Microwave Massacre

Microwave Massacre

A guy kills his wife because she's a bad cook.

A guy kills his wife because she's a bad cook. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechersSize
Download   Microwave.Massacre.1986.DVDRiP.XviD.AC3-FLDVDRip34391.37 GB
Download   Massacre do Microondas (1983) Legendado VHSRip (Microwave MassacOther5126475.16 MB

Microwave Massacre torrent reviews

Sam M (ag) wrote: It may look good, but the film doesn't flow very well. It's plodding and uninteresting. There doesn't seem to be much aim and the characters are not relatable. As hard as I tried, I just couldn't like it much.

Josh L (ca) wrote: Take away the "I" and "E" from the title, and you'll have an accurate idea of what this film is.

Robert S (it) wrote: I really enjoyed this movie, I feel like it teaches you a lot of life lessons.

Harry B (de) wrote: I'm not even sure if this film makes any sense plot wise, at least I didn't get it, and I watched it like 3 times. However who cares, Leelee Sobieski is a total babe, a top notch knockout and shows tons of her voluptuous cleavage and yes, even a full out ass shot with her lifting her leg and flashing her c**t. That alone is worth 4 stars for sure even though it's just a partial from behind look but ladies and gents, let me say, WE HAVE BUSH!!! And prime grade A bush when your talking Leelee peoples. I must have watched that flash of the bush scene when she hops out of the bath tube at least 50 times by now, and it still never gets old, and pretty much the same goes for the scene where Leelee is looking out the window with her collosal knockers just begging to be let out. The movie is like huh? Nonetheless, it's a classic. Thanks Miss Sobieski for continuing to give us high quality boner material and let us ogle and drool over your sweet curves. If I had to take a guess, the actual location of heaven is in any of your sweet holes.

Eric J (mx) wrote: Visually stunning but quite the muddle in terms of plot. It's anime so it's SUPPOSED to involve suspension of disbelief. Still, my problem with Steampunk is that it straddles the line a little too much.

David D (kr) wrote: Too plain and slow to be considered a thriller

Frodo P (br) wrote: This film is not just visually great but amazingly acted showing atroubled child and how they actually act. I must warn you though itdoes deal with very dark subjects and much like a monster calls if youwant to watch this with your child you might need to plan on explainingsome iffy subject matter. It is a truly beautiful movie and i dorecommend you watching it. Is it perfect no but i give it a 5/5 because I love watching the film and that it deserves a lot more credit than people give it.

Jacob M (de) wrote: Witches have been a popular thing among Hollywood, most recently being the highly successful franchise that was Harry Potter. In the 1960's there was the memorable TV series Bewitched, about a witch who falls in love with a regular human being. The film that likely led to that show is the film I'm about to review, the romantic comedy Bell, Book, and Candle, starring Jimmy Stewart, Kim Novak, and Jack Lemmon. While it's an interesting concept, I feel that the film should have been a lot better. Kim Novak plays Gillian Holroyd, a witch who hides her identity by owning an art gallery. She falls for publisher Sheperd Henderson (Jimmy Stewart), but it's considered wrong for a witch to fall for a mortal man. Gillian manages to make him love her by casting a spell on him and causing him to dump his fiance (Janice Rule) in order for the romance to fully work. When Sheperd intends to publish a book about witches, the romance might go a bit too far. The film also features Jack Lemmon as Novak's witch brother Nicky, Elsa "The Bride" Lanchester as Novak's witch aunt Queenie, Hermione Gingold as a witch mentor, and Ernie Kovacs as the writer who wants to make the witch book. To begin, the casting is good. Kim Novak is clearly the true star of the show. Like in Vertigo, Novak is attractive, creepy in several moments, and is still very likable. Jimmy Stewart was decent in his role, unlike in Vertigo, I felt he was a little too old for the part. In the Broadway play it was based on, Rex Harrison did the role. He likely would have been more suitable in the film. Stewart wasn't bad, he just wasn't the amazing actor we all know him in (those roles go to films as Vertigo, Rear Window, Wonderful Life, Mr. Smith, etc.). Jack Lemmon, while the screen presence is good, fails to truly communicate in his humor, which is weird cause he perfected comedy in Some Like it Hot and The Great Race, but he was OK; he just wasn't truly funny here. Ernie Kovaks was memorable here as the writer. While only appearing briefly, Hermione Gingold was a scene stealer in all her scenes, and provided the funniest sequence where she tries to counteract the spell. Elsa Lanchester was fine as the aunt, though her witch laugh can be annoying. And before he played America's favorite barber, Howard McNear has a delightful cameo in the publishing company. What lacked the most about the film is that it wasn't very funny. Lemmon got me laughing in a couple of places, but I wasn't truly entertained. Novak's cat Polywacket was the true scene stealer, and got me laughing the hardest, which is kind of disappointing for such a comic actor as Lemmon was. The romance wasn't the greatest either. While Stewart and Novak excelled in Vertigo, here, Stewart was, like I said earlier, a little too old for the role, and it was hard considering that Novak was half his age. I know I'm a little hypocritical cause some of the greatest screen romantic chemistries had older actors (Bogart and Bacall, Key Largo, Stewart and Grace Kelly, Rear Window, and John Wayne and Angie Dickenson, Rio Bravo, just to name a few), but the age difference here just didn't connect for me. Stewart realized that mistake after doing the film, which was why for the rest of his life, he mainly played married man roles. The romance was completely horrible, it's just that I thought the age difference was more noticed here than it was in Vertigo, which is even weirder cause both film were released in the same year a few months apart. The score was another epic disappointment. While some of the moments were completely haunting, I wasn't fully immersed in the atmosphere, which was why Bernard Herrmann should have scored the film. I would have given it a higher score. To put it short, Bell, Book, and Candle is a decent film about witches, and the premise was very interesting, but the film lacked its true potential, some of the comedy didn't fully connect, the score wasn't convincing, and Stewart and Novak's age difference in the romantic scenes were truly a creepy and cheesy distraction. It was an OK film, but it could have been a lot more entertaining, especially considering that the Bewitched show was more entertaining than this.

