Every small town has its secrets lurking beneath the idyllic surface. There have been so many works that situate themselves in quaint hamlets and use these settings as the foundation for examinations of the darker and more perverse side of society, usually being fashioned as darkly satirical subversions of common perceptions of small-town life. One of the great examples of this is John Updike’s The Witches of Eastwick, in which we are introduced to a trio of ordinary women living in a charming New England village, but who have their entire lives shaken up by the arrival of Daryl van Horne, a mysterious and extraordinarily charismatic middle-aged man who takes up residence in their town and initially presents himself as a loud, bawdy hedonist, but one who nonetheless manages to seduce every one of them – and in the process, our trio of protagonists discovers that they have suddenly developed mysterious powers, which they intend to use on their beguiling new resident, who makes it very clear that he is not merely there to pass the time, and has much more sinister intentions. A thrilling and consistently entertaining piece, it was quickly adapted into a film, with George Miller (in the aftermath of his wickedly successful Mad Max saga) taking the helm, and proving that a change of setting and shift in tone is not too much of an obstacle, since his version of The Witches of Eastwick (which he made in collaboration with screenwriter Michael Cristofer, a celebrated playwright and author in his own right) is a wonderfully offbeat, engaging blend of comedy, romance and horror, all of which are perfectly curated by a director who has shown an incredible attention to detail when it comes to capturing the right tone and ensuring that his works are consistently in-line with the somewhat outrageous principles of the source novel, which is honoured with precision and dedication by an adaptation that may not have the exact spark of Updike’s wonderfully labyrinthine and offbeat writing, but are nonetheless captured with sincerity and complexity by Miller’s commitment to capturing the spirit of the novel.

While he is often viewed as a remnant of the past in mainstream literary circles, with his cultural cache not being as strong today as it was in previous decades, Updike is undeniably a very important writer, and his narratives often underlined themes relating to American values, seeking to question their purpose and dispell the myths usually associated with the concept of conservative principles that were falsely perpetuated by many artists that came before him – he can be considered the more sardonic and cynical counterpart to the likes of Norman Rockwell, albeit in an entirely different medium. His practice of quietly and methodically unravelling the core of American life to highlight their inherent fallacies is well-represented in The Witches of Eastwick, which uses many different techniques to demonstrate the more disquieting nature of supposedly perfect communities. At its core, the film is an offbeat and outrageously funny feminist statement – three women lament the loss of their husbands, but find themselves swept off their feet by someone who turns out to be quite literally the Devil in disguise, whose presence forces them to realise their inner strength (here defined by magical powers), which they eventually use to get rid of him, realising that they do not need some vulgar man to make them feel worthy and give them a sense of independence. By contemporary standards, perhaps it’s a bit tacky and obvious, but it is nonetheless very entertaining, and the root of many compelling ideas that inform most of what both the novel and this adaptation set out to portray. Miller may seem like an unexpected choice in principle, but his penchant for the absurd and surreal, as well as his deep fascination with using allegory and metaphor to comment on the human condition, form the foundation for quite an enigmatic dark comedy that makes use of some tremendously interesting ideas to tell this story, which it does with incredible precision and commitment to the material.

The Witches of Eastwick is the kind of film that assembles an incredibly impressive cast, to the point where it becomes surprising that so many gifted people were able to come together, especially for a story that is seemingly more trivial, at least in terms of its intentions and style. The central trio is perfect – the film came during a period where Cher was finally being taken seriously as an actor (coming the same year as her career-defining performance in Moonstruck), while Michelle Pfeiffer, on the verge of a major breakthrough with The Fabulous Baker Boys two years later, and Susan Sarandon, already someone beloved by both the arthouse and mainstream audiences based on her wide berth of work over the years, make a strong case for their future status as icons of the medium. While no one would ever consider this career-best work for any of them, the film does build on their natural charisma and showcase their skills beautifully, particularly since they prove to have effortless chemistry and are entirely convincing as these slightly affluent but still quite humble New England women who are seeking a better life for themselves, and how inadvertently get caught in a fascinating conspiracy revolving around their enigmatic new neighbour. This role is played by Jack Nicholson, who was firmly implanted as the most famous actor in Hollywood, and could therefore take on these more fun, offbeat roles that highlighted the precise reasons why he was arguably the most covered star of his generation. He’s effortlessly charismatic, his devilish demeanour and comedic timing making an otherwise one-dimensional character into an unforgettable villain, and the film is almost worth it solely for his performance, which is wonderfully supported by the central trio, with whom he connects brilliantly, making this film an unquestionable delight and ensuring that it meets all the necessary criteria to be considered a resounding success in both structure and style.

Something that we can often appreciate about Miller as a filmmaker is his commitment to creating simple, straightforward narratives that hint at something deeper, but very rarely are defined by their complexity. The Witches of Eastwick is a film in which a lot of the themes are presented at the surface level, and it doesn’t entirely intend on digging too much deeper into these ideas, preferring to keep everything quite simple, and ultimately being much more effective in the process. The material is already strong enough for even the most conventional directors to make a success of it through simply directing by rote – but Miller is far too interesting a filmmaker not to make a few offbeat choices that elevate (and sometimes even improve) the novel and its underlying ideas. The Witches of Eastwick is presented as an eccentric, off-the-wall dark comedy steeped heavily in fantasy and horror, using these elements as the foundation for quite an amusing examination of small-town America and the secrets that lurk within – this is where most of the film’s humour emerges, and we discover that there is a lot of complexity in how Miller chooses to realise these ideas, which he does with a firm attention to detail. The structure itself is very simple – a brief introduction to the central trio, followed by a series of seductions by their new resident, and then a chaotic descent into madness that is both hilarious and unsettling. The director honours Updike’s cutting, precise manner of presenting these ideas, and adds his unique spin to the material, which makes this film one that consists of multiple layers, each one allowing us to pull apart the layers and reveal the intriguing and enigmatic ideas that lurk within, and ultimately bolstering our experience in ways that are only supported (rather than entirely driven) by the creative decisions made in terms of the visual effects, score and editing, all of which are exceptional and contribute to the overall experience of this terrific film.

As far as comedically-tinged fantasy horror films go, The Witches of Eastwick is squarely in the middle – it is a well-crafted and very effective film, but it doesn’t feature too much innovation and there are areas in which it is quite pedestrian, meaning that it is a more consistent but predictable affair. However, this is far from a criticism – in fact, the film as a whole is a resounding success, using its simplicity to very effectively capture the spirit of the novel and evoke certain themes that everyone involved knew didn’t need to be emphasized to the point of being frustrating, instead being a more subtle and interesting affair. The fantastic performances from the cast, the upbeat style of filmmaking and the effortlessly compelling tone all work together to create a memorable work that keeps us engaged and entertained throughout. It is arguably aligned with films like Lorenzo’s Oil and Three Thousand Years of Longing as projects that are not definitive of his career, nor passion projects in the way that Mad Max or Happy Feet may have been, but are nonetheless wickedly entertaining works that showcase his versatility and skill. Hilariously irreverent, beautifully-constructed and filled with memorable moments, The Witches of Eastwick is a triumph and proves to be one of the more entertaining works of this period, particularly in how it relishes in providing nothing but unbridled, pure entertaining from beginning to end, and knows just how impactful a very simple story is when it is told with precision, charm and a lot of humour, all of which are definitive features of this otherwise offbeat and outrageously odd work.