 Thanks for checking out this movie review video. So this is for the 1968 film Witchfinder General I've heard a decent amount about the film here and there over the many decades and Obviously because it's a much older film and this is actually considered to be one of Vincent Price's best Performances, it's actually considered by well was considered by price himself to be his best performance I think he really enjoyed himself in this role as well And you know you can see that he's kind of soaking it up, but I would argue that this isn't his best role I mean he did a really good job because Vincent Price, you know, he always did a really good job I'd like to me even more in House on Haunted Hill to be honest, but you know, he says it to his best performance I'll take his word for it. I guess but here we go Directed by Michael Reeves who also directed she beast and the sorcerers. That's two separate titles Also written by Reeves and Tom Baker who wrote the script for the sorcerers and that was the only other script he had done Also known as the conqueror worm is what this film is. I don't really know how that ties into the actual film I mean which finder general makes sense because even at one point he says, oh, you know, they're they're thinking of you Know they're you know what they're calling me around here stern. They're calling me witch finder general Maybe that's something that'll catch on I Like that moment. It shows the arrogance of Hopkins Pretty good. Vincent. Oh, yes, exactly it almost didn't actually happen with Vincent Price playing the role of Hopkins in this because apparently the director Reeves Initially wanted Donald Pleasants to play the role of Hopkins Now, I don't know why it ended up not being Donald Pleasants But they went with Vincent Price and obviously things came out just fine for the film because it's a price man He does a great job between the last 15th and late 18th centuries Sorry between the late 15th and the late 18th centuries 500 people were executed for the charge of witchcraft Two-thirds actually were because of Hopkins himself who didn't even live to see the age of 30 So to give you an idea of how tyrannical Hopkins really was just consider that a total of 500 people over centuries were executed for witchcraft and of that two-thirds were because of hops hopkin himself and he I mean it had to be a period of what like 10 years at most that he was doing this so Pretty tyrannical pretty awful Just a bloodthirsty piece of garbage obviously Price fell from his horse on the first day of filming apparently and Reeves the director refused to speak with him in hopes that it would actually Make him angry and fuel his performance now I don't know if that it actually ended up happening because I'm not sure the price actually commented on that but I thought that was a Interesting approach you find that more and more with the older films and the in the stories you hear about directors back then That they were doing you know terrible things like that basically like intentionally trying to piss off their Actors and actresses because they feel like oh well, this will get a better performance out of them You know it shows a level of arrogance But it also shows that they're not that bright because if you have an actor and or actress Involved in this film didn't you hire them because you think they're good at what they do like I it shows this extra level of Control that is just too much. Yeah, I feel like it's really overstepping the bounds You worry about directing and the cinematography and all that stuff. Don't worry about the actors They will take care of themselves. They will come to you and ask if they need something Anyway, it's thought that was an interesting story. So the opening scene is effective at showing the atrocity of killing witches It's very kind of chaotic with the woman being drawn dragged to the Gallows to be hung for witchcraft and she's screaming the entire time Which if you really watch the the actual screaming doesn't fully sync up with the woman's mouth a bunch of the time But you know it's 1968. It was probably a lot harder to make that happen back then Good backstory explanation in the beginning as it gives historical context for the times you need to understand That the story was taking place within Yeah, they did a good job of establishing that historical context Which a lot of people would end up needing because if you're going to see the witchfinder general especially back in 1968 You didn't necessarily know that much about the witch trials, especially the witch trials over in The UK so just saying You become aware of what shade of blood we're dealing with with this type of film be Especially very very early on of it. It's that you know red paint look that people think of most associated with Old Italian films that really vibrant Red that almost has like an orange to it and it's just too thick honestly, but Yeah, I mean there's a There's a nostalgia to that in my opinion like I kind of enjoy seeing that type of blood Because you know, you know what time period you're looking at you know, what level of filmmaking we were at at that point We just hadn't gotten to the real good-looking blood yet Notice that when Stern asked Hopkins in turn in return if he enjoys torture He doesn't answer at all Hopkins does not answer This indicates that he knows that he's not supposed to enjoy it, but he actually does enjoy it Which is why he just doesn't respond. He's supposed to Give the air to everyone that he's there to be impartial. He's there to look at the evidence He says that numerous times about looking at the evidence and that he's supposed to then make the call on what happens And he himself doesn't actually do any of the terrible acts. He doesn't do any of the killing He just instructs people to do it Especially stern who obviously loves doing it because he's a very sadistic person and then he enjoys watching it So when he's asked if he enjoys the torture He does he definitely does and you see that throughout the film It's just he doesn't want to get his hands dirty. He wants to be able to step back and be like, you know I didn't do this, you know, I just Pull I just you know considered all the evidence and came to a conclusion and that guy did the killing that guy Did the torturing not me. I just came to a conclusion. I'm you know, hands are clean over here Just saying Night scenes are kind of hard to watch in this film to be honest They're so dark and you can tell they were actually shot during the day and then darkened in post And it just makes it very very hard to see anything in the scene. Yes, I understand. This was just kind of a this was a time period That's what they're doing. That's