Add a Review

  • Warning: Spoilers
    So it isn't horrible, but it also isn't good. If you are 12 and like skeletal warriors this is for you.

    Plot was thin, acting was sparse, effects were low budget but passable with one eye closed.

    The biggest problem with this film was in expecting an audience above 12 to buy, believe or have leaps of faith abounding in order to swallow some pretty big lies and physical impossibilities.

    Everyone dies, except the two puppy lovers, and no one cares about who dies since they are all weak actors and couldn't present a character that you might have any concern about.

    And tell me, who in their right mind wouldn't go for the gold after having fought tooth and nail defeating the armies of dead. The entire ending isn't believable and you are left with nothing worth remembering.
  • Well it was terrible, but it is a hilarious kind of terrible. A great movie to watch with a group of friends. Its got Skeleton Spainards, pitiful cg, Spotaniously combusting arrows, Volkswagen desert racing, characters who refuse to communicate,extremely fuzzy logic, acting worthy of the worst you tube videos, and now that I mention it a crappy you tube video is exactly what this movie felt like. recycled cg atrocious writing and painful plot development. You can usually tell if a movie is going to be bad if by the end credits you never knew any one in the movie had a name. And for some reason the audio quality was really bad, and while that may actually be a good thing (as you would not have to hear the stupid dialog being poorly delivered) it was still sort of annoying. all in all its like a said I enjoyed the movie but it was not because it was any good at all.
  • This was just short of being a complete waste of time. The stop animation skeletons saved it.

    It was strange seeing actors taking such a poorly written movie and playing it completely straight, as if they thought this was something good. That said the actors could on the whole act. I like "B" movies but they need certain redeeming features for them to work: either they need humor, gore or cleverness. This lacked all three. Yes there was some CGI and I suppose it almost gave me a laugh, but that is because it looked like rivers and fountains coming out of the people "bleeding". Seeing a one foot wide wall of CGI blood hit a windscreen and then in the next scene there are just a few dots of blood on that car...well...and this was about par for the movie. Just not worth your time.
  • At some point this must have seemed like a fresh idea, an army of C.G.I. skeletons defending a treasure. Unfortunately the skeletons, who do not speak, are more interesting, and have far better acting skills than anyone else in this movie. With stupid unnecessary female conflicts, ridiculous dialog "What the hell is that,blood?" "Yea this is not good", and "Indiana Jones" nonsense, "Army of the Dead" is a wannabe spectacle of awful proportions. What starts out as a dune buggy adventure, winds up with a possessed professor and illegal treasure plundering. BAD, and not good bad . "Sharks in Venice" is a masterpiece, because it's so bad it's good. This is just BAD. - MERK
  • Army of the Dead is a classic example of a film with ideas much bigger than its budget: a group of desert racers pitted against a legion of Conquistador skeletons is a wonderful notion, and using CGI technology to realise the complex visuals is perfectly OK in my book (I like CGI when done well), but, without enough cash in the coffers to do the concept justice, what is the point?

    The film starts off well enough, as a fairly likable bunch of thrill-seekers set off on a 500 mile high-speed journey, with one of their number secretly searching for the location of an ancient horde of gold. However, after he discovers the treasure, and triggers a curse that see hundreds of bony soldiers rise from their graves to protect the loot, the film goes rapidly downhill.

    With a skeletal army obviously 'inspired' by Jason and the Argonauts (and, consequently, Sam Raimi's Army of Darkness), a middle section which reminded me of Assault on Precinct, and a Terminator style ending (that last difficult-to-destroy skeleton looking more than a little like the relentless T-800 crawling after Sarah Connor), the film rarely feels very original (and is it just my imagination, or does the Army of the Dead's music also take its cues from the soundtracks of these far superior films?).

    Furthermore, the film's poorly developed script is loaded with plot contrivances and very silly moments that really take some swallowing: the hero's (obviously very rich) friends give him an original 16th century sword for a birthday present (unpractical when going on a long cross-country car journey, but so convenient against the undead); the guy seeking the treasure hires gun toting mercenaries to help him and looks surprised when he is double-crossed; a girl reveals she possesses super powers by lifting a huge boulder above her head; and the final survivors discover a convenient, abandoned radio station equipped with fuel and a massive generator—ideal for destroying their enemies.

