Testament

Testament

Nuclear war in the United States is portrayed in a realistic and believable manner. The story is told through the eyes of a woman who is struggling to take care of her family. The entire movie takes place in a small suburban town outside San Francisco. After the nuclear attack, contact with the outside world is pretty much cut off.

The life of a suburban American family is scarred after a nuclear attack. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechersSize
Download   TESTAMENT (1983) ws eng dvdripDVDRip5431712.2 MB
Download   Testament 1983 XviD - WunSeeDee -Other3746702.76 MB
Download   Testament (1983) ENG and RUS audioOther52261.46 GB
Download   Testamento final (1983) DVDRip+VHS Castellano Exploradoresp2p.avDVDRip2826725.48 MB
Download   Testament 1983 Nulcear DramaOther4339629.85 MB
Download   Testament 1983 Nulcear DramaOther2742629.85 MB
Download   TESTAMENTOOther35474 GB

Testament torrent reviews

Brandon L (ca) wrote: Definitely scary. This Cover-your-eyes worthy horror flick has everything you want. And does it better than the other all to the same Blumhouse found footage fiesta

Lora R (jp) wrote: I have an indifference about this documentary so I need to get the facts put your money where your mind is... Support the cause or support the person living with breast cancer!

Scott W (jp) wrote: Me gusta Pelotero. Pelotero es muy interestante. Es sobre dos peloteros de la RD.

Des S (mx) wrote: This was boring and had no romance and minimal storyline.

Zahid C (es) wrote: Day: ThursdayDate: 4 Mar 2010Time: 11.00 pmWith: No oneOn: PC

John W (ca) wrote: Lackluster story and performances. We're just not give anything to stir interest or any reason at all to care.

DC F (mx) wrote: Not all that it was hyped up to be. The plot was kinda on a whim and had what seemed to be a few random characters until the end. In this film's defense, it did get better towards the end as focus seemed to be getting better. Then the ending was rushed and senseless.

Marcus B (mx) wrote: Young John Wayne at his best! All the old-timey western character archetypes are present and done well. Very fun, simple plot, great movie!

