Army of the dead Reviews

  • Sep 24, 2012

    Never Trust A Skeleton With A Shotgun.. Or Anyone Who Says This Is A Good Film!

    Never Trust A Skeleton With A Shotgun.. Or Anyone Who Says This Is A Good Film!

  • Sep 19, 2012

    Although you can tell there was genuine effort put into making "Army of the Dead" the results are unfortunately incredibly mediocre. The acting ranges from passable to pretty bad, the special effects range from okay (such as the skeleton army, which is often show and cut in ways that look good despite the low budget) to laughably bad (some effects such as blood spurts and explosions are computer generated instead of being practical and those are some of the easiest effects to do in live action films). From a low budget production you can forgive the bad effects but the real problem with the film is that it isn't paced or written very well. At times you'll be wondering where the film is going and questioning whether what happened makes any sense or not. The only reason to watch this film would be if you yourself were thinking of doing a low budget movie and you wanted to see how it shouldn't and shouldn't be done because both aspects are seen in this movie. For everyone else, this isn't even "so bad it's good" territory. (Dvd, September 18, 2012)

    Although you can tell there was genuine effort put into making "Army of the Dead" the results are unfortunately incredibly mediocre. The acting ranges from passable to pretty bad, the special effects range from okay (such as the skeleton army, which is often show and cut in ways that look good despite the low budget) to laughably bad (some effects such as blood spurts and explosions are computer generated instead of being practical and those are some of the easiest effects to do in live action films). From a low budget production you can forgive the bad effects but the real problem with the film is that it isn't paced or written very well. At times you'll be wondering where the film is going and questioning whether what happened makes any sense or not. The only reason to watch this film would be if you yourself were thinking of doing a low budget movie and you wanted to see how it shouldn't and shouldn't be done because both aspects are seen in this movie. For everyone else, this isn't even "so bad it's good" territory. (Dvd, September 18, 2012)

  • Mar 02, 2012

    not half but minus 9 and a half

    not half but minus 9 and a half

  • Jan 13, 2012

    This movie was sort of action/thiller. I don't think it was such a good movie. the skeltions looked way to fake. storyline was fair good though.

    This movie was sort of action/thiller. I don't think it was such a good movie. the skeltions looked way to fake. storyline was fair good though.

  • Nov 20, 2011

    Terrible CGI effects, a script that probably reads like bad fan fiction and utterly unlikable characters, combine into a terrible tour-de-farce of horrible movie making. In fairness to it, I did manage to somehow actually sit through the entire movie (A miracle in itself). It's definitely worth a laugh, but don't pay any money to see this if possible.

    Terrible CGI effects, a script that probably reads like bad fan fiction and utterly unlikable characters, combine into a terrible tour-de-farce of horrible movie making. In fairness to it, I did manage to somehow actually sit through the entire movie (A miracle in itself). It's definitely worth a laugh, but don't pay any money to see this if possible.

  • Ed Fucking H Super Reviewer
    Nov 16, 2011

    Don't even bother. Shitty CGI.Shitty Acting. Shitty Editing. The concept was good enough I guess, but the execution is just too fucking horrible to come up with anything good to say about it. Avoid.

    Don't even bother. Shitty CGI.Shitty Acting. Shitty Editing. The concept was good enough I guess, but the execution is just too fucking horrible to come up with anything good to say about it. Avoid.

  • Oct 23, 2011

    Really poor effects mixed with really poor acting. Cliched characters and lacking in originality as far as story is concerned. Avoid.

    Really poor effects mixed with really poor acting. Cliched characters and lacking in originality as far as story is concerned. Avoid.

  • Oct 28, 2010

    This movie was one of those cases where it's so bad it's good! In the opening five minutes I wasn't sure if this was going to end up being a horror film or a porn flick, that's how it seemed to be filmed! I would have settled for a bit of both . . . heh heh. Anyways, the story revolves around a couple, Josh & Amy Barnes, who are university eggheads. For Josh's birthday Amy arranges for them to go off-road racing through the Mexican desert. However, little do they know of a ghost story from 1590, when a Mexican general sent his army to find El Dorado, the Lost City of Gold! Said army never came back from that expedition. Back to the present, a professor joining Josh, Amy and the others on this trip has his own personal agenda while in the desert and banks on finding El Dorado, thus claiming the treasure for himself. He sneaks off and although he finds the treasure, he also discovers a nasty little surprise that puts everybody on the trip in mortal danger! I really liked this movie because it was fast paced, it was a little different in terms of the camera work, and it was just plain fun (and funny!). Plus there were a couple of really hot chicks in it as well. The effects were pretty funny, especially when people spouted blood! This is one of those horror movies that you don't take too seriously and just have fun with. I'd recommend it to any horror fan!

    This movie was one of those cases where it's so bad it's good! In the opening five minutes I wasn't sure if this was going to end up being a horror film or a porn flick, that's how it seemed to be filmed! I would have settled for a bit of both . . . heh heh. Anyways, the story revolves around a couple, Josh & Amy Barnes, who are university eggheads. For Josh's birthday Amy arranges for them to go off-road racing through the Mexican desert. However, little do they know of a ghost story from 1590, when a Mexican general sent his army to find El Dorado, the Lost City of Gold! Said army never came back from that expedition. Back to the present, a professor joining Josh, Amy and the others on this trip has his own personal agenda while in the desert and banks on finding El Dorado, thus claiming the treasure for himself. He sneaks off and although he finds the treasure, he also discovers a nasty little surprise that puts everybody on the trip in mortal danger! I really liked this movie because it was fast paced, it was a little different in terms of the camera work, and it was just plain fun (and funny!). Plus there were a couple of really hot chicks in it as well. The effects were pretty funny, especially when people spouted blood! This is one of those horror movies that you don't take too seriously and just have fun with. I'd recommend it to any horror fan!