    And as for the effects... in the right lighting (ie., very low), the CGI skeletal warriors are just about passable, but, for the most part, they look cheap (because they are) and laughable. Likewise, the various other digital effects—explosions, squirting blood, electrical power surges—are extremely amateurish and therefore quite unconvincing.

    Army of the Dead might possibly be fun for those who enjoy really cheesy B-movie trash, but will no doubt be quite painful for most others.
  • I just finished watching this movie and i just wasted 89 minutes. CGI Skeletons, CGI Blood. The story isn't half bad but i missed some real undead and good acting.

    I've seen a lot of horror movies including B movies but this one was over the top fake.

    With a bigger budget and some good special effects this movie could be something.

    I hope Romero's Army of the Dead is gonna be better (althoug i liked Land of the Dead) This is a story that screams for a big budget Remake. Some zombies instead of some lame CGI Skeletons then this movie would be interesting.

    I finished the movie because i never quit a movie halfway through. But this one i wont watch again
  • Warning: Spoilers
    It's really a terrible movie to me, I can't believe any score over than 1 point, maybe it's a different understanding. The storyline is awful, you might have seen over ten films like that, you could predict what will happen in the next minute very easily, and get a good preparation for every "scared moment"; the CGI was abysmal, the real people are definitely separated with animated characters, skeleton as well as the blood is so fake that is even worse than some computer games. I'm very surprised I could finish this movie with great patience because I'm wondering if it's true that the leading actor is Ross Kelly, and who is supposed not to show in any movie like this
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Army of the Dead starts as husband & wife John (Ross Kelly) & Amy Barnes (Stefani Marchesi) drive through the Baja desert in California when Amy springs a surprise on her hubby John, she has set up a weekend of desert rally driving with a group of their friends & professional guides. John is pleased. Along for the fun is college professor Gordon Vasquez (Miguel Martinez) who has his own motives for joining the rally, Vasquez know's the legend surrounding the lost city of El Dorado & it's gold. Breaking away from the main group Vasquez finds El Dorado & finds the vast amounts of gold inside but also discovers that the curse is also true, a curse that says when any of the gold is taken the skeletal army of the dead will rise to kill those who took it & return it to it's right place in El Dorado. Soon the Baja desert is swarming with an army of killer skeletons intent on killing all who have come into contact with the gold...

    Co-edited, co-produced & directed by Joseph Conti this low budget horror film homage to the likes of Army of Darkness (1992) & the skeletal army from the end of Jason and the Argonauts (1963) apparently had the working title Curse of the Anasazi & I was surprised at just how much I liked this, don't get me wrong that's not to say I thought Army of the Dead was a classic but for what it is I quite enjoyed it & was even impressed with it on a few occasions. At 90 minutes long Army of the Dead has a decent pace & once the titular skeletal stars turn up about halfway though it never lets up until the end, to be honest I am not really sure who I would recommend Army of the Dead to as it has plenty of flaws but I liked it. I liked the story about the legend of the lost city of gold & it's skeletal protectors who rise from the grave to safeguard it, the character's are basic & clichéd but serviceable & there's slightly more gore than I expected as well. It's just a shame that there are as many negatives as positives, it's fairly basic & predictable, a lot of the effects work is poor & the lack of any decent character's mean the film lacks any real depth. I don't know why but I just liked it, I can't be much more specific than that really.

    For a low budget film Army of the Dead has ambitions, from rallying scenes to an entire CGI computer animated army of skeletons that look quite impressive at times but at other's look laughable which does tend to overshadow the positives. The skeletons themselves are nicely detailed & look pretty good but some of the animation is very poor, the way they interact with the cast & surround objects is also poor. The idea of skeletons ripping themselves of freshly dead people to join the army is a neat idea & the blood soaked skeletons look cool but once again why does the blood not drip or why do they not leave bloody footprints on the floor? The electricity effects at the end are very poor as are the crumbling skeletons, why would the electricity make them fall apart anyway? There's some decent gore here, some gory stabbings, shootings & a slit throat included. There are also one or two good moments like the skeletons firing flaming arrows or a reasonably atmospheric period opening sequence set in 1590 as a group of soldiers are slaughtered by the skeletons but in silhouette against flickering flame lit cave walls.

