Le règne des ténèbres

The only halfway decent thing about this movie is the cover art. It's easy to see why the principals have no other movie credits - they're just that bad. The only glimmer of on screen talent is from David No, with a real director and a real script he might hope to turn in a creditable performance.

Kel Dolen's lisping narration is a boring attempt to provide some sort of continuity and story line that would otherwise be totally absent from this lame excuse for a movie.

There is one shocker connected to this movie; according to the 'Official' website, they are making a sequel!

This movie is so completely awful it's difficult to know where to start! Firstly, 'El Mariachi' is namedropped on the DVD cover and we are led to believe this is a similar looooow budget effort. But in the commentary track the directors Kel Dolen and David Allen let slip it cost a million dollars! Now, by Hollywood standards that is low, but I wouldn't exactly call that a shoestring budget! 'Pi', 'Man Bites Dog' and 'Laws Of Gravity' are three movies that immediately spring to mind that show what can be done with very little money but TALENT and drive, and closer to home Peter Jackson's 'Bad Taste' was a cheap but original and entertaining horror movie that I really enjoyed. So there's no excuse for why 'Reign In Darkness' is so absolutely terrible! I can't think of anything good to say about this. The script stinks, there are no real characters with any substance or funny lines or any real logic behind it. The digital photography is passable I suppose but the acting stinks and the fake American accents are laughable. I couldn't help but wonder why Dolen and Allen made such an unoriginal and uninspired wanna-be mainstream movie in the first place. Why bother trying to compete with Hollywood product like 'Blade' when instead they could attempt something totally extreme and unlike anything Hollywood already produces? Someone like say, the astonishing Takashi Miike would be a more fruitful inspiration rather than this third-rate John Woo schtick. Surely being outside the mainstream allows you to be MORE creative and adventurous, not less! Maybe they were treating this is a show reel and are angling for a mainstream Hollywood career. If that's the case I wish them luck (because they're really gonna need it!), but otherwise I'm baffled about where they are coming from. Perhaps their constant references to Lucas and Spielberg on the DVD commentary says it all. I would say 'Reign In Darkness' is the worst Australian vampire movie of all time, but I've seen 'Bloodlust', and that, believe or not makes this look like 'The Matrix'! Even so this is one of the poorest Australia movies I've seen in many years, and is to be avoided like the plague!

First i need to say that i took this movie out without watching it all.....but i would bet good money it didn't get any better! There are so many things wrong with this movie that i felt like taking notes just to keep track of them. I mean, what is going on here!? Why is he walking around in daylight? Did i miss something? Why are they injecting homeless people? Why is everybody talking like that and what is the deal with the guy with the southern accent? Maybe they wrap it all up at the end....like i said i took it out so who knows. Don't waste your money renting this. The acting would be laughable if it weren't actually painful to watch. I read somewhere that this movie had a million dollar budget, the largest percentage of which seemed to me to have been spent renting the bmws in the chase scene. They're convertibles, and our "hero" is driving one with the top down in broad daylight. That's where i turned it off!!

I rented this expecting a mildly entertaining vampire/horror movie. The box artwork and description sure made it sound interesting. It tries to be a combination of "Blade" and "The Matrix" at once and fails miserably on both goals.

Very poorly executed in almost every possible way. It was apparently shot on the same Sony digital camera systems that Lucas used on the last Star Wars movie. But the picture on this film is only decent and looks quite fake and bright. Why they even bothered amazes me since this was obviously a very low-budget movie to begin with. The sound is also very poorly done, i could not even understand much of the dialogue throughout the movie.

Avoid even renting this waste!

OK, first things first, let me get a little rant out of the way: IF YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE AN EX-SPECIAL FORCES BOUNTY HUNTER IN YOUR MOVIE MAKE SURE HE OR SHE CAN ACTUALLY SPEAK IN THE DIALECT YOU WANT THEM TO! The Aussie trying to talk like an Alabama native was, quite possibly, the dumbest idea in cinema history. Except for casting Judge Reinhold as a Black Ops officer in "Project: Human Weapon".

The cinematography wasn't all that bad (except the part where I could actually see the rig they used to lift people off the ground) and it showed what the future of Independent Film will look like (sharp, clear, and almost as good as the studios) but the people behind the camera must've blown their camera budget on that awful looking Kevlar vest thing because instead of buying a red lens filter to simulate night time they just turned the contrast on the camera WAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYY down. Awful. So, yeah, it looked OK despite having a couple of glaring mistakes but that simply wasn't enough to save a horribly written, shoddily directed, badly acted piece of Australian crap.