Adam F (nl) wrote: "Mr. Deeds" holds the dubious honor of being one of the best of the "Happy Madison" films... but it still isn't really that good. The movie begins when billionaire Preston Blake dies while climbing Mount Everest without leaving a will, prompting the new heads of his enormous media company to search for an heir. It turns out that Blake has a nephew: Longellow Deeds (Adam Sandler), a pizzeria owner living in a tiny town in New Hampshire. Deeds is just a simple guy that enjoys his simple life in the small town and is just the nicest guy around, gladly carrying old people across the street on his back, making pizza delivers in person and delighting the inhabitants of the town with his improvised poetry. When Deeds is brought to New York City for a couple of days while all the legal details are worked out he's a real fish-out-of-water and deals with big city and big-money problems in ways that are just... well unconventional! Since he's a small-town kind of guy, he cuts a deal where, with the help of businessman Chuck Cedar (Peter Gallagher), Deeds will sell all of his majority shares and be $40 billion richer. As a new-found billionaire, it's no surprise that the media are hungry to know more about him. Reporter Babe Bennett (Winona Ryder) tricks Deeds into rescuing her from a "mugging" (actually it's her co-worker pretending to be a criminal) in order to get close to him and get the inside scoop. Deeds falls for her and takes her around town, enjoying the big city and the luxuries left to him by his uncle, which include an enormous mansion and a butler with ninja-like speed named Emilio (John Turturro). You know it's only a matter of time before it all comes crashing down though. Not only are his embarrassing antics going to be served up as breaking news to the country, but the girl he's fallen for doesn't really like him, she's only pretending in order to get the inside story (or is she?). On the financial side, mean ol' Chuck has nefarious plans that will mean trouble for the 50,000 employees of Blake Media.The movie's biggest fault is that it's bland. The romance element is very predictable, not only in its conclusion but in the way it plays out. When you hear Bennett invent a fake identity, saying that she comes from a small town with a ridiculous name just so she can be more similar to Deeds, you know that coincidentally it'll be the name of a real town. You know there will be that awkward moment of comedy when she has to try and pass off as an inhabitant of Winchestertonfieldville and the fact that she mentioned that she is a nurse will come back and threaten to blow her cover. You know that at first she'll only be hanging around Deeds to get the story but eventually his small-town charms will get the best of her and she'll fall in love, only for her deception to come right around and drive the two apart. You can also easily see coming that Deeds, because of his small-town upbringing, will comically clash with the stuck-up business types but that he will win them over because he's just so sweet. The only people he won't be able to win over, well those are the mean bad guys and you can tell they're bad because they're stuck up and only care about money. They go to eat in places where they dare to serve things like French dishes and listen to operas. Why can't they be uncultured like the audience watching this movie and appreciate the simple things, like a Frosty (R) from a Wendy's Restaurant(TM)? Seriously, even for an Adam Sandler film this story has such shameless product placement for the Wendy's hamburger chain that I was taken aback.I will give the movie credit and admit that as far as the "Sandler-isms" this movie does keep it to a minimum. That's to say if these familiar "comedic" elements were in the film, I didn't really notice them as much as I usually did. If we go through this quick list I put together (collected by watching other reviewers talk about Sandler's films and some of my memories from the other movies I've seen him in) we can just check off the ones that apply. In most films he's Jewish, wants to be or at one point was a firefighter and is a terrific sports player. We usually get a significant amount of jokes directed at minorities or people who are just different (for example homosexuals), people with physical disabilities (including people who are obese), a lot of low-brow crotch humor, cameos by his group of SNL buddies and sports stars, product placement, jokes that will only appeal to the lowest common denominator (for example toilet humor or fart noises), scenes of stupid pointless violence, a significant amount of scenes where his character yells at people and berates them and many shots where people fall down. Well, in this story Deeds is a volunteer firefighter, so there's that but I can't recall him being Jewish nor playing basketball. There's only one physically deformed character that gets made fun of (which is Steve Buscemi as "Crazy Eyes"), only one sports star and no toilet humor that I can recall. I'll even give a pass to the scene where Conchata Ferrell gets kicked in the groin by Winona Ryder because there are no actual testicles being injured there. Some of the more obvious "Sandler-isms" in the film though, they're actually genuinely disturbing. Let's take a look at the product placement of the Wendy's Restaurant for example. Deeds owns a pizzeria, so he clearly knows how to cook. He enjoys creating his own recipes (you see him delivering all sorts of weird pizzas to Crazy Eyes) and enjoys the personal touch of delivering his pies personally. Why in the world would he go out of his way to check out a fast food chain then? Doesn't it seem out of character? It's not like a tiny town like the one he's from would have a McDonald's or a Kentucky Fried Chicken so why would he be the kind of guy that loves going there? In fact the inhabitants of Deed's hometown seem like the kind of chummy people that would protest the opening of a Wal-Mart in their area because it would hurt the local small businesses. So why is Deeds going to Wendy's? The scene is there to create a bond between Deeds and some of the rich executives that are meeting him for the first time. Wouldn't it make more sense for him to bring them to a greasy-spoon diner, owned and operated by a family, or to have him cook food for them though? It could be a way to show the big guys the simple joys of a home-cooked meal instead of the stuff made by fancy chefs more concerned about using exotic ingredients and presentation than bringing back memories of your grandparent's cooking kind of thing. Instead we get yet another way to fatten the Madison wallet. Another really bizarre inclusion is the amount of violence in the film. There are at least three scenes where Deeds goes into a violent rage, severely beating someone and one more scene where his love interest has to fight another woman. What is this doing in a movie about a sweet country guy coming to the big city? Maybe I was wrong and this one is just like every other Happy Madison film after all.Hasn't this story been done to death anyway? The country bumpkin coming into the big city and teaching us the values of a simple life has been done many times now and without anything new to add to the genre, what's the point? This movie begs for an original thought and receives absolutely nothing. Give me a horror comedy where the big media mogul dies and his fortune goes to the family of inbred, cannibal hillbillies from "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre", now that's a movie with some original ideas and potential! I was going to give the movie an average 2 and-a-half out of 5. Not really good, not really bad. A good rental option, something you can watch once to pass the time and then just forget. The more I think about the movie though, the more I dislike it. I hated the ending for example, a real Deus Ex-Machina involving Deeds' Butler, who is mostly included to serve the audience a whole bunch of bad jokes about having a foot fetish. Yes I did laugh, a couple of times, but what does the movie offer? You won't learn anything or be touched in any way, there aren't really any memorable moments that aren't contrived and cringe-worthy. Consider this as well: this movie cost $50 million dollars to make. That's a lot of money. If you want to compare that to anything, the film this is based on cost about $846,000 to make. Yes, that was in 1936 so you have to consider inflation but even if the costs of producing a film were 50 times less back then it still wouldn't equal the budget of this 2002 film. All of that money, and this is what they came up with? It's just more of the same lazy filmmaking from Happy Madison studios, my financial advice is to save your time and your money; don't see this. (theatrical version on Dvd, October 17, 2013)

David R (gb) wrote: A brilliant ensemble comedy,filled with hilarious dialogue.One of Michael j.Fox,s "lesser" known movies that shows what greed can do to some people.This is an hidden gem of a film that,s ten times funnier than the so-called comedies that come out nowadays.