    With a supposed budget of about $1,500,000 I think most of that actually ends up on screen, apparently filmed in New Mexico. The acting is pretty poor although the character's are so shallow the actor's had nothing to work with.

    Army of the Dead is a film with lots of positives that I liked but just as many negatives that I didn't, it's a film I didn't hate & would maybe give it another watch but I would still find it hard to recommend to anyone so the five out of ten is purely my personal opinion. I have seen much, much worse. A curious mixture of the quite impressive & the downright awful.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Wow, am I the first one to comment on this?

    This film has a simple enough plot. Archaeologist unleashes an army of undead guardians of a treasure. Skeletons wearing 16th century Conquistadore helmets hunt down college kids.

    Inexplicably, haunted skeletons who are immune to bullets and even explosives are killed by a Tesla coil.

    This shows the dangers of CGI being overused as a cheap substitute for other special effects. Not only were the skeletons repetitive. (All of them making the exact same motion, as though they were imposed over each other), but you had CGI used for blood spurts and explosions.
  • It wasn't as awful as lets say, Hide and Creep, but it was close. By the way, Hide and Creep is the worst movie of all time!! Not even as good or as campy as Plan 9 from Outer Space--don't rent it, ever! Special effects department on Army either didn't have much money or they fell a sleep on the job. Interesting skeletons, but really really bad acting. (The skeletons hissed like cats.) Weren't enough naked women running around either to justify the $1.07 rental cost. The guy who played the "professor" was just terrible. Really an amateur. He must've been an investor that demanded a part. This movie may have been good if they only had a new cast, new director, new special effects, new writers, new producers, so on and so forth. Just skip renting it--not even worth the buck at RedBox.
  • jake487527 March 2008
    Warning: Spoilers
    I don't know why Army of the Dead works; it just does. It doesn't do anything particularly well, and its story is filled with so many historic inaccuracies that it's almost laughable, but who cares. Army of the Dead is one of those things that horror fans spend weeks longing for, a good cheesy horror flick that doesn't take itself too seriously and still manages to deliver some laughs and entertainment… whether it means to or not.

    In the film, a group of ex-college students all go out on some sort of off-roding expedition as a birthday present to some dude… not my idea of a good time, but some people get a bone for that stuff. Turns out the good professor has an ulterior motive for dragging all of his ex-students out into the Mexican desert, miles away from civilization. He's got half a treasure map in his possession… a treasure map that will lead him to Anasazi gold in Mexico… despite the fact that none of the Anasazi ever lived in Mexico. Anyways, the genius professor meets up with a group of white dudes who have the other half of the map… and then they go into a cave full of Anasazi treasure… sadly, when they touch the gold they awaken an army of the dead. The army of the dead is led by the ghost of Vasco Da Gama for some reason… even though he never set foot in North America, and his creepy, skeleton ass leads a horde of Army of Darkness-style skeletons across the empty canyons and hills to take their revenge on the greedy intruders… which just happen to include the professor's unknowing graduates who are warming themselves next to a fire with bottles of tequila, lots of them. Will they survive the night or be shot to death with flaming arrows and ripped apart by swords?

    Joseph Conti does an alright job of directing and he appears to have figured out a way to work past an obviously measly budget… rent a bunch of cars and drive around the wilderness. Then have your actors camp out underneath the stars, get drunk, and have relationship problems. It's not the most exciting thing in the world, but Conti works with what he has very well. Within the confines of a small budget and some poor special effects, Conti manages to create a fairly interesting film with a serious tone and some moments of solid storytelling, which, though factually inaccurate in a laughable manner, still manages to keep the film from sinking into the realm of straight to DVD garbage.

    The acting in the film is typical low-budget garbage and no one really stands out as anything special. The characters walk around and deliver their lines as if acting is something new to them, but no one ever gets bad enough to ruin the film.

