flick, I shall try and elaborate on it's luster. Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending it's honour, since it doesn't have any. On the other hand, 'Dance with the Devil' is slammed so often that it just breaks my heart. I am, as some may know, a real and in-the-flesh fan of this film series but I do not expect anyone to sympathize with me for any of my kind words towards these pictures. I'm simply exercising my right to free speech and so now I shall...Forget about the story, the acting & dialogue, the FX (as they would be called were this a film with any sort of budget) and the myriad of other distractions. The focus here is very evidently on the sex and the copious sex scenes which drive the movie (right into soft porn land).In addition to said sex element, what I find delightful and most memorable about this movie is it's tone- especially in the early scenes- where the use of soft (mostly blueish) colours and what I find to be a VERY, VERY seducing musical score by Miriam Cutler (yes, really, I am actually a fan and know who did the music. Just lay off me man!) create a mood & finesse that the earlier instalments simply didn't have. The costumes in the movie are brilliant, from Marta's slutty tight dress and sheer night gown to 'homo-esque Hoffman's' see-it-to-believe-it Warlock garb. It's a visual orgasm I tell you. And that's before we arrive at the sex scenes... believe it!The movie barely hangs together as it chugs along, but the intermittent sex scenes do provide a timed release of interest in an otherwise drab muddle of what is either ultimate camp or just sad film-making... maybe both.But with scenes that feature lines like "I bet what you've got is real nice too!", how can you beat up on such a lovable mess of sexy entertainment? Somebody please, tell me?? And check out that artwork on the VHS box cover- it's f*****g lovely!!! (Check out my review of Witchcraft X too!)

I'm sure you've already read the plot so if you can look through the cheesy special effects and dreadful, monotonous music every time the bad girl gets it on it isn't bad. The chief warlock looks ridiculous and the bad girl can't act to save her life but she looks great in a see through nightdress so who's complaining.For me I'm a sucker for big natural boobs and the blonde bad girl has them and we get to see them. I don't watch these kind of films for the plot or comment on society so a pair of big, non fake breasts being squeezed and covered in sweat works every time. Some of the other girls aren't bad. A shower scene between the good guy and his girl is OK but she's got fake ones and thus not for me that sexy.

I can go on and on and on about what's wrong with this film, but why bother? It's no fun pointing out the flaws of a movie that's supposed to be bad. And if the makers of this crap thought they were doing a masterpiece--may God have mercy on their souls.I am just gonna be frank. I read a review for the movie in my Blockbuster Video Guide saying that it contains "exposed breasts galore." Well...they were right. Lots of gratuitous shots of large, surgically-enhanced (I'm guessing) breasts. What's a crappy horror movie without the gratuitous nudity? Exactly!The acting and f/x (if that's what you call 'em) are so inexplicably bad that I had to wrestle my hand off the "Stop" button. Maybe it's because I'm an aspiring filmmaker and actor myself. A low budget is no excuse. Look what Kevin Smith did with the micro-budget comedy "Clerks." John Carpenter's pockets weren't exploding with cash when he made "Halloween." But when he did the killing sequences, instead of explicitly showing us the blood and gore, he left it up to the audience's imagination. And he still scared the pants off many viewers! In one scene of this movie, the villain sticks a sword through this guy's stomach and we suddenly cut to this stupid close-up shot of the blood dripping off the sword, as if we're supposed to believe it actually got pushed through his body. As for the computer-generated f/x...what the hell was that! They must've stole 'em off someone's screensaver!If I have anything good to say, this film is good for a few laughs. Unintentional laughs, that is. They should've at least used a tongue-in-cheek approach. That way we can be laughing WITH them. And of course, if you wanna watch some good nude scenes that's a plus. But you can always save yourself the trouble and rent a flick from Surrender Cinema. That way you won't have to wear out the "Fast-Forward" control as much. My score: 2 (out of 10)