Ninja Zombies

Ninja Zombies

What do you get when you combine the deadly ninja with the horrific zombie? Amazing action sequences, suspense and scares, gore, violence and plenty of laughs! On the surface, Ninja Zombies is an action-comedy-horror film, or a zom-com with martial arts. At it's core, however, it's a film about friendship, growing up, and accepting responsibilities that you never wanted. Dameon, a young landlord with no real job or obligations, begins having nightmares - flashes from the life of a samurai on the run who tries to rid his world of an evil Hell Sword that could raise the dead (the Jigoku no Ken). When he finds a chest containing his family's ancestral sword and a mysterious journal, he realizes that his dreams were real and the samurai was his ancestor. He discovers that there are two swords: this one from the chest is good and grants him his ancestor's fighting power, but the evil sword from his dreams is also real...

  • Rating:
    4.00 out of 5
  • Length:90 minutes
  • Release:2011
  • Language:English
  • Reference:Imdb
  • Keywords:zombie,   ninja,  

What do you get when you combine the deadly ninja with the horrific zombie? Amazing action sequences, suspense and scares, gore, violence and plenty of laughs! On the surface, Ninja Zombies... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


Ninja Zombies torrent reviews

Dan N (ca) wrote: Holy crap...that was.....crap

Emily S (gb) wrote: Too TV-movie-esque for me.

Stuart K (kr) wrote: Directed by Bill Condon (Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh (1995), Gods and Monsters (1998) and Twilight: Breaking Dawn Parts 1 & 2 (2011/2012), this biopic focuses on a true American pioneer, one who broke down barriers and dared to be different in what was a very puritanical country. It has a very good cast and is well made, but it was largely ignored by mainstream audiences despite glowing reviews, maybe that says something about people's hang-ups todays. Alfred Kinsey (Liam Neeson) studied biology and the life cycle of gall wasps while at Indiana University. He met his future wife Clara 'Mac' McMillen (Laura Linney) while at University. After his book on gall wasps is published, he approaches the dean of students at Indiana University about teaching sex education classes at the University as a response to the anti-sex propaganda that was being shown in schools and colleges at the time. His classes cause a huge storm, and then he decides to do a study on human attitudes to sex around the country. Together with colleagues Clyde Martin (Peter Sarsgaard) and Wardell Pomeroy (Chris O'Donnell). Kinsey gathers enough research for his book Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948), which causes trouble. Condon is quite an underrated director, and it seems he's capable of turning his attention to whatever subject comes across and can make a good film out of it. He gets brilliant performances from Neeson and Linney, who make a good, open couple on screen, and it has a good supporting cast including Oliver Platt, Timothy Hutton, John Lithgow and Tim Curry.

paul s (de) wrote: Robot Stories is an indie film that apparently had a budget of about five dollars. As the title indicates, there are four short stories, dealing with artificial intelligence in one form or another. There is very little heavy lifting on display here; no deep sci-fi ala Philip K. Dick or even pondering the ethics of Robotic Code, or, except for the last tale, any pondering of morality or the soul, as one gets with Asimov. Belying the title, these series of stories are concerned more with simple human elements, and really, robotics, or AI have very little to do with it. For example: the first story, entitled Robot Baby, deals with parenting more than anything. A young, successful career couple decides to have a child - only in this future scenario the couple must first tend and nurture a robot baby. There is a nice twist at the end of this story, which makes the viewing viable, but really, without the twist the story is very "been there, seen that". The second story is so very "so what" that I'm not even going to give it a second thought, while the third has only a "cute" factor going for it, along with one of two decent performance in the film (oddly by the writer/director himself - hmmm, perhaps the entire project was merely a way for him to show off his robotic shtick). The fourth story has a bit of gravitas to it, containing the other bright performance, in a tale dealing with questions of the soul and the definition of humanity. Here there is a bit of artistry in the filmmaking, but otherwise the stories are all very straight forward, and the direction and cinematography echo that. Overall, nothing to write home about, or even truly recommend.

Brian G (de) wrote: Not a great movie but has great heart. Read the book whilst in Canada & was so happy that a movie was made albeit a tad weak but showed how far dreams can take you if you really live them & amazing to think that his love of the Creation started a whole movement & those baby beavers sure were cute!

Caterina I (br) wrote: So funny and at the same time so sad and deep. Very well cut too.

Chris C (ru) wrote: Leprechaun 4 In Space is better than its predecessor but still offers nothing new to the franchise despite a humorous performance by the demonic Warwick Davis.