    The most compelling aspect of the film is its low-rent special effects. Normally I hate cheap CGI, but for some reason, it actually worked in this film. The special effects are very reminiscent of the skeleton work in Army of Darkness and there are quite a few of them. Sometimes there is some telling doubling and synchronization of the army of skeletons, but for the most part, when they are by themselves, they look pretty cool. The CGI gore even had a nice level of cheese factor as it sprayed nicely. It still looks fake as hell, but the kind of fake that seems to have some effort behind it.

    Army of the Dead isn't anything truly groundbreaking but it is a nice diversion from the piles and piles of truly horrible garbage that get foisted upon the horror-loving public. It does a few things well, and avoids doing anything truly terrible… besides not knowing that Vasco Da Gama never made it to North America.

    Final Synopsis: If you're Jonson' for some horror, Army of the Dead will do in a pinch. It's not the type of movie anyone is going to buy, but it is good for a few laughs. Give it a rent if you got nothing else better to do than watch the ghost of Vasco Da Gama cut down college kids.

    Points Lost: -1 for some skeleton doubling and synchronization in the CGI department, -1 for some bad acting, -1 for some filler scenes of cars driving, -1 for being laughably inaccurate in the history department Lesson Learned: Never follow anyone out into the desert. When sleeping with a scandalous slut in the vicinity, always look under the sleeping bag before you crawl into bed.

    Burning Question: How hard is to look up Vasco Da Gama and find out he never came to North America? That's almost unforgivably lazy.

    Army of the Dead 6/10
  • What do I like about this movie... Besides shotgun totting skeletons? This was a fun movie. It'd been a long time since someone made a film like Ray Harryhausen. This film delivers a great skeleton army. Although some of the computer animation for the blood and gore is pretty bad, the skeletons themselves are rather neat looking and the story is better than most movies of this budget. This is actually a pretty ambitious movie that tried very hard to capture the feel of the films like the Mummy, and succeeded to a large degree. Some of the acting seemed unnatural, with some under-reaction from some of the cast, but the good outweighs the bad, and the actors in this film were overall believable.

    I recommend this movie. The movie has its ebbs and flows and your interest might come and go, but overall, it works and it is worth a watch.
  • Good: The story could be interesting. Bad: The dialog is terrible, the filming is terrible, the CG is way beyond bad.(Poor use of it, not the quality.)

    It's like they had a free pass to not give a care about what they put together because it was cheap. I honestly believe that it was shot, and edited in two days, then hours later slipped in the redbox that I rented it from. To top it off, I didn't even pay for it and yet I'm still offended that I wasted my rental on this. I think that they didn't even read the scrip before they shot it, then didn't watch it before they released it. There is more directing and editing talent in an adult films than in this film.

    Unless you enjoy amateur films, and I mean REALLY amateur films, don't waste your time.
  • A group of archaeological students travel to the Mexican desert for a weekend of dirt racing in honour of their friend John Barnes' birthday. But the professor has an ulterior motive – along with some mercenaries, he plans to locate & loot a massive treasure of gold that was left by the Anasazi, an ancient people who lived in the area. But once he finally finds the treasure, he accidentally releases the treasure's guardians – an army of undead skeletons led by a feared conquistador who wanted to steal the treasure but died in the process. As the skeletons attack the students' camp, Barnes & his friends must find a way to defeat the hundreds of killer skeletons that are assaulting them.

    The killer skeleton film is a rare subgenre in the horror field. The most notable ones to use them were in a supplementary fashion – the old 1950s stop-motion fantasy films like Jason & the Argonauts had some awesome stop-motion skeleton warriors & more recently the Sam Raimi Evil Dead sequel ARMY OF DARKNESS, which was technically not really a horror film but had some brilliantly funny moments & a great battle scene with knights up against an army of skeletons. Since then, the idea of killer skeletons has been mostly dismissed… until now.