Eric R (ca) wrote: Though director Kevin S. Tenney has faded into obscurity in recent years, he did start his career in the late 80's with two solid horror efforts. The better known of his films is his second feature, the tongue-in-cheek gorefest "Night of the Demons" but his first film, the more subtle "Witchboard", very well might be the best of the two. Considering how celebrated "Night of the Demons" is it does come out as a bold statement but trust me, the solid characterizations makes this come out a hair on top for me.While at a party, s smarmy arrogant rich snob brings a Ouija board and with the help of the luscious Tawny Kitaen (ex-wife of Whitesnake leading man David Coverdale, and she's best known for appearing scantly clad in his music videos straddling cars and such) they conjure up the spirit of a 10-year old boy. All goes well until Kitaen gets addicted to using the board and the spirit decides to turn evil, causing all sorts of poltergeist and exorcist shenanigans. Can her skeptical boyfriend learn to work with his arch rival, the rich snob, in order to save her from being possessed?For me, what makes "Witchboard" better than "Night of the Demons" is the characterizations and strong character arcs, which is a rarity of horror films of this nature. Many horror fans might find the first half of the film to be 'boring' as it takes time to develop characters. For this I applaud Kevin Tenney as his script truly got me involved with the characters and actually care about their outcome. The strongest part of his script has to be how our two feuding mails in the love triangle learn to solve their differences in order to save a human life. The twist at the end on who they really contacted while using the witchboard was also a treat. Well done Tenney!Tenney is also able to craft many scenes of shock, including and not limited to a scene where a guy gets crushed by selveral slabs of dry wall. It might be light on gore (something Tenney would amp up in his next film) but he makes up for it with so clever kills and chaotic climax which mixes supernatural and slasher essentials. To top it off he gives the audiences some great creative camerawork, the most memorable being a scene were our hero gets pushed out a window and a scene where he shoots the Ouija board at the camera with the camera going through the bullet hole!It may not be as gory or over-the-top as "Night of the Demons", but the subtlety works for "Witchboard"'s advantage making it an effective low budget horror film. Sure the acting can be shaky at times, but for the most part it's good and strong characterizations makes this for a more engrossing horror film experience and definitely one of the better horror films I've seen to emerge from the late 1980's. "Witchboard" is definitely a horror film worth hunting down. Like "Night of the Demons" it did inspire two sequels: "Witchboard 2: The Devil's Doorway" and "Witchboard: The Possession", which I have yet to see mostly for the fact that the second film is not available DVD.

Sam Y (ag) wrote: Yes, I used to take vacations to play WoW. And it still only deserves one star, that how bad the movie is.