Day of Resurrection

Day of Resurrection

After a virus devastates the global human population, survivors in Antarctica desperately try to find a cure and save the human race.

  • Rating:
    4.00 out of 5
  • Length:127 minutes
  • Release:1980
  • Language:English,Japanese,French,German,Spanish,Russian
  • Reference:Imdb
  • Keywords:based on novel,   italy,   disaster,  

A military-engineered virus, released during a plane crash, kills the entire human population. The only survivors are scientists in Antarctica, who desperately try to find a cure and save ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


Day of Resurrection torrent reviews

jordan f (br) wrote: Better than Man of Steel. this is the best superman movie i have ever seen.

Ashoka R (es) wrote: If you are into hollywood movies then you will hate this movie most probably..

Zahid C (fr) wrote: Day: SundayDate: 14 Jul 2013Time: 10.00 pmWith: MaaOn: HDTV

Dillinger P (br) wrote: Documentaries are a tricky thing to get right, firstly your subject has to be completely unique and compelling, your contributors have to be charismatic/interesting/cookie or all of the above and thirdly not only must it be paced with precision but ultimately leaves you able to make up your own conclusion of where you stand on the topic and feel completely satisfied on your decision. If as a documentary you get these 3 fundimental things correct, you are guarenteed to have a hit on your hands, so why is it of recent, documentaries just seem to keep falling short of these 3 factors? Terms and Conditions, is a wonderful concept, one that will resonate with everyone, we are all effected, every single day, by the subject matter here. No one is exempt, your target audience is already in the bag, ie anyone with access to the internet. Its production values are decent and it has a nice wealth of contributors, however some of them are boring as hell, im not saying that people need to put on a show in order for it to be compelling but when im listening to you speak for a good part of 20 mintues, you need to intice me and hold my attention. One member of the contributors is so monotone and void of any emotion is his act for "Cool" statues anytime he graces the screen, which is often, you instantly want to put your foot through it. Then we have the final part, i need to leave satisfied and be able to make up my own conclusion, this doc is so biased it is unreal. Yes you have stock footage of interviews and youve made your point that companies like facebook wont speak to you about their privacy policies but surely there must be a spokesperson out there that would be willing to fight their cause and stand up for what their company is doing? Either that or this documentarian is so afraid of their responce or is not trying hard enough. For example, our narrator actually stalks Mark Zuckerberg outside his house and films him using spy glasses, infriging Marks rights and using the defence of, well if Mark Zuckerbergs company can destroy all of our privacy rights then fuck him, we can do this to him; Its childish and sets a bad example. Thats like saying, well that guy stabbed my best friend so its ok for me to stab him. Not how it happens and this im afraid is what stops this piece from being a classic. So biased and childish, i want to root for their cause, i agree with what their saying, but im not being allowed to make my own choice. Their views are being shoved down my throat and im being forced to accept. Which is ironic considering the content of this piece. Enjoyable and well put together but highly unlikeable contributors and unproffesional direction makes it hard to digest.

Alex P (ru) wrote: very predictable n boring plot...but good casts sort of made it a good watch..

Jacky L (jp) wrote: atmospheric. the soundtrack wasn't my cuppa tea, but apt for the mood it was going for. quite intriguing watch plus smart decision to have kept the film short and sweet at seventy five minutes. the chaptering of the film makes me wonder if the director was referencing 'breaking the waves' at all.

Martin D (jp) wrote: Rewarding, likable film of a restrained romance between a construction worker and his young son's schoolteacher. Ending predictable, however. See at Cinema Village, NYC, June 14, 2010.

Eric H (gb) wrote: This starts slowly, but there is a moody atmosphere building. The cold isolation works great as a way to ramp up the tension. The premise is something new for the vampire genre. I like the originality. The style also has a good look to it. The acting is pretty good for a horror movie. Ben Foster has the most interesting role. Josh Hartnett gets the leading man role. It's a good horror movie with something different.

Robert D (us) wrote: a decently made movie. should of been a lot better

Emma S (ru) wrote: Billie's way too sexy and fun for Fanny .

