An edgy, terrifying tale about an intern who failed medical school... but never gave up surgery.

  • Rating:
    4.00 out of 5
  • Length:84 minutes
  • Release:1995
  • Language:English
  • Reference:Imdb
  • Keywords:murder,   police,   surgery,  

An edgy, terrifying tale about an intern who failed medical school... but never gave up surgery. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


Sawbones torrent reviews

Daniel P (kr) wrote: One of the most honest portrayals of a guilt ridden man who shuns himself away from society. This sleeper hit had quite an impact on me, bringing up many issues people face later on in their lives. The big question this movie brings up that all people wonder is will anyone miss me when I'm gone?

Ronnie S (it) wrote: Den kunne have vret rigtig fed og det hbede jeg p til det sidste ... Heldigt for det, for efter en time og 10 minutter cirka begyndte der at ske noget. Det der skete var s ret kikset og fngede mig ikke overhovedet. Rimeligt trist. Speciel effectsene (de f der var og der var MEGET lidt) var derudover pinagtigt ringe ... Vrre end jeg har set meget lnge. What a shame what a shame

Prashanth K (nl) wrote: Tried to rip off Dhoom 2 and Cartoon Network and made a big flop of both.

Genie K (kr) wrote: need to watch - in instant quie

Benjamin F (jp) wrote: This film does not do offer anything meaningful. It's poorly written, numb hearted and boring.

Landy c (gb) wrote: A movie with an Asian male lead that's not doing martial arts. A nice try.

Steve S (ca) wrote: Oh this was sooo funny, the 1 liners & sarcastic comments are right up my alley :)Str8 guy pretends to be gay to get to the girl....

Saiiara S (es) wrote: The actors probably would have had more interesting things to say over lunch than what the script had to offer them.

Gabita G (gb) wrote: Foarte frumos filmul

Ben G (nl) wrote: So much better than Top Gun!!!

Mike I (ca) wrote: Good schlocky horror

Sue B (us) wrote: oh i thought it was the one with wilson the ball. That guy looks like rupert from survivor.

Harry W (us) wrote: Deathstalker sounded like an ideal example of low-budget 1980's sword and sorcery cinema, so it was a film I most definitely had wanted to see.It is laughable how cheap the film looks, because it is clear that the film is filmed within a forest during modern day with a cheap ass camera. The setting his hilariously unconvincing and is below the quality of a fanmade sword and sorcery venture that you can find any kid with a sword and a camera uploading onto YouTube today. The visual quality of the film is rough and it looks laughably ridiculous. The rest of it is a lot of Styrofoam and cardboard sets in poorly lit studios which just makes the visual experience of Deathstalker even more laughable. Basically, the quality of the film starts out poor and gets worse as it goes on, and that makes the experience actually pretty funny. Deathstalker is an example of so bad its good, and the fact that the filmmakers had the ambition to do so much with so little budget is decent. The final product of Deathstalker is pretty stupid, but it's mildly entertaining from a cheap fun perspective. Just remember that the film is VERY cheap, more cheap than fun.Deathstalker also has the technical fault of having many of its sound effects poorly out of sync with the physical actions of the characters. This makes it more laughable and therefore more entertaining from a comedic perspective though this seems hardly to be the intention of the filmmakers, but in obvious honesty they really could not know much about what they were doing.And the storytelling is laughably bad. With its terribly generic script and plot dynamics going in so many directions but never having any consistency whatsoever, Deathstalker is hilariously weak in how it attempts to puke out its story through terrible visual elements and a dumbfounded sense of filmmaking from director James Sbardellati. It is clear that he is far from aware what it takes to make a good film, but he manages to get away with making a film that is so bad that it is good, and a prime example of that kid of film and just what low budget filmmaking in the 1980's was all about.Deathstalker essentially knows where its best possibilities lie because of its budgetary limitations and the timeframe of its release, so it fills itself with sword fighting and nudity. While everything in Deathstalker looks really cheap, at least it bothers to incorporate in plenty of action with all kinds of sword fighting and laughable wrestling sequences as well as plenty of appealing female nudity. Deathstalker embodies the limitations of its low-budget 1980's film style and tries to do everything it can as a matter of entertaining its audiences. I'm sure that back in its 1983 original release it would entertain a lot of the senseless teenage male audiences looking for cheap fun action and attractive naked women, so I guess it is interesting to look back at Deathstalker as an iconic symbol of its timeframe in underground cinema. And like I said, audiences that can find entertainment with a film that is so bad that it's good and so cheap that it's fun may find Deathstalker entertaining. I know that to a certain extent I did, and the musical score in the film was ok with it being the only technical quality to boast much about at all. Of all the negative qualities of the film that boast a lot of entertainment, Rick Hill's lead performance just charters the ridiculous story of the film through more and more hilarious territory.Rick Hill looks like a skinnier and constantly constipated version of Lou Ferrigno in Deathstalker, but he fails to match up to the same kind of heroism that Lou Ferrigno put into his perfrormances as Hercules and The Incredible Hulk. His lack of acting experience is absolutely hilarious because he seems completely confused at the concept of acting and spends the majority of the film simply stopping, thinking "what do I do now? Oh yeah" and then going forward with random physical actions and uttering his lines completely charisma free. Rick Hill's lack of acting talent is one of his most hilarious assets as the lead in Deathstalker.Lana Clarkson is also an interesting presence because she is very attractive and the fact that her career in the 1980's flourished through many sword and sorcery films thanks largely to her career being kicked off thanks to this film, so Deathstalker did at least do something good for the careers of one of its cast members.So in the end, Deathstalker is a cheap and stupid film which the picky viewers will disparage, but audiences looking for cheap 1980's fun filled with action and nudity do not need to look much further than Deathstalker.

Oscar T (nl) wrote: La regla general debera ser que todos los autores escribieran el guin para las pelculas basadas en sus obras, as como en Magic que supera a su homnimo literario.

Haytham K (us) wrote: It's amazing that even after 75 years this film is still nice to watch with its witty dialogue and enjoyable performances!

Stephen W (br) wrote: Applaling! Bad acting, very bad CGI ( it's like it was done in Photoshop) and a terrible story. Don't even waste your electric with this tripe

Simon T (ru) wrote: Wonderful comic riff on Bonnie and Clyde, produced by and starring the brilliant Jim Carrey and a fine supporting cast that includes Tea Leoni, Richard Jenkins and a sleazy Alec Baldwin, hungrily skewering all the Trump-like monstrosities we know he loathes. It's zippily directed by Dean 'Galaxy Quest' Parisot, who knows exactly when to end things. Very underrated by the critics.

Farsheed F (fr) wrote: Three Words, Mind Numbing Action. Stupid fun, but lacks in a coherent plot and acting is sub par from most of these legends.