what they had to work with, you know It was the best that was gonna get really But now it's hard to watch because you really can't see much of anything going on during their night scenes Thankfully, there's not a whole lot of that in this film. So I was very happy when it first started happening I'm like, oh, no, I really hope we don't have a lot of night scenes because I can't see anything really except a Portion of the sky and like some silhouettes of people against it, but yeah Geez Stern just jabbing lows in the back is pretty brutal I mean, this is where you can see when you look really closely that you know The metal spike he's using the like ram in his back which he uses to do that too He also does that too who is it Sarah much? Well at the end of the film I mean, it looks great It looks very brutal and messed up and disgusting especially for its time in 1968 I'm sure people were kind of shocked by those scenes back then Because it is very very brutal and disgusting But you can see if you really look look at it that it's one of those like retractable things where like it just gets pushed up again against the skin and it just like goes back into the The piece that he's holding so and then there's some blood there, but hey, it looks good for the time I think So Hopkins insinuates to Sarah that if she sleeps with him then he will be convinced of the innocence of lows That's disgusting That's another thing is one of his one of Hopkins like main aims in this film kind of just seems it's to bone He just kind of goes around and it's just like oh, you know This person seems like a witch do they happen to have any good-looking women related to them Who would be willing to convince me otherwise? In in which case if they do meet me in a bedroom As you see him a few times just undoing his outfit Gross it's disgusting. It just it just takes that next level it gives you that next level first You see that he's a terrible person because he's directing people not being impartial obviously he's trying to Do everything he can to just immediately say that someone is a witch even though he says that he considers evidence then he's Instructing people to torture then he's standing there obviously enjoying watching it And then it's that next level of him like but if I get some sex out of this, I'm definitely gonna exploit that so let's do it It's very easy to see the flaw in the witch finding logic They just keep torturing people until they confess which as people probably have learned People should have learned torturing people to get confessions or to get information does not work typically Because people get to a state where they just want it to stop because they can't handle it anymore And they'll just tell you whatever there have been so many confessions and so much intelligence information that has been extracted that way and it is Untrue because they're just getting trying to get people to stop now That is part of the point one of the biggest points of why this film is Scripted the way it is and why that type of stuff does become very apparent because they're trying to make the point That what was going on with these with literal witch hunts were horrible Yeah, just terrible and there really was no logic It really was just kind of to satisfy the disgusting urges of people like Hopkins and Stearns You see that the motives of Hopkins and Stern actually conflict Stern just wants to torture people but Hopkins actually wants in Sarah's pants He wants to still maintain this kind of air of like being high-class and being someone of stature Whereas Stearns couldn't care less. He's like, you know, people know I'm here to torture people know him I'm the I want to say muscle, but he's also not like really the muscle because he's actually a real like cowardly wimp When it comes down to it He just really likes torturing and killing people who are helpless just saying but they're standing in opposition You see that come up numerous times where Hopkins is kind of like we need to bring it back a little bit because a I'm trying to score and that helps my chances and B. I need to Keep up airs here. You know it needs to appear like we're going through a process and I'm looking at evidence And I'm coming to a decision Whereas Stearns is just kind of like look man. Just let me do this. Let me do the torturing When do I start getting the stab backs? I mean that's basically it or slap women around because he does that too There's truly no winning when you either sink Sink and drown to prove that you're innocent in the witch Trial or float and then you get killed after the fact because you're deemed a witch Yeah So this kind of points to how there is that flawed logic and how it really is just going towards They're trying to kill and torture people and that's the main aim of it is if you put their body in the water When their hands are tied and everything if they sink to the bottom and drown good They were innocent, but now you're dead now if you float. Oh, that's a sign of the devil gonna have to kill you now So there's no winning. There's truly no winning. I Like the cut where they go to Lowe's hanging from the tree That was a kind of cool transition that they do Within the film a lot of transitions were just kind of like normal But that one really stood out to me where they just cut to like Lowe's they don't show him getting hanged But I do think it's still very very Impactful that you see the aftermath of it him just hanging there from I think was a tree I don't even think it was a gallow Like you're wrong about that though Imagine being Marshall and coming back from serving to find that your would-be father-in-law Had been hanged and your fiance has been knocked up by the guy who ordered your would-be father-in-law to be hanged that is a pretty crazy thing to consider coming back to and so you can obviously see why Marshall is so pissed off and Why he's willing to desert in order to go after Stearns and hop or stern and Hopkins And he does and that's kind of the best part of the film obviously is this kind of pursuit That Marshall has it does kind of change it into something different. This isn't really like a straight-up horror film There's obviously a lot of horror to it, but it's kind of more You know kind of a historical piece that has action to it, but also has drama and has some horror Nice moment when Marshall whacks Stern in the face with that metal pitcher when he finds him in that one town and Stern I think Stern like goes to like shake his hand because he doesn't know who he is and he just grabs the pitcher turns and Wacks him right in the face with it such a satisfying moment because at that point we've seen enough of Stern We know who this guy