Movie magic is rarely about things going right. Usually, it’s about the chaos working in your favor. When you look back at the Witches of Eastwick actors, you aren't just looking at a call sheet. You’re looking at four of the biggest egos and brightest talents of the 1980s shoved into a pressure cooker in Cohasset, Massachusetts.
It worked. Sort of.
The 1987 adaptation of John Updike’s novel shouldn't have been a hit. The production was a nightmare. The director, George Miller—the guy who gave us Mad Max—almost quit because the studio was breathing down his neck. But then you have the cast. Jack Nicholson, Cher, Susan Sarandon, and Michelle Pfeiffer. It’s a lineup that feels impossible today. You’ve got the devil himself and three women who, honestly, were probably too good for the material they were given. Yet, their chemistry turned a mid-tier supernatural comedy into a cult classic that still defines the "campy horror" vibe.
The Devil in the Room: Jack Nicholson’s Daryl Van Horne
Jack Nicholson didn't just play Daryl Van Horne. He consumed the role. At the time, Jack was the king of Hollywood, coming off a string of massive hits and awards. He was the only person who could play a "horny little devil" and make it both repulsive and weirdly charming.
Interestingly, he wasn't the first choice.
Bill Murray was considered. So was Burt Reynolds. Can you imagine Burt Reynolds doing the "cherry pit" scene? Probably not. Nicholson brought a greasy, manic energy that grounded the supernatural elements in something very human—and very gross. His performance is a masterclass in physical acting. He uses his eyebrows like lethal weapons. But beneath the leering and the vulgarity, there was a real tension on set.
Nicholson was actually a huge advocate for his female co-stars. When the studio tried to mess with the budget or the script, he’d often back them up. He knew the movie lived or died on the rapport between the four of them. If the devil wasn't scary, the witches didn't matter. If the witches weren't powerful, the devil was just a creep in a bathrobe.
The Three Witches: A Casting Carousel
The Witches of Eastwick actors we see on screen weren't the ones originally intended for those specific roles. This is where the Hollywood gossip gets juicy.
✨ Don't miss: Why the Cast of Hold Your Breath 2024 Makes This Dust Bowl Horror Actually Work
Initially, Susan Sarandon was hired to play Jane, the cello-playing redhead. Cher was supposed to play Alexandra, the sculptor. But when they arrived on set, things shifted. Director George Miller decided—or was convinced—that Cher should be Alexandra and Sarandon should be Jane. Wait, no. It was actually more dramatic.
Sarandon didn't know she was being swapped until she arrived. She found out that Cher had been given the role of Alexandra, and she was being moved to Jane. For a professional of Sarandon's caliber, that’s a slap in the face. She had already learned the cello! She had prepared for a completely different energy.
"I get to the set," Sarandon later recalled in interviews, "and I find out that I'm suddenly playing the part that requires me to play the cello. And I’ve never played the cello."
She learned it in a few weeks. That’s the level of grit we’re talking about.
Cher as Alexandra Spofford
Cher was at the peak of her "serious actress" era. This was the same year she did Moonstruck. She brought a grounded, maternal authority to the trio. Alexandra is the one who keeps them together, the one with the most to lose. Cher’s natural "I don't give a damn" attitude was perfect for a woman who accidentally summons a demon because she’s bored with her small-town life.
Susan Sarandon as Jane Smart
Jane is the repressed one. Her transformation is the most visual. She goes from frizzy-haired, shy music teacher to a wild-haired, sexual powerhouse. Sarandon’s chemistry with Nicholson is arguably the strongest in the film because it feels the most dangerous. She’s the one who almost loses herself to him.
Michelle Pfeiffer as Sukie Ridgemont
Pfeiffer was the "newcomer" compared to the other three, though she was already a star after Scarface. She played Sukie, the fertile, soft-spoken journalist. It’s easy to overlook Pfeiffer when she’s standing next to Cher and Sarandon, but she provides the necessary lightness. Her character is the bridge. Without Sukie, the movie becomes too dark, too fast.
🔗 Read more: Is Steven Weber Leaving Chicago Med? What Really Happened With Dean Archer
Why the Chemistry Actually Worked
The set was famously difficult. George Miller was constantly fighting with producer Jon Peters. Peters, for those who don't know, is one of the most eccentric figures in Hollywood history (the guy who famously wanted Superman to fight a giant spider). Miller actually walked off the set at one point because the interference was so bad.
The only reason he came back? The Witches of Eastwick actors refused to work with anyone else.
They stood by their director. That bond translated to the screen. When you watch the scene where the three women are playing tennis or lounging in the pool, it doesn't feel like acting. It feels like three women who have genuinely found a tribe. In the 80s, female-led movies were often catty or competitive. This one wasn't. It was about collective power.
The Controversy of the Ending
If you’ve read the Updike book, you know the movie is... different. Very different.
The book is darker, more cynical, and arguably more misogynistic. The movie turns it into a blockbuster spectacle with literal vomit and giant monsters. Many critics at the time, and even some of the cast, felt the ending went off the rails.
The special effects—while impressive for 1987—sort of swallowed the performances in the final fifteen minutes. We see Jack Nicholson turn into a giant, grotesque version of himself, and it becomes a bit of a cartoon. But even then, the actors sell it. Nicholson’s commitment to being absolutely humiliated by these three women is what makes the climax satisfying. He’s not a cool villain. He’s a pathetic one.
The Lasting Legacy of the Eastwick Cast
Why do we still talk about this movie?
💡 You might also like: Is Heroes and Villains Legit? What You Need to Know Before Buying
Honestly, it’s because we don't see ensembles like this anymore. Today, a movie with four A-listers of this magnitude would be a $200 million Marvel project where they’re all in front of a green screen. In The Witches of Eastwick, they were in a real house, in a real town, eating real cherries (and spitting them out).
The movie also touched on things that weren't being talked about in mainstream comedies:
- Female sexual autonomy.
- The suffocating nature of small-town gossip.
- The idea that "the devil" is just a man who tells you exactly what you want to hear.
The Witches of Eastwick actors elevated what could have been a trashy summer flick into a piece of pop culture iconography. You see it every Halloween. The big hair, the silk robes, the "hell hath no fury" energy. It started here.
Real-World Takeaways for Film Buffs
If you're looking to dive deeper into the history of this production, there are a few things you should check out. First, look up the interviews with George Miller regarding his "Mad Max" approach to directing a comedy. He treated the camera like it was in a car chase, even when it was just in a living room.
Second, pay attention to the score by John Williams. It’s one of his most underrated works. He gives the devil a "dance" theme that makes the whole movie feel like a macabre ballet.
Finally, if you want to see how much the actors influenced the script, watch the scene where they talk about what they want in a man. Much of that was improvised or adjusted based on the actresses' own input. They weren't just mouthpieces for a male screenwriter; they were architects of their own characters.
To truly appreciate the film, you have to look past the 80s hair and the practical effects. Look at the eyes. Look at the way Sarandon looks at Nicholson with a mix of horror and desire. Look at the way Cher dismisses him with a single word. That’s where the real magic happened.
Next Steps for the Curious:
- Watch the "Making Of" Featurettes: Specifically look for the ones discussing the practical effects of the "balloon" scene. It's a masterclass in pre-CGI ingenuity.
- Read the Original John Updike Novel: It provides a fascinating contrast to the film. You’ll see exactly where the actors had to "fill in the blanks" to make the characters likable.
- Compare with "Practical Magic": If you like the ensemble vibe, watch how the 90s took the "witchy sisterhood" trope and softened it compared to Eastwick’s sharper edge.