Steinesongo Too many fans seem to be blown away

Laikals The greatest movie ever made..!

Lollivan It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to what it was like to watch it for the first time.

Bessie Smyth Great story, amazing characters, superb action, enthralling cinematography. Yes, this is something I am glad I spent money on.

gwnightscream This 1997 horror film stars Tammy Lauren, Andrew Divoff and Robert Englund. This focuses on gemologist, Alexandra (Lauren) who unwittingly unleashes an evil genie, a Djinn (Divoff) that's been imprisoned in a ruby who intends on becoming mortal, but needs her soul. As a way of getting to her, he starts granting wishes to people with deadly results and she can see visions of them. Englund (A Nightmare on Elm Street) plays Beaumont, an antique collector. This isn't that bad, except for some of the acting. Divoff is creepy in it, Harry Manfredini's score is chilling and there's some gruesome make-up effects. Kane Hodder (Jason Goes to Hell), Tony Todd (Candyman), Reggie Bannister (Phantasm), Ted Raimi (Army of Darkness), George 'Buck' Flower (The Fog) and Joe Pilato (Day of the Dead) make brief appearances as well as K.N.B. make-up artists, Greg Nicotero, Howard Berger and Robert Kurtzman. If you're into horror, give this a try at least once.

jaredalbin This movie was definitely a gore fest, but it is surprisingly good considering I watched it for the first time 18 years after it came out. The times have definitely changed because you hardly ever see gore like that in the movies today. If you're into gory movies from the 90's, then this is definitely a movie to watch. It starts from the opening scene all the way to the end. It has a nice plot that is easy to follow, and the pace isn't slow. The part in the movie where she is going to Beaumont's (spelling?) party to get her sister is interesting. Why? Because the door guard is the same actor that played the namesake of the movie Candyman. Seeing that makes me want to watch Candyman. I think I will watch Wishmaster 2 and follow it up with Candyman 1 and 2 tomorrow night.

Dr_Drew_Says Wishmaster (1997): The Good, the Bad and the Reminiscent Synopsis: A long lost artifact that plays host to a Djinn (which is an ancient demon) is found and comes into the possession of a young appraiser. Mysterious events begin to unfold until the Djinn finally reveals his plan: to grant three wishes to the woman and release his kind from their realm to rule the Earth.The Good: I really like the concept of this movie. The idea is a fascinating one, which is no surprise given Wes Craven has made a living out of coming up with good ideas. The idea of taking the old "genie in a bottle" myth and making it a fairytale told to cover up the existence of the Djinn is clever. The movie works well within the guidelines of that story. While the film is not at all scary, it has a number of really good, effective scenes... even by today's standards. The party scene near the end of the film is beautiful chaos and very well imagined by the director. Some of the effects are dated a bit, but it is disturbing nonetheless. The acting is adequate and the script isn't half bad. The actor who plays the Djinn in human form is actually more effective than the Djinn in demon form. Also, the "wish" format is intriguing. Part of the Djinn's devious nature is tricking people into making wishes they thought were going to give them treasure, etc. In essence, the Djinn does in fact grant the wish, he just does it in a way that brings pain and sacrifice to the wisher. It's a pretty clever mechanism and makes the film work.The Bad: All the things I said about the originality of the idea aside, it could have been done better. I just felt that parts of the script (and possibly the budget) held up the idea that Craven created. The movie could have been a whole lot "bigger" in scope with the ramifications of a "Djinn invasion" not localized to one protagonist. It was like the only one aware of the Djinn and apocalypse heading for the planet was this one girl. I get that they tried to make her interesting... giving her a past that made her susceptible to weakness and ultimately, redemption. It just made the stakes too small for me. Craven has always done this though, so maybe it was more the limitations of the budget or quite possibly, it was that the idea is to be more single character-centered... like he did with Nightmare on Elm Street's Nancy. Most horror films do this though.The Reminiscent: Speaking of Nightmare on Elm Street, I found a lot of similarities with Wishmaster to Craven's cornerstone franchise. The evil comes from a parallel or dream-like state. The protagonist is a young female. Much of the dialogue feels much like the early Elm Street movies. The evil is trying hard to bust through into our world and finds a way to manipulate those of us on "the outside". This movie even has an unmasked Robert Englund. Some of the originality is lost in this, because at times it feels a bit like a newer Elm Street movie with less of the cheese factor. I also feel like a lot was borrowed from the Hellraiser series as well. Even some of the imagery was similar - like a man hanging with his chest ripped open by chains and hooks. By the end of the film, I felt like I watched a decent movie that had maybe borrowed one too many scenes from other iconic horror movies.

FlashCallahan In ancient Persia, an evil creature called the Djinn wreaks havoc on a local kingdom before being sealed inside a fire opal.Centuries later, the stone, encased in a statue, is discovered when the statue is broken apart in a loading accident.A young gemologist, Alex, examines the jewel to appraise it. But she unwittingly awakes the Djinn inside.Soon the Djinn is loose on the streets, twisting people's wishes and and killing them so he can steal their souls.Eventually the Djinn disguises himself as an elegant man-about-town, Nathaniel Demarest.In both human & Djinn form, he pursues Alexandra to trick her into making three wishes, to enable his unholy legions to conquer the Earth...Even thought the film is as subtle as a sledgehammer, it's the nearest cinema has had to a new Jason/Freddy/Michael Myers in a very long time.Ignore the Presented by... moniker, it's for status,and get ready for some proper B-movie cheese. Divoff is excellent as the titular character, and chews his lines with glee. ##Kills are inventive, but beyond these two aspects, the film is just you average horror.The inclusion of (at the time) horrors greatest stars, is a little cringe worthy, and the effects are really bad, even for the limited budget.But if you can overlook, these little flaws, it's quite an good spin on the horror genre, with something original, which was lacking at the time of release (hello ironic horror).