is we're waiting for him to get his and that's that first portion of him getting his obviously gets even more They did a good job shooting the horse chasing scenes I wasn't impressed with the horse chase scenes Because man that would be hard to keep up with them like these horses were like going hard with these actors and with the actors on their backs and Yeah, it was just shot really well. They kept it in frame They were really moving at the right pace to keep up with it and there was this level of excitement that you feel from the way that those Chase scenes were shot. So good job on that. I Really like the old guy that Stern buys a horse from that guy's acting was hilarious He was actually it's done to say this but he was like my favorite part of the film Because he was such like this wacky weird character. He looked kind of odd So that partially played into it. He had this weird sounding voice Which it may not have actually been his even real voice that could have been someone else doing the voice over after in fact but It's just funny and like the way the lines were delivered were funny It was just this nice little piece of comic relief I don't know if it was intentionally comic relief or not But a little piece of comic relief and something that's otherwise very very serious and depressing The burning scene is handled. Well, I thought they kept it pretty intense So good job on that you you feel just the tension building And I think the music actually adds to that as well and the music was good the score for this was well done Yeah Jumping out with a knife yelling someone's name and then allowing them to shoot you doesn't really seem like a good idea I'm referring to the part where Hopkins is basically has has What's in it? I'm sorry I'm blanking Marshall and Sarah basically at gunpoint and he's gonna go take them to kill them and One of the soldiers that was there with Marshall jumps out from a distance jumps out and he's just like Brandishing a knife and y'all Hopkins and just like pauses for a bit And then Hopkins just shoots him and it's just like that was a bad plan not very well thought out at all I could see why you're the nameless soldier You're a red shirt if people get that reference people probably do Marshall chopping Hopkins like wood it was pretty funny especially because since this is a much older film You don't really like see the axe going into him It doesn't even look that real you just see him What looks like him just beating him with basically like a wooden prop is what I'm assuming it was that is definitely not sharp But yeah, I mean he was going at it. He was just like chop that wood buddy Yeah They do a good job of showing stern as a sadistic killer when it comes to those who are helpless But a weak coward when faced with an equal combatant like Marshall and the other soldiers And obviously Hopkins is the sinister mastermind who won't get his hands dirty There's a point that when states descend into chaos from civil war It becomes a playground for those with these sadistic leanings people looking for things for their own gratifications their own What am I looking for their own goals? And it's it does seem like that becomes a much easier easier thing for them to get done Because all these soldiers are away fighting this war that's kind of what one of the points that it seems like they're trying to get at here is that What's going on with stern and Hopkins is mainly just happening because you have the weak population Still at home the weak population who's not going to be as willing to stand up and say hey This is wrong and we're gonna do something about it and flex their muscles and actually brandish some weapons They're just gonna be like oh this guy seems like he knows what he's doing. Let's just go Along with it and that's what happens Yet another example of people who use religion for their own twisted motives. That's another thing I'm not sure sure that was supposed to be a point back in 1968 with this film But you definitely see it in this one and obviously there have been many real life examples over the decades and centuries and full existence of Humanity for the most part of people taking religion twisting and around perverting it for their own personal goals And that is exactly what Hopkins is doing here And that's exactly what Stearns is doing Stearn is doing by just looking to Hopkins Who's looking to his or using the religion and telling him yeah go ahead and do this so Yeah Now my last thing I want to say about this film I know this film ends up being all about Vincent Price Especially when people hear about it when people talk about it when people watch it But Robert Russell did a phenomenal job as Stern Let's all just acknowledge that you know I will say yes Vincent Price did a very good job But as great of a job as Vincent Price did Robert Russell did a as good of a job If not better in my opinion like the way he plays this just gross sadistic horrible human being with joy on his face It's awesome like his facial acting Wonderful in this film it's so good. So that that's the last thing I want to say about this So out of five stars with half stars in play. This is a quite a solid film. I'm give it three and a half stars I do enjoy this. I would probably watch it again. But like I said, you know, this isn't like a true horror fans horror film It is a Film with some horror in it and it's more like a oops. Sorry. It's more like a historical real-life type horror So might not be everyone's cup of tea also might not be everyone's cup of tea because there are people who don't want to watch older films But I would say it's important to and actually I'll probably do an opinion video about why it's important to watch older films Especially horror films But anyway, I would love to hear your comments about which finder general aka the conqueror worm go ahead and put it Down in the comments or just talk about Vincent Price or older films or whatever you want to nerd out about Do me a quick favor though if you haven't already hit subscribe for me, please that legitimately is the way that I want you to repay me I don't want your money or anything. I just want your subscribe You know that that is 100% the way you can repay me because it keeps me motivated It really does every time I see a new person subscribe I'm like that is a person who just said to me I appreciate this and that keeps me going So I would appreciate that also hit the notification bell if you want to know when I'm putting up new videos To consume them as early as possible because that also helps my videos get traction just saying But regardless I really do thank you for taking your time to watch this and until next time keep it brutal