Le règne des ténèbres

Don't let the cover fool you for this poor movie. the plot had many holes init so i was lost right off the bat. the acting was imporable. the main charactor looked like a batman and agent smith from The Matrix. on a scale of 1 to ten one "being poking my self in the eye with dull wooden spork" and ten being "I loved it." I'd give it a 2 glueing my hand to senitive areas and yanking my hand back. The last time I saw a movie this bad it was called i, zombie. I'd rather watch that again than this.

Pease dont rent this movie it was a waste of film

I know that cosmic forces conspire against me and this movie is further proof of that fact. You see, were it not so, then this blight of a film, this cancer, this celluloid diarrhea that crept into my eyes and ears and then sat and