Metascore
68

Generally favorable reviews - based on 10 Critics What's this?

User Score
tbd

No user score yet- Awaiting 1 more rating

Your Score
0 out of 10
Rate this:
  • 10
  • 9
  • 8
  • 7
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
  • 0
  • 0
Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 6 out of 10
  2. Negative: 1 out of 10
  1. Reviewed by: Jay Scott
    Jun 10, 2014
    100
    The Witches of Eastwick is an uproarious and entirely successful attempt to examine the differences between the sexes by couching the examination in mythological terms. [12 June 1987]
  2. Reviewed by: Roger Ebert
    Jun 4, 2014
    88
    There are some moments in The Witches of Eastwick that stretch uncomfortably for effects - the movie's climax is overdone, for example - and yet a lot of the time this movie plays like a plausible story about implausible people. The performances sell it. And the eyebrows.
  3. Reviewed by: Dave Kehr
    Jun 10, 2014
    88
    The Witches of Eastwick is filmmaking of a very high order; it's also a great time at the movies.
  4. Reviewed by: Christine Arnold
    Jun 10, 2014
    63
    The Witches of Eastwick is a diverting, impeccably polished and excellently cast movie. But its charms fade fast, about as fast as it takes to leave the theater. [12 June 1987, p.D1]
  5. Reviewed by: Thomas B. Harrison
    Jun 10, 2014
    60
    The Witches of Eastwick is a theme park without a theme. Like Nicholson and his co-stars, Miller doesn't have a lot on his mind. He just wants to have fun. His movie is organized mayhem, a strange and funny tour de force. [15 June 1987, p.1D]
  6. Reviewed by: Sheila Benson
    Jun 10, 2014
    50
    Under Australian director George Miller ("Mad Max"), The Witches of Eastwick begins so promisingly. It has such smashing separate moments, so succulent a cast and so interesting a premise that watching it crumble into stomach-turning crudeness and "Poltergeist"-scale special effects is deeply painful.
  7. Reviewed by: David Sterritt
    Jun 10, 2014
    38
    The Witches of Eastwick, based on John Updike's novel, takes just about every wrong turn it can find. Perhaps this was predictable, with a wild-driving director like George Miller at the wheel. What's surprising is how many opportunities for vulgarity and stupidity the film invents for itself, even beyond the book's built-in temptations to excess. [12 June 1987, p.21]

See all 10 Critic Reviews

Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 0 out of
  2. Mixed: 0 out of
  3. Negative: 0 out of