Gordon B (ru) wrote: Like Peter Jackson(TM)s film Heavenly Creatures this forgotten fantasy film successfully walks the line between child-like imagination and paranoid delusion

David H (ag) wrote: I love this 70's French Crime Movies and this one is extraordinary specteculat Alain Delon as a Ex-Bank Robber who get released from Jail after 10 Years and a Social Worker who try to help him to found back into Civil Life and he found a new Girlfriend everything seems perfect but the Mean Cop who arrested him then stalk and harrass him everywhere he goes and drive him back into Old Behaviours until he kills the Cop and get executed on the Guilotine (Which is such a Barbarism) that's one Thing i love on French Movies the Cops are often the Bad Ones and the Deep Critism on the own System

edwin a (it) wrote: You don't see films like this anymore. 'Fires on the Plain' is an incredible depiction of the lives of the soldiers of the Japanese Imperial Army. Kon Ichikawa's masterpiece follows Tamura, a soldier with Tuberculosis as he wanders around the Philippine landscape in the last year of the war. He is sent away to the hospital by his commanding officer only to be refused treatment and so he is sent back. His CO tells him to go back and if they refuse him again then his last order is to kill himself with his grenade. He is refused again, but meets up with a band of squatters sitting outside the hospital. The next day they are shelled by American troops and Tamura flees, choosing not to kill himself, and from there he wanders from place to place trying to get to Palompon. He discovers that some men have been eating human flesh in order to survive, while others trade as much tobacco as they can for whatever they can get back.The film is filled with a quiet sense of desperation and desolation. Everyone we see is skin and bones, covered in dirt wearing torn and tattered rags. Ichikawa uses his camera to catch some beautiful shots of the destructed landscape and the Japanese soldiers who walk it. Kon Ichikawa was famous in Japan for making many comedies and satires, and there are moments in Fires on the Plain that are bitingly hilarious. Take for example a shot of what appears to be a dead man lying face down in a pool of water; a soldier walks but and asks himself aloud if that is how they will all end up, to which the man lifts his head out of the water and replies ?what was that?? and then drops his face even deeper into the puddle than before. Another hilarious sequence involves one man finding a pair of boots along the trail. He takes the boots, replacing them with his old ones. Another man walks by and sees that pair of boots and switches up for his old boots. The scene continues until finally Tamura finds the exchange spot and examines the boots left without hardly any sole. He looks carefully at his own and at ones on the ground, and deciding that they?re both kaput he removes his own and goes barefoot. The film is filled with incredible scenes, one after another. Like Mizoguchi and Kurosawa, Ichikawa knew how to use his camera to paint beautiful and stunning pictures. There are many stunning shots of men in barren empty plains surrounded by nothing but smoke in the air and dead or dying bodies on the broken earth. There is another incredible scene where dozens of Japanese soldiers attempt to cross a road guarded by Yanks in the middle of the night, all crawling on their hands and knees as the camera watches on from above. The film gets its name from the columns of smoke rising up from fires on the plains seen throughout the film. They represent to the soldiers life a little more ordinary; the lives of Japanese farmers back home burning husks of corn. Their beacons of hope for the normal life however are in hostile hands.The film caused a stir in its day with its graphic content. Much emphasis is placed on the horror of war, not just with the enemy but within your ranks and yourself. Kon Ichikawa?s Fires on the Plains is an incredibly authentic and moving, and somewhat disturbing, portrait of the horror suffered by the men making up the lower ranks of the Imperial Army. Clint Eastwood?s Letters From Iwo Jima, while it is a very good film, comes nowhere close to realizing the horror of war depicted in Fires on the Plain. (Eastwood was no doubt influenced by the film, seeing as he claims to be such a classic Japanese film buff.) Many war films show that war is hell, but we?re shown this from the winner?s side. In Fires on the Plain, we?re shown that war is even more hellish when you?re on the losing end.

Max M (ca) wrote: im not interested sorry

William S (nl) wrote: An extremely derivative (very much a poor man's Jane Eyre) and particularly over-ripe, gothic melodrama that has been around a little too long and is beginning to smell rather too pungently for it's own good. Tierney and a steller cast of great character actors (Walter Huston, Anne Revere, Jessica Tandy, Harry Morgan, Spring Byington and Price at his hammyest) are all wasted and/or shuffle about looking suitably bored and glumly spouting ludicrous dialoguel. Hard going but it does have it's moments.I've always wondered as well, WHAT happens to the child?? And why is it that no-one seems to know or care what happens to her??

Fred V (es) wrote: This movie brings us four Brothers that are out for revenge for the death of their 'angel' mother. It's a bit strange the movie decided to leave out the alive mother almost entirely (Spoiler alert: she gets shot in the first 5 minutes and dies instantly), so the Viewer is not allowed to get to know her even a Little bit. This makes it much harder to feel for the loss those four Brothers have endured. This movie has some heart: you still feel some empathy for foster Kids in General and those random four Boys in particular. However, the depth of this movie is comparable to the depth of a muddy Creek: its totally superficial from start to finish. Lots of unrealistic Shooting and Drama, not backed up by felt emotiion. I side with the critics on this one: it deserves 2,5 stars, but nothing more.

Madeleine Y (ru) wrote: So thrilling, great climax!

Des S (jp) wrote: I didn't think I was going to like this movie too much, but it turned out to be really good. I had how his movies are always sad, but I like how this one turned out.