  • Sep 13, 2010

    Never Trust A Skeleton With A Shotgun.. Or Anyone Who Says This Is A Good Film!

    Never Trust A Skeleton With A Shotgun.. Or Anyone Who Says This Is A Good Film!

  • Feb 10, 2010

    I feel sorry for all the actors involved; if they honestly thought that acting was their calling, I feel soo sorry for them. I am hoping after this, they realized their folly and have moved onto (hopefully) more successful endeavors. Everyone in this movie is beyond lousy, and the only time I have seen such a general lack of talent in front of the screen is for Boll suck-fests. Ross Kelly as the protagonist, Josh Barnes, is one of the most bland, boring, and entirely unconvincing actors to be given a lead role. As his wife, Stefanie Marchese, doesn't fare much better, and the chemistry between the two is actually a negative number. Their professor, the aptly named Professor (if he had more to his name, I did not catch it), as played by Miguel Martinez, is some sort Machiavellian schukster changing allegiances more often than underwear (a glance at IMDB tells me he does in fact have a full name, I don't care). As the cliched slut, Jocelyn Tucker seems to be one of those air-headed bimbos that are constantly hammered; you know, the kind of gal whose idea of a good time is to go to the bar every night and get slosshed until she pukes in the bathroom stall. Now, that wouldn't be a bad thing, save for the fact that she seems to be the smartest character in the whole movie, which I'll get to in a bit. All the actors seem to have graduated from the "Hey, Look I'm Acting Class", which, if I notice you are acting, then you're bad at it. It's suppose to be internalized; a few exceptions do exist (a la spoofs, purposefully over-the-top movies). Joesph Conti directs as if he had nobler aspirations and watch all his dreams die during production, which is to say oddly. Parts of the film seem decently made, especially the opening prologue, with the use of shadows, but he fails to deliver any sort of consistency, and the whole movie looks rather terrible. He doesn't use many wide angles to showoff his desert landscape, making it look small and boring. Also, I do not know what kind of camera was used here, but it made everything look very cheap, like a terrible made-for-TV thing. The digital camera filters out lots of the colors, and the drab look just wears thin after awhile. The script is one of the dumbest ever. Why invite the slut if she's already trying hitting on you before? This is why I claim that she is the smartest person in the movie. She's the only one who does anything in accordance to how her character would do things, but it's still hollow acting. Our introduction to the Professor is one of most awkward, expository, bits in the while movie, and that's really saying something, as none of it sounds convincing. Once the actual adventure part begins, thanks to the Professor's looking for and disturbing some lost, buried treasure, which awakens the titular army, things looked as if they could pick up, but all the action scenes are rather poorly handled, and given the rarity of seeing the actors occupy the same shot as the skeletons, they do a terrible job of selling them as real. As far as the CGI is concerned, it's typical DTDVD, nothing great, nothing truly awful. Now, all this could have been pretty fun if it either had been played with a less than straight face, it wasn't, or if it went so far off into bad territory I could laugh at it, I couldn't.

    I feel sorry for all the actors involved; if they honestly thought that acting was their calling, I feel soo sorry for them. I am hoping after this, they realized their folly and have moved onto (hopefully) more successful endeavors. Everyone in this movie is beyond lousy, and the only time I have seen such a general lack of talent in front of the screen is for Boll suck-fests. Ross Kelly as the protagonist, Josh Barnes, is one of the most bland, boring, and entirely unconvincing actors to be given a lead role. As his wife, Stefanie Marchese, doesn't fare much better, and the chemistry between the two is actually a negative number. Their professor, the aptly named Professor (if he had more to his name, I did not catch it), as played by Miguel Martinez, is some sort Machiavellian schukster changing allegiances more often than underwear (a glance at IMDB tells me he does in fact have a full name, I don't care). As the cliched slut, Jocelyn Tucker seems to be one of those air-headed bimbos that are constantly hammered; you know, the kind of gal whose idea of a good time is to go to the bar every night and get slosshed until she pukes in the bathroom stall. Now, that wouldn't be a bad thing, save for the fact that she seems to be the smartest character in the whole movie, which I'll get to in a bit. All the actors seem to have graduated from the "Hey, Look I'm Acting Class", which, if I notice you are acting, then you're bad at it. It's suppose to be internalized; a few exceptions do exist (a la spoofs, purposefully over-the-top movies). Joesph Conti directs as if he had nobler aspirations and watch all his dreams die during production, which is to say oddly. Parts of the film seem decently made, especially the opening prologue, with the use of shadows, but he fails to deliver any sort of consistency, and the whole movie looks rather terrible. He doesn't use many wide angles to showoff his desert landscape, making it look small and boring. Also, I do not know what kind of camera was used here, but it made everything look very cheap, like a terrible made-for-TV thing. The digital camera filters out lots of the colors, and the drab look just wears thin after awhile. The script is one of the dumbest ever. Why invite the slut if she's already trying hitting on you before? This is why I claim that she is the smartest person in the movie. She's the only one who does anything in accordance to how her character would do things, but it's still hollow acting. Our introduction to the Professor is one of most awkward, expository, bits in the while movie, and that's really saying something, as none of it sounds convincing. Once the actual adventure part begins, thanks to the Professor's looking for and disturbing some lost, buried treasure, which awakens the titular army, things looked as if they could pick up, but all the action scenes are rather poorly handled, and given the rarity of seeing the actors occupy the same shot as the skeletons, they do a terrible job of selling them as real. As far as the CGI is concerned, it's typical DTDVD, nothing great, nothing truly awful. Now, all this could have been pretty fun if it either had been played with a less than straight face, it wasn't, or if it went so far off into bad territory I could laugh at it, I couldn't.