    Army of the Dead is a 2007 attempt to give the idea a whole feature airing. Of course, stop-motion is so passé so the producers used cheap CGI to animate a whole army of skeletons, which looks pretty good until you realise that the skeletons are just one model being cut-&-pasted several times to resemble a whole army. The scenes where the skeletons directly interact with the humans are shoddy & the CGI blood & explosions used are even poorer CGI creations.

    The story is a riff on the recent Pirates of the Caribbean films, most notably the first one – an ancient but cursed treasure with an army of undead guardians protecting it for eternity – but with that source franchise making a lot of money to the point that at time of writing this, a fifth instalment is being produced, this film's novelty value will be eroded significantly. The characters are reasonably well drawn – an advantage over some of the other horror films coming out of the independent sector as of late – and the acting is also quite good, but the film fails to generate much in the way of suspense & the skeleton attacks are quite hokey.
  • terrible acting. I now that emotions and American actors do not always mix good but this is truly terrible acting. In the Netherlands we call this "kijk Ike spiel ton eel" acting. Which is could be translated as:"look at me audience I am acting"-wink. What it means is that the actor tries to feel the emotion by convincing himself of it in a rational way. The emotion does not enter the stomach, therefor you cannot read what he thinks in the autocue behind his eyes. The most simple way tot do this can even be done rationally by putting a mantra of thoughts in your head. Try it: keep repeating the line:"I hate you"and ask your girlfriend for a cup of coffee. You will properly won't get it.

    Now B movies can be fun when the acting and the surrounding still is a parody. Bat taste for instance is absurd and the actors now and respect that. When actors try to act in a style that is different form the style of the movie, then as a viewer I get a feeling of discontent.

    I have to say that I did not watch the entire movie and I hope you do not as well, it is a waste of time.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    This movie is just plain bad. Save your money.

    Every cheap trick known to film-making is used in lame attempts to build tension and drama, they don't work. For instance, there is a main character who's a knowledgeable professor and ends up being a bad guy. Speaking of shallow characters, there's the drunk girl who is seldom seen without a bottle of hootch and hoping to share. Plot wise, it's more painful than that. College types seeking lost treasure guarded by the dead should be a formula movie that could have been good, even with a meager budget. It's not. The writing is bad, the casting is bad, the direction is bad.

    About casting... who's idea was it to make the film's "sweet, nice, pretty girl" a rather plain looking gal with a mole between her eyes that can only be described as distracting. Sometimes it's hidden by makeup and other times, it's as hard to ignore as John-Boy's cheek melanoma, and I just thank God it didn't have hair.

    The movie becomes predictable and tired before the first 20 minutes have gone by. A katana for a birthday gift around the campfire? Come on, like that wasn't going to be used. Turns out it's one that's 400 years old or so. Like college cronies can come up with one of those for a drinking buddy. The end tries to make the hero into something of a McIver (sp?) type genius who lays the legions of undead to waste with his daring-do, and smarts. Too bad, it's as poorly conceived as the rest of the picture.

    Skip this one.
  • john-ryan2-117 March 2008
    Warning: Spoilers
    Someone owes me 89 minutes of my life back. Or to be accurate- 55 minutes, as I switched this garbage off before it could do any additional damage. Initially I thought this would be OK. The initial scenes did an alright job to build the tension and the use of shadows to show the "undead" killing the Spanish chaps who were intent on stealing the gold were quite well handled. However, I thought that the use of shadows was for effect, but how wrong I was. The reason for shadows is that the CGI skeletons were so poor that Ray Harryhausen must have been spinning in his grave (if he was dead, which he isn't). The moment that caused me to switch off was when they used CGI to show one of the actors having his throat cut. This is sub-par Sinbad / Jason and the Argonauts, with the worst dialogue you can imagine. I pity the actors, who did their best with the lines they had been given, but the pauses between responses smacked of "it's your turn to say something". Save your sanity and watch Army of Darkeness. The real-time skeletons are 100 times better than those shown in this shoddy piece of film. Avoid.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I admit I was drawn to this movie by the art on the cover, with a Conquistador skeleton wielding a shotgun. As long as the movie had that in it, I promised myself I'd be satisfied. As it turns out, it had a bit more.