Forrest K (ca) wrote: This weird blend of two entirely separate series is surprisingly so crazy it works. Chaney's Wolf Man becomes a much more human, tragic figure in his quest to beat his own immortality, and the thought that Frankenstein's notes could hold the secret of life and death is a novel and inspired one. Although the "scientist is consumed by lust for power" plot line is well-tread, it's given a fun shake in this film, and the climax is explosively fun.

William W (au) wrote: I loved this 'birth of the FBI' film, with James Cagney as a law-school graduate who decides to join to avenge his killed ex-college roommate. He's outstanding, and supported by strong character actors like Robert Armstrong, Margaret Lindsay and Ann Dvorak. Exquisitely recommended.

Richard C (gb) wrote: great peter cushing film,very enjoyable with some creepy moments.

Rania A (br) wrote: Delightful! A cute cartoon that will be loved by all children and many adults too!

David M (nl) wrote: Am I the only one a little taken back by how dark this movie is? The house itself is a bit cartoony (obviously for the kids) but the subject matter of a woman dying in the foundations of her house & husband covering it up & keeping her trapped in the cement & even building a shrine around her corpse - is like something you see exploited on the front page of a newspaper & cringe at how vile humans can be. And the fact she possesses the house like some demonic force, ummmmm parents are supposed to let their little kids watch this!? Usually I get a kick outta screwed up films like this, but not this time. This movie totally creeped me out. They should remake this as a live-action horror film. See if it still appeals to kids then. Also, not entirely sure what type of animation graphics were used for this film but they were horrible & not enjoyable to look at.

JS L (ca) wrote: "It's all one huge thing now, there's trees in the city, and garbage in the forest. What's the big difference?" - KurtA sentry of the American Northwest, writer/director Kelly Reichardt idolizes its forested mountains in this outing for two reunited friends. The men have have taken different paths in life, but meet back at the crossroads to share a slice of natural comforts. I found OLD JOY to be one of the most relaxing viewings I've ever had and it's largely due to Yo La Tengo's wanderlust score and Reichardt's determination to let it play out. The narrative is minimal, the ending is opaque and the journey is all too fleeting.

Logan M (jp) wrote: "Singin' in the Rain" has remained a defining musical for the 1950s era and the modern era.

Leon B (es) wrote: Review: I found it quite amazing that this movie was based on true events, because the controlling leader of the colony, Paul Schafer (Michael Nyqvist) really had some warped rules, which went way over the top. The photos of the real Chilean colony were touching and the fact that Lena (Emma Watson) and Daniel (Daniel Bruhl), went through so much to escape from the horrendous conditions, made the movie quite intense towards the end. Lena's love for her boyfriend was truly emotional, and I couldn't believe that no one was willing to help her to find Daniel, who went through unimaginable torture, just because he was protesting and taking photos. Personally, I wouldn't have picked Emma Watson to play Lena, because she lacked emotion and I didn't really feel the intensity of her character but Daniel Bruhl played his Daniel extremely well. Michael Nyqvist and Richenda Carey, who played Gisela, we're pretty scary throughout the movie, so I have to commend them for there performance but there wasn't much depth to the characters because the storyline jumps from a happy couple in bed, to a couple split apart, living in a cult. Anyway, I found the story intriguing and I couldn't help rooting for the couple who were in the wrong place at the wrong time but it needed more emotion. Watchable! Round-Up: This movie was directed by, German born, Florian Gallenberger, who also brought you Shadows of Time and City of War: The Story of John Rabe. I think a story like this, needed a big director because it's definitely a moment in history which a lot of people haven't heard about. I can just imagine the horrible things that must have happened within the colony, so there must be more to the true story, which wasn't brought to the big screen. With that aside, I still found this movie interesting and emotional but, for some unknown reason, it felt like there was something missing. Budget: $14million Worldwide Gross: $2.5million I recommend this movie to people who are into their drama/romance/thrillers, starring Emma Watson, Daniel Bruhl, Michael Nyqvist, Richenda Carey, Vicky Krieps, Jeanne Werner and Julian Ovenden. 5/10