Former criminal investigator, Major Korenev, nicknamed Fox is released from prison. He has been detained there as a result of planted incriminating evidence of unlawful investigation techniques. Setting accounts with Shaman - a big criminal boss, who ordered the evidence planted and also with his former colleagues was not a part of Korenev's agenda. As he returns to Moscow he finds a new world ruled by underworld bosses, criminal clans fighting each other and utter chaos on the desperately keeping appearances streets of Russian capital. Facing death of his friends, Major Korenev decides to re-install law and order using some unorthodox methods that are only relevant in 21st century Russia.

  • Rating:
    4.00 out of 5
  • Length:114 minutes
  • Release:2002
  • Language:Russian,Spanish
  • Reference:Imdb
  • Keywords:based on novel,  

Former criminal investigator, Major Korenev, nicknamed Fox is released from prison. He has been detained there as a result of planted incriminating evidence of unlawful investigation ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


Antikiller torrent reviews

David S (ag) wrote: Although it is action packed with gunfight, good fight and parkour scenes, this movie suffers from poor acting. Other than what Iisted above, there isn't much else I enjoyed about it.

Jon B (mx) wrote: Absolutely dark and brutal Cat III film directed by Soi ("SO BIG ARE THE BALLS" from Bio Zombie) Cheang. Highly anticipating his next film, Assassins, which stars Louis Koo/Richie Ren and is coming out in December if I recall? Anyway, this one's shockingly violent by recent HK film standards, with numerous amoral characters in a grimy, nasty world. Silver Cheung deserves props for his fabulous art direction, as always. He really creates this dark, forboding environment that makes the film tick. And I love Matt Chow's writing, but there's just two many twists for one story in this one. The problem with this movie is isn't doesn't know what it wants to be. Rife with continuity errors (particularly with regard to injuries that magically disappear) and featuring quite possibly the most inappropriate song choice in film history in the final scene. But the real problem is that it should have ended around the 80-90 minute mark, as the ending makes no sense. If the film was set up to create some sort of dreamworld or hallucination, then the final 15-20 minutes would make sense in the storyline. I don't know who decided to keep this going, but it really killed it for me.Sam Lee is great in a nuanced role akin to his breakout debut in Made In Hong Kong. Though Edison Chen's a crap actor in general, I was surprised to see him hold his own here. Probably because he didn't really have any lines besides some barking in broken Khmer. (And he sure as hell overacts, particularly in driving scenes. Dude, you really don't have to twist the steering wheel back and forth constantly to prove that you're driving.) And I was a bit bothered by his "dark-skinned Asian" makeup which kinda looked like blackface. I think this will bother people more in 20 years or so, but it bothered me here and now.As a final thought, the film is really good in a lot of ways. But I'm also not sure how to digest it -- may have to watch it again sometime and see what I think a second time round. I'm still unclear as to what this all means, or what the purpose of this film is. But I'd like to figure it out; maybe watching the commentary and deleted scenes on the 2-disc edition here can unravel this mystery.

Jason S (es) wrote: Still another one with so much potential and in some ways so good was just mediocre because it was done by a mediocre director...

Kirk J (br) wrote: I really wanted to like this film. A 1950s neo-noir in an LA setting. The big-name cast was promising. The synopsis sounded intriguing. Despite all of this potential, the film turns out to be a major disappointment thanks to a vapid screenplay that lacks substance. Nick Nolte gives an inspired performance that practically carries the film. Jennifer Connelly is beautifully haunting and mysterious despite having limited time onscreen. I applaud director Lee Tamahori for creating a film that is visually pleasing and stylish. Unfortunately, it was impossible for him (and probably most film directors) to turn this screenplay into anything more than a ho-hum, predictable mess.

Sean C (au) wrote: A provocative movie from the standpoint of story, for there is none here. It is simply a full length and intelligent conversation. Its dark vision of our future as humanity (film was released in 1981) is seeming to come to fruition, despite its tone of hopeful reflection at the end. As a lover of great conversations over food, this film was pitch perfect.

Ethan P (mx) wrote: A tense and gripping story about a brilliant criminal who creates an intricate plan and escapes the most secure prison in the world.

Rebecca M (gb) wrote: Not much of a horror was waiting and waiting for something to happen and as usual with films like this it's last 10 mins was disappointed was expecting more as it got a good rating.

Hugo S (au) wrote: Shallow, boring and a waste of time. The typical 'America turns everything into a TV show' type movie. Couldn't bear myself through the entire movie really. Coming down under 'comedy', 'adventure', and a 94% on Rotten Tomatoes, I thought it would have been an interesting movie to watch, I couldn't have been more away from the truth. After reading the review from Rotten Tomatoes top critics, I am starting to wonder if I we watched different movies.

Laura M (es) wrote: It was as messy as the monster looked like a diseased vagina sprouting tentacles.

Scott D (nl) wrote: bad cgi and no story. I give Alvin and the Chipmunks 4 D-