    A brief breakdown of the story, such as it is: The prologue tells of Coronado sending his army to look for the Lost City of Gold in America. They find it, and unfortunately, an army of skeletons who slaughter them all. If I've got the story right from the professor in the story (this film's Basil Exposition), the Mayans killed the Anasazi who in turn came back as bony avengers and killed the Conquistadors when they tried for the gold. Since then, anybody who even looks sideways at the gold is killed to protect it. And whoever gets killed has their flesh slimed away and turns into one of the undead.

    Cut to present day where the professor joins some young couples as they take part in a desert race in souped-up Volkswagens. Also along is a Jerry Reed look-alike as their guide and his honey. There is campfire talk, with the professor telling his ghost story and adding to it a personal addendum about a student who fell prey to the undead after finding and keeping a gold coin. Of course, this leads the prof himself to lust after the gold, hence the ruse of the race. He's out there to find the Lost City and he's hired some mercenaries to help them. In short order, the mercenaries are killed by the skeleton army's um, shadows. Just kidding. They use the shadows for effect at the beginning and it's fairly effective.

    Our hero of the story, whom I'll refer to as Hero, is a former student of the professor and, along with Jerry Reed clone, rescues the professor. They unwisely take him back to camp, not knowing he has a piece of the gold and that the skeleton crew will soon descend upon them.

    And when they do, that's, ahem, the meat of the movie. As has been noted in other reviews, the skeletons are CGI, but they're not that bad. If I had seen them as a kid in the 60s, I would have thought they were the best thing ever. As it is, they are the best thing in the movie besides our Hero's honey of a wife. After the initial attack on the campers, the survivors take off on foot and reach an abandoned radio station where the the final siege takes place.

    The acting ranges from okay to bad, the CGI skeletons are fairly cool, the blood is totally fake (it looks animated, as in cartoon animation) and the ending has one of those "how?" factors as in how exactly was the skelecrew defeated. And I did get my hoped-for scene with the shotgun ghoulie, so I was satisfied. There are plenty of story holes, like how did Hero and his wife get out in a beyond-damaged vehicle, but by the end, you won't really care. It's all about the bone boys and they deliver enough goods to make it worth a rental.

    Favorite line is when the Jerry-Reed look-alike sees blood smeared all over the front of a windshield and says: "Is that blood?" Really. Have fun with it.
  • raypdaley18215 March 2008
    Warning: Spoilers
    On the face of it this sounds like a semi-decent idea for a film. Then a quick look at the cast gives you a very bad feeling. I already predict lots of the cast are going to die as their all total unknowns.

    Unfortunately I can't report on if that's the case or not. The film had bored me before it was 10 minutes long. It wasn't going anywhere quickly (always a bad idea in a horror film, 1st law is cut to the chase!)

    I gave up on it and this is much as I can say. If you watch more than 10 minutes you've got more patience for the movie than I did.

    It had a decent enough start with the Spanish soldiers fighting the skeletons but then too much dialogue and story set-up getting to no action. There may have been action later, I was too bored to stick with it.

    Not for those with low boredom thresholds.
  • Like with most American films, this one is corny, narrow and stupid. That might be OK for American audiences who think Saddam was behind 911, but not for educated people. The plot was bug infested and the acting mediocre at best. The script was about as bad as it gets with maybe the exception of Bette Midler in her blasphemous movie The Thorn. I felt sorry for the actors. Whoever wrote the script should have taken a vacation and hired some high school kids who would have done a better job. The effects were nonsense, as was the hero who said he used "Physics 101" to create a Tesla coil. The people who made this film obviously know next to nothing about electronics, or for that matter physics. I gave it two stars because there was one scene where you might get a bit of a fright and it only cost me $1.99 at the local supermarket. If you value what time you have left on earth, don't watch this movie.
  • gurumaggie5 February 2022
    Warning: Spoilers
    It's not the good one with Dave Batista before you ask, leftover plastic skeletons are more convincing than the cast in this hilarious pile of poop.

