Dr. Peyton Westlake is on the verge of realizing a major breakthrough in synthetic skin when his laboratory is destroyed by gangsters. Having been burned beyond recognition and forever altered by an experimental medical procedure, Westlake becomes known as Darkman, assuming alternate identities in his quest for revenge and a new life with a former love.
- Category:Action, Crime, Fantasy, Sci-Fi, Thriller
- Stars:Liam Neeson, Bruce Campbell, Neal McDonough, Frances McDormand, ,
- Director:Sam Raimi,
When thugs employed by a crime boss lead a vicious assault on Dr. Peyton Wilder, leaving him literally and psychologically scarred, an emergency procedure allows him to survive. The scientist then returns to exact revenge on the people who burned him alive. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Darkman torrent reviews
(ag) wrote: There's too much of nothing going on, and hence the content is appallingly disappointing. The screenplay is managed so brilliantly that I could care less for the twists & turns. Owing to the genius execution, there's no room left for comments on performances. Hadn't expected this from Neeraj Pandey. 0/5.
(ag) wrote: Surprised at how much I hated this movie. There's just not much of interest going on in it. One of those "why was this made" type deals. I'm a big fan of Ethan Hawke, but here he is given little to do or perform with.
(de) wrote: The Miller Bros deliver a wonderful and heartfelt movie. Their story is inspirational and totally true. This is a must see. I also highly recommend their NY Times best seller, "Either You're in or in The Way". Great work guys!
(ca) wrote: this crazy Kusturica! Gotto love him:)
(es) wrote: This movie was fucking hilarious!
(br) wrote: So so so so so bad. Even the hotness of David Boreanaz could not make this one fly.
(mx) wrote: Low budget but a lot of fun. Great cast really gory but lots of humor as well
(ru) wrote: Pretty much a perfect movie. Every scene progresses its plot in some way and the characters are developed in an efficient way. It's funny, suspenseful and overall wraps things up beautifully.
(de) wrote: This was my first Almodovar film, but it certainly won't be my last. The story and characters were so engrossing I forgot I was reading subtitles. Definitely one of my favorites!
(br) wrote: najlosh film na Dario Argento sto imam gledano :(
(kr) wrote: Just as any italian movie, the red paint used as blood seems too false
(fr) wrote: Variation on a Vampire Theme. Fun. The direction can be a little too arty at times-- Clemens likes to place the camera behind trees, etc. However, the pacing is good and there's plenty of atmosphere.
(kr) wrote: A more interesting movie than Hammer's typical output at this time this film still has plenty of gore but the use of Freud's theories to diagnose the killer and Porter's sympathetic but misguided doctor suggest that the writer was at least trying something a bit different. The ending in St Paul's is almost operatic and brings a grandiose to the proceedings that is missing from most Hammer of the 70's. There are still plenty of silly bits in there and one gratuitous nudity sequence but otherwise this isn't half bad horror.
(ru) wrote: An early Ingmar Bergman film that's still a powerful and rich experience. An ensemble piece that covers a group of circus performers, Sawdust and Tinsel uses its carnival-esque aesthetic to explore issues regarding sex, loyalty, and aspiration. Already at this early stage in his career, Bergman was using unorthodox filming techniques with discreet lighting and editing, making the film feel dream-like, yet also not shunning more realistic drama. Not as memorable as his best work, but an early triumph from the Sweedish auteur.
(fr) wrote: absolutly hilarious film that is still very very funny to this day despite being made in the fifties. the humour is as you would expect very slapstick but in places it is really laugh out loud, bob hope on top form, a real comedy gold gem.
(de) wrote: I went to c dat it was coo
(gb) wrote: Pues est bien claro, pero algo exagerada para mejor pelicula.
(ru) wrote: Cripplingly low budget, amateurish acting and extremely hit-n-miss CG.A fun idea and a smidged above student film level there is a decent movie here if you weren't taken out of it by the general lack of quality control and an uneven tone that at first spikes the mild horror with humour then seems to want to be a comedy and then hard horror. A one time late night tv watch kinda movie.
(fr) wrote: Horrible. They re-use the same shots of the scarecrows over and over and over. It's pretty lame, and way predictable.