Army of Darkness

Army of Darkness

A man is accidentally transported to 1300 A.D., where he must battle an army of the dead and retrieve the Necronomicon so he can return home.

  • Rating:
    4.00 out of 5
  • Length:81 minutes
  • Release:1992
  • Language:English
  • Reference:Imdb
  • Keywords:spear,   surrealism,   epic,  

A man is accidentally transported to 1300 A.D., where he must battle an army of the dead and retrieve the Necronomicon so he can return home. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


Army of Darkness torrent reviews

Jim G (us) wrote: Well executed documentary about the poignant and voluntary exit of the greatest band of the 00s decade. If you're getting this on disc spring for the deluxe 3 disc set to get the 3.5 hour concert including covers of Nillsson, Alan Vega and cameos by Arcade Fire & others.

Archibald T (mx) wrote: Why watch a mock up slasher movie when you can find one from the 80s instead? I guess the best way to answer that question would be the fascination of it then the actual enjoyment of it. It's like viewing an experiment. We live in a day and age where some movies try their hardest to mimic the past. Thanks to Tarantino, a bunch of directors out there now think that what passes for commercial in the horror genre is by going Grindhouse. Many low budget horror movies have adapted to this trend. Some work, some don't. Just like the horror remakes. However, this mock up slasher flick doesn't bode well due to it's lack of pacing, poor acting and lame story. It does work in the atmosphere department which was VERY effective and a few death scenes were chilling. One big thing I didn't like was showing the killer's face too early and often in the film. That pissed me off. Killers in slasher movies only have their faces shown in the last act. It ruins the mystery if it's shown too early.The film's story is your basic run of the mill slasher. It's set at a sorority, very much like the ones in Black Christmas and House on Sorority Row. In fact, this film is more closer to Black Christmas with the exception of it being set around Christmas. It's 1981 and all the girls look modern. None of the actresses or guys in the film look nothing like one's from the 80s. You'd think authenticity would've crossed the director's mind, but no. Moving on...A new girl just suddenly decides, because the script says so, to join Alpha Gamma Theta sorority. Not knowing that a serial stalker/killer roams around looking to pick off the girls in the sorority one by one. It's always a bad time to join a sorority in these films. The killer uses a hammer as his weapon of choice. He bangs away at these poor girls AND IN THEIR FACES! :D This is the 2nd feature production company Gamma Knife Films have churned out. Their first was Death Stop Holocaust. So far they have a few more films that are to be in production soon. They're in their infancy at this point and it shows, but I will be looking out for more of their stuff.

Yash B (it) wrote: Pretty annoying and very cheesy and still fred... Its still not worth watching. At least the first one was fair, this was just dumb to be honest.

Iara Z (ru) wrote: Bonitinho, mas muito previsvel...

Regina H (nl) wrote: I found this to be an excellent movie, one you must have in your movie library. The whot cast is excellent, you will enjoy every moment from start to finish I guarantee.

F B (nl) wrote: What started out like a good film soon turned in to a confusing load a garbage which left me totally bewildered.

Adam R (fr) wrote: (First and only viewing - 8/28/2009)

Rob M (kr) wrote: The movie that made Clive Owen's name is seriously good, a morally ambiguous heist movie with a satisfying twist at the end. And as much as I like Daniel Craig, Owen is clearly meant to be James Bond, right?

Mohammed A (es) wrote: It's good movie to watch

Jennifer S (nl) wrote: not a "good" movie by any stretch... but totally awesome nonetheless. this really makes me miss usa's "up all night" program.CONTROL! COMPLETE CONTROL!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Alex G (ru) wrote: Stanely Kubrick once described Charlie Chaplin as being all content and no form. I think the same could be said for Jacques Tati in this film. My first Tati film, this plotless, nearly wordless physical comedy could be perceived as aimless, as Tati is never afraid to cut his scenes or shots. However, aimless is too superficial a word, I believe, to describe this film and its scenes. Tati is the master of the master shot. He hardly ever goes in for a close up or a single; always wide, to allow the audience to see the whole picture. In my opinion, he uses these master shots to allow room for the audience to laugh and to discover what they want to look at. His frames are so busy, with action going on in the foreground, middle ground and background. A frame is never wasted; always something going on. I've always admired films that have a very objective point of view. I also love the way that Tati uses windows for comedic effect. Unlike Chaplin, Tati is a very small part of this film. We see his antics, but there are times throughout the film where he is not in it for a while, and at times even a background character. Nonetheless, every time he is there, he manages to make us laugh.There's so much to say about this film, I can't possibly cover it all in one review. This comedy is simple, cute, and beautiful. The gags are the same way. The restaurant sequence is the best part in the whole film. It stretches out for approx. 40 minutes (I don't know the exact timing), but there's so many antics that go on: Tati breaking one of the doors (made of glass) and the doorman is resorted to holding the door handle to simulate to the arriving guests that the door is still there. I love the having to kick the steps for the stair light to go on, the scratches on the women's back, the guy falling out of his chair, the guy tracing lines on a brick, the airplane, the guy having the tile stuck to his shoe, among many others. The scene in the invention place is funny too. I love "the door that makes golden silence" or whatever its called. The restaurant sequence is definitely the best part of the movie, but that sequence at the beginning is worth mentioning. I also love the other part of the main girl, Barbara, trying to take a picture of something but people keep walking in the way of her shot. All of these scenes are better seen than read, and the same could be said about this movie. I also like how the dialogue in this movie is so quiet you can't understand what they're saying, but as the movie goes on, you just learn that what they're saying isn't important, as the movie treats a large part of it as irrelevant. In the end, this is a wonderful comedy that is a lot to take in, and I will want to see this again. For those of you that don't mind there being a extreme lack of a plot and dialogue, but plenty of cute, simple gags and antics, you would like this movie. If you are absolutely in love with plot and dialogue and conventional storytelling, this film will not be your cup of tea, no matter how funny you may find the material.

Bev L R (kr) wrote: Very sweet. Didn't like the 'doin' choreography" scenes as much as the scenes with Caron and Ferrer.

Nicola M (mx) wrote: Great musical numbers, Peter was fantastic and June did wonderful despite being 30 during the making of the film. I loved the "French song" that June and Peter sing in the library.

Freddie K (es) wrote: A surprisingly funny comedy. Roman Atkinson proves once again that he knows how to do satire, and for spy fans, this is what you've been wanting. With some well crafted action scenes comes impeccable comedic timing that makes you laugh for minutes on end. I just wish the movie didn't resolve a conflict through a drawn out and pretty awful speech.

Kerby H (mx) wrote: I just didn't get it. Ben Kingsley was good but not that great, and the movie is so short that there's hardly any time for anything to happen. i don't like Jonathan Glazer's direction very much,

Liam M (br) wrote: An instant classic that gives laughs, characters, and morals to make a fun ride for the whole family.

Jamie I (br) wrote: I generally hate war movies. Realistic violence and the true horrors of war do not sit well with someone who generally views movies as an escape. I wanted to see this Spike Lee joint at the first trailer I saw. More than a war movie, this is a story of four Buffalo Soldiers who end up in Italy. More than that this is a story of a father/son bond between one of those soldiers, Train, and an abandoned Italian boy, Angelo. Even though they cannot communicate verbally they create their own tapping language amid a violent backdrop surrounded by all the evils of war. Highly recommended.

Adrienne L (es) wrote: Many years ago I thought this was kick ass. Now I think its just demented and depressing. Lena Olin's character is plain scary (and not at all sexy). Poor Juliette Lewis gets another trashy sidekick offering to work with. A real turn off. Tastes change.