Vampire Clan

Vampire Clan

Five friends welcome real life vampirism into their lives. They cut their own wrists and let their friends drink from them. Rod, the leader, and a very psychotic young guy, ends up killing Heathers parents and stealing their car to go on a crazy raod trip. His behaviour begins to frighten his friends, though they went along with it at first. All end up in prison except Heather.

Based on the true story of the murder of a girl's parents in Eustis, FL (USA), five teens in a vampire cult on the run are captured by police in New Orleans, LA and tell their tale of how they got there. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechersSize
Download   Vampire.Clan.2002.DvDrIp.XviD-AlIeNDVDRip4248699.16 MB
Download   Vampire.Clan.2002.SPANISH.XVID.[wwwMas.org]Other2929699.59 MB
Download   Vampire.Clan[dvdrip][spanish]DVDRip3232699.59 MB

Vampire Clan torrent reviews

Darthatron (ca) wrote: I really enjoyed this movie. I had gotten and played the video game, and when I saw an ad on TV, I really wanted to see it.

Namir G (ru) wrote: - Ryan Reynolds and Jason Bateman. Two of my favorite actors, and probably why this is in my queue.- Best quote so far: "You know the adults are about to fire up a work day, right?"- Apparently, wishing while peeing into a fountain works equally as well as just tossing change in.- So they've switched places. Like in the Parent Trap, but instead of adorable pre-drug Lindsey Lohans, they're a professional dad & a deadbeat actor.- As the dad explains his world, cut to scene in day care. "These are called children, or dependents. Never disparage your own children -- everything they do is a miracle from God. When they're bad, it's only because they're tired or going through a phase. When other people's kids are bad, however, it's because of indulgent parenting or innate defects."- There's a restaurant called the Abattoir.- Takes place in Georgia! They're at the Georgia Aquarium!- That lady just waggled her finger playfully at her date while holding a drink. I found it strangely alluring.- This movie has more bad tropes than a Google search for tropes.- City Hall called them back. Definitely a make-believe movie.

Vincent L (mx) wrote: This film created strong images and atmosphere. However, the decision to have the murder revenge attempt does not seem to base on any facts, making the whole operation to appear like a kid's game. Very well acted though.

Anglique C (es) wrote: I've never heard about this movie before, so I have nothing to expect. As the movie went for about 20 minutes, I thought that this was just going to be another typical dating movie. Sometimes I shake my head and rolled my eyes, but there were also some moments that can put a smile on my face. The ending was unpredictable, which is the most interesting thing about this movie.

Haleigh S (it) wrote: This is basically a fabulous hunk of info about the war for dummies. It is insightful, its HONEST, and I for one appreciate how the angle is compassionate for humans vs anger towards the government. Besides 'The cove' this has to be my favorite documentary ever.

Brady H (ca) wrote: This is totally not a movie for me.

Thomas K (de) wrote: Good movie, lovely images of Palestine, solid story line, although I always thought that Saladin had all the Templar's captured at Hattin killed and spared the soldiers who weren't sworn to God..."Saladin ordered that they should be beheaded, choosing to have them dead rather than in prison.'' - Imad ed-Din, Saladin's Secretary.But one can't be too picky. Good movie.

Amy S (fr) wrote: I think I want to see Mad Hot Ballroom before I see this, but I'm down for anything with Antonio Banderas.

Nick B (au) wrote: I did enjoy it while I was watching it a really stupid comedy that had all these dmb moments but after I watched it and thought back i thought this actually was a pretty bad movie, the idea was good and the two leads werent that bad but the movie just managed to fail. Is worth to the sherminator play a character who isnt a dork.

Gary C (jp) wrote: English film, no more to be said !

James B (au) wrote: Amazing cast! Wonderful cinematography! Amazing lighting! Wonderful sets! A wonderful period piece with a Kafka-esque flavor! Great soundtrack! Highly recommended!

Avery B (br) wrote: I remember thinking it was cool too...but it is mediocre when it comes down to it.