    Apparently driving around in sand is arduous and a Ringo Starr lookalike creepy professor turning up for your birthday, yes just what I always wanted said no-one EVER!
  • Warning: Spoilers
    This review should only be one line long. Unfortunately, the minimum length is ten. I'm pretty much wasting space here until I get to the actual review, which will pretty much describe everything that this movie is about in a single sentence. If you find this idea to be extremely hilarious and awesome, I highly recommend this movie. The cover art serves as a similar litmus test. There's a conquistador skeleton wielding a shotgun. The skeleton army has quite the array of weapons. Swords, halberds, shields, heavy artillery, shotguns... you name it, they've got it. Furthermore, they have ingenious tactics involving flaming arrows. Whereas conventional wisdom dictates that you light ONLY the tip of the arrow on fire (so as to avoid burning yourself, the fletching, the bowstring, etc.) the skeletons have a superior strategy. They light every part of the arrow on fire, except for the very tip. As such the fire is incapable of coming in contact with the intended target, and it is thoroughly impossible to fire. Brilliant. Well, that should cover my 10 lines, so here we go. I confess I will ruin the end of the movie, but you will see it coming for about 30 minutes. VASCO DE GAMA'S UNDEAD SKELETON ARMY WILL BE ELECTROCUTED BY AN IMPROVISED Mexican TESLA-COIL. If you are giddy with excitement, rent this movie.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    As I started watching this movie I became a little confused, this wasn't the zombie splatter fest I had been expecting, but when I finally realized what I was watching I became pleasantly surprised. . I have to say I have no idea why this movie has an R rating. It feels much more the likes of a Ray Harryhausen or a Disney film. It's really in the realm of PG-13. There's almost no blood or gore, and when there is, it's not very realistic. I think it's being mismarketed, which is where I think the disappointment lies; it could have easily been sold as a good family movie. It looks like a low budget Sci-Fi channel movie, but with better effects. Nothing about it is earth shattering or ground breaking, it's obvious that it's extremely low budget, just like the Harryhausen films, but it also has the same magic. I found myself feeling like a kid again and that doesn't happen very often. Maybe it's just the simplicity of the story, or the naiveness of the cute blond. The story is adequate; certainly formulaic, but with the right twists and turns, the acting isn't great, but acceptable. The real gem in this film is those darn Skeletons. They are so cool in a Ray Harryhausen sort of stop motion way. They kind of jerk abnormally, I don't know if this was intentional or not, but it did give them a very unique creepy feel, like the ones in Jason and the Argonauts, except you don't have to wait until the end for the payoff. You get them from the beginning and throughout in abundance. I can't say this is an amazing movie, but it does stand out on its own. Maybe they stopped making these movies because nobody wants to see them anymore unless they're loaded with lot's of chopped limbs, gushing blood, gore and sex. This movie has a certain innocence to it that I find refreshing, and maybe some of you will too.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    ARMY OF THE DEAD is a low budget little action horror film, released straight to video and shot in New Mexico. The story follows a bunch of archaeologists exploring some ancient caves in search of some long lost Spanish Conquistadors, only to discover an army of reanimated skeletons bent on their destruction. This is one of those films shot entirely in the dark, full of cheesy scripting and even cheesier special effects. JASON AND THE ARGONAUTS this isn't: these living skeletons are bad CGI creations while the screen occasionally splashes with CGI blood. As expected, the acting is very bad and the action oddly repetitive given the scope to tell an interesting story. And that comes from somebody who's a massive fan of reanimated skeletons!
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Okey... I've seen bad movies, this is beyond bad.

    Don't know if this count as a spoiler exactly, but marking it as one just to be sure.

    Apparently, skeletons don't die of shotgun blasts, or any shooting weapon for that matter, what kills are fire. Now, thats just the most stupid thing i've seen. Skeletons die after a few seconds of fire? LOL! Skeleton being pumped with led : Lives Skeleton on fire : Dies (well again) Oh and electricity kills them too, and swords... but not bullets.

    Oh seriously, the blood in this movie was by the far worst i have ever seen, that goes for all effects too. The lightning... well, the carton made lightnings in He-Man looked more realistic.

    Save your time, i don't think this is good even if your stoned beyond recognition.

    TOTAL CRAP!
An error has occured. Please try again.