Fairaher The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

InformationRap This is one of the few movies I've ever seen where the whole audience broke into spontaneous, loud applause a third of the way in.

Neive Bellamy Excellent and certainly provocative... If nothing else, the film is a real conversation starter.

Brennan Camacho Mostly, the movie is committed to the value of a good time.

Mr_Ectoplasma 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.

jackrchang Well...maybe not quite. First off there's more than one version of the film, i.e. there's the edited for television version and an x-rated version. The edited occult sex-parties weren't cut with quite the deft hand used for Eyes Wide Shut...although very little is done with a deft hand here.Welles is clearly sauced to the eye-balls throughout, and who can blame him? Super-cutie Pamela Franklin is a skilled enough actor to make this film lose much of its camp appeal (yes, there are extra scenes of her in the x-rated for those of you with less than honorable watching intentions). Her husband, Sheriff Truman from Twin Peaks, is a cardboard cutout of a person just like he is in Twin Peaks.While the plot is standard plug-and-play innocent wide-eyed girl being seduced into satanic cabal, it doesn't really do anything interesting with that and plods on clumsily throughout. There are multiple surreal hallucinatory scenes, some of which edge on the psychedelic. The satanic cult is, I will say, a more impressive representation than Rosemary's Baby has.I enjoyed it, frankly. But then I love Orson Welles, Pamela Franklin, hallucinatory dream shots, and 70's satanic cults so if you don't...well, the movie's kind of crap at the end of the day.Brotherhood of Satan is the same movie only campier and much much better. Legend of Hell House is a better Pamela Franklin movie and genuinely scary. Malpertuis is a better hallucinatory horror movie with a drunk Orson Welles.

sol- 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.

cfc_can I figured that any horror film with Orson Welles in it would be weird. Necromancy sure was but it was a little too weird for it's own good. The film does indeed have a creepy feel as it deals with a coven of satanists/witches in a small town and a young woman's attempt to escape them. The director though seems to be deliberately trying to confuse the audience by using flashbacks and dream sequences. By the finale, there are too many unanswered questions. What's worse, as the story is so confusing, it's pretty hard to root for any of the characters. It seems odd that Welles would agree to headline this film especially since he doesn't have that much to do. Maybe someday they will put out a tape of the outtakes and bloopers from this movie. Now that would really be fun!