Greg W (ca) wrote: sorry 4 me corman knows how 2 get shit that's soooo bad-it's good this is an example of.

Pa K (es) wrote: I actually thought this was very well done. big Ross Martin fan sorry that he was quite quickly dispatched of and just his voice was the rest of the movie.I thought the movement of the robot was good. I thought it was a cool looking robot where it was big but also wide and weird. invoices that made when it's trying to first speak or just chilling in a way. doesn't go over the same old tracks that most of the monster movies like this do yes it is pretty much but the heavy-handed moral but still it was very well done

Harim K (ru) wrote: poor man's casablanca but in tokyo

Senor C (au) wrote: 3rd in the Universal Dracula series isn't really about the son of Dracula but rather another vampire using a backwards Dracula name (you'd be wiser to use a better alias & it doesn't take too long for others to realize that he's the Prince of Darkness). It takes a little getting used to Lon Chaney Jr in the vampire role because of his size & that moustache. After Bela has mastered the role it's a little difficult to fill the cape (Christopher Lee is the only one who does it better)

Tim S (us) wrote: I think that I would have a difficult time recommending Crumb to people. It's not your everyday run-of-the-mill documentary. It gets down and dirty with its subject, which is cartoonist R. Crumb, delving into not just his private life, but his private thoughts and other sordid details. I also can't say that I entirely enjoyed the film. It's certainly not bad, but it felt overly long to me, like it needed some tweaking. I think the reason is because it doesn't have any sort of real pace to it. You're not being kept up to speed with anything. It's just a series of interviews cobbled together in a certain order, more or less. It works for what it is, but it still felt a like a little too much. I guess if you're a die-hard Robert Crumb fan and his work then the approach to this documentary probably won't matter. It's a very gritty and detailed look at one of the industry's strangest and most controversial artists, but you won't always like what's being said or what's being shown to you.

Robert B (kr) wrote: Wendy and Lucy (Kelly Reichardt, 2008)So it seems like everyone I know went wildly in love with Wendy and Lucy at some point in the past three years. They're not the only ones; the movie has an impressive 84% rating on Rotten Tomatoes as I write this. In the face of such blinding opposition, I will say from the outset that I can't be sure my main criticism of this film is something that's actually there or something I'm reading into it, and that probably hinges on the answer to a single question. But I'm getting ahead of myself.Plot: Wendy (Brokeback Mountain's Michelle Williams) and her dog Lucy are on a cross-country trip in a ramshackle car to Alaska, where Wendy is hoping to get a job (or a job is waiting for her). She makes it as far as Oregon when her car breaks down. She's already economizing something fierce, but it seems that if she shifts a few things, she should be able to cover the cost of repairs. After dropping her car off at the garage, she takes Lucy over to the local grocery store, ties her to a post outside (since dogs are not allowed in), then conducts a ham-fisted shoplifting attempt that gets her detained"during which Lucy is taken to the local pound. The rest of the movie details Wendy's quest to recover her dog.And here's the question: what was Kelly Reichardt's intention with Wendy's character? How I feel about the entire first hour of this movie hinges on that question. If we are supposed to be seeing Wendy made her bed, and now she has to lie in it,? that's all well and good, and you've got a mediocre, if well-shot, slice-of-life drama. But there are indicators that this is not the case. The largest of them is Larry Fessenden's cameo, which steers the movie in a somewhat different direction (and is the movie's first truly striking scene, which adds to the gravitas): it's the first point at which something happens to Wendy that is entirely out of her control, and it's here that it crystallized"perhaps erroneously"in my head that Reichardt does not want us to see Wendy as a character who is making increasingly bad choices and is being forced to live with the consequences, but wants to show her as soe sort of indie/counterculture/hipster antihero archetype. And if that is truly the case, the first hour of this movie is loathsome, patently offensive, and no longer justifies the final fifteen minutes, which are a great deal better (and during which Wendy finally makes the single logical, objectively-right choice she makes during the entire course of the movie).Your call; I'm giving it the gentleman's C. ** 1/2