Lovesusti The Worst Film Ever

Grimossfer Clever and entertaining enough to recommend even to members of the 1%

Aubrey Hackett While it is a pity that the story wasn't told with more visual finesse, this is trivial compared to our real-world problems. It takes a good movie to put that into perspective.

Geraldine The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

Steve Nyland (Squonkamatic) Bert I. Gordon's BURNED AT THE STAKE, inexplicably titled THE COMING on the British made video I managed to see, is essentially a chick-flick horror movie tapping into both THE EXORCIST and the legendary Salem Witch Fiasco with an interesting angle on time travel. Others have described the plot in enough detail, my interest in how the film essentially boiled down into a clever little manipulation aimed at 17 to 25 year old females who still remember the angst of their adolescent years. It's quite watchable, has some decent shock sequences, but ultimately raises more questions than it answers when viewed in a contemporary light that sees through the film's contrivances.For instance, you have to wonder about any horror movie that casts a 17 year old girl as a 12 - 14 year old who's age is never really established. At one point lead actress Susan Swift -- who is superb, given the material -- is playing hopscotch when I realized she was perhaps a bit too old for that sort of thing. Or at least a bit too well developed as the film takes great pains time & again to provide her with costuming that seems to be more interested in showing us how she was maturing into an attractive young lady. They tap into the Linda Blair thing by having her spend the bulk of the film either dressed up as a Puritan serving girl, a schoolgirl, or running around present day Salem in her nightgown so much that you wonder why nobody seems to notice & ask if she needs a ride home.She also spends an awful lot of the film writhing around on the floor in a demonic frenzy, which is where I suspect a lot of the interest in the film lies. Then the movie goes out of it's way to be respectable, showing it's true colors of having it's cake and eating it too by lacking the traditional nudity and explicit gore that early 1980s horror movies are so well known for. Yet make no mistake, the film is an exploitation exercise, albeit one in surprisingly good enough taste to appeal to a female audience who will very quickly come to identify with the poor young thing as she realizes that she is a modern day reincarnation of one of the young hysterical liars at the focus of the Salem Witch Fiasco. Then there is the scene where she sits on the steps of her school bus unsupervised while the rest of her class is being given a tour of a colonial era haunted cemetery, the improbability of which is only underscored by having her teacher literally struck dead from above by a coincidence of the most extreme kind.Then again all of the adults in the film are ineffectual, stupid, or at best well-meaning but ultimately wrong. All that is except for one of the resident present day witches who walks around dressed like Elvira and is the only one with any hope of getting to the bottom of the mystery at hand. Which is, how can a 17th century Puritan farmer suddenly find himself transported to 1981 era Salem? The farmer is the only truly sympathetic character in the film (even the local investigative journalist carries a flask of whiskey with him for a quick nip to get him through some research work) and yet the filmmakers have the clod invade the young woman's bedroom where he is understandably shot at point blank range by her mother, who doesn't seem to understand that good Massachusetts liberals don't keep loaded handguns in their bed stands. The scene is creepy but for the wrong reasons, since after all this is supposed to be a 12 to 14 year old girl. Couldn't he have just invaded the kitchen while she was fixing a snack?Perhaps this is the key to understanding the film, which is more or less a young woman's fantasy vision of a horror film world, replete with cobblestone streets, Gothic churches, cloistered old cemeteries, fetching costumes, and authority figures who are too caught up in their adult function roles to understand her inner turmoil. Good old Albert Salmi has a thankless role as a police officer who is nice enough to re-unite our heroic witch with her "familiar" Rottweiler hound but intellectually ill-equipped to understand what is going on around him. He's like an ineffective father figure, concerned and empowered but ultimately unable to comprehend what he's found himself in the middle of. The finale also has enough fire & brimstone yet ultimately fails to answer the basic question at the heart of the film: Was there actually a supernatural force at work in Salem in 1692? Damned if I know.5/10

ACBisson03 The first time i saw it i got half of it but i watched and i knew later on it was about a salem witch trials. They focused on the Sara Good's family. SHE is famous for cursing a priest which came true. In the film it depicts her daughter dorcas and her husband the spirit of Ann Putnam Sara's husband comes to the future hunts this girl to redeem her soul. which does happen at the end of the movie. Dorcas is depict as witch at 5years old who is burned at the stake. Which never happen Ann putnam saves her from the flames. the girl is safe she goes to Ann putnam's grave to to see that is not empty but it is at first because she accuse her of witchcraft, and lets her burn to death. Now that ann putnam saves her her spirit is redeemed, and she is not a outcast to society for the salem witch trials.

willow21k On the whole horror films are not known for attention to detail. But when entire plot devices are based on complete historical fiction it's just sad. First of all the title of the film: Burned at the stake, this would not have been so bad if it was not set in Salem, Massachusetts. Accused witches were sometimes burned at the stake, this is true. But none of the 19-22 people who died during the Salem witch trials were burned at the stake. Almost all were hanged and one was pressed to death. Hanged isn't necessarily the best title but it would have been a more accurate one. The other huge inaccurate that I have a problem with is Sarah Good's husband. First of all the man was an uncaring husband and father, this is a historical fact. He did not defend his wife or his daughter during their trials in fact he gave evidence against them. Dorcas was 4 years old when she was accused and she was accused after her mother but before her mother was executed. Dorcas was convicted of witchcraft but never executed, instead she spent months in jail. After the panic was over in Salem and Dorcas and the other imprisoned accused were released there are numerous records of Dorcas's father petitioning the government for reparation money claiming that the months of imprisonment had rendered his daughter useless to him. Where's the caring father here? If you can see past the false history that this entire film is based on then I'm sure it's an okay horror film

JHC3 In the seemingly endless quest to find well made, well acted horror films, it is all-too-rare to find one that even comes remotely close to hitting the mark. Needless to say, I was very pleasantly surprised when I stumbled across "Burned at the Stake" on a U.S. cable network while I was flipping channels. The premise is reasonably simple. In 1692, young Ann Putnam (Swift) is the most vocal witness against alleged witches, leveling baseless charges against anyone who earns her displeasure. Manipulating her for his own ends is Reverend Parris (Peters) who also serves as the court's guide on matters pertaining to witchcraft and Satanism. Things get complicated when Ann starts accusing members of the Goode family of witchcraft. Salem (of 1980 or so), Loreen Graham (also played by Swift) begins having unusual visions shortly before she visits the Salem Witch Museum. A strange man in seventeenth century garb tries to accost her there and the building. He continues to stalk her while strange phenomena begin to involve her more and more. Soon, it appears that she is becoming possessed by the spirit of Ann Putnam. Unfortunately, further description gets rather involved and would give too much away. Though the film is not action-oriented and would likely be of little interest to many viewers, the performances are good and the seventeenth century dialogue used in the film's many flashbacks sounds very convincing. The production values are solid with the possible exception of some of the special effects. In a side-note, the film's technical advisor was Laurie Cabot, Salem's official witch. Viewers who appreciate a well-made, atmospheric, but understated horror film may appreciate this. The writer/director, Bert I. Gordon, has had a long career in horror and science fiction filmmaking and is best known for his work on a number of "big bug" films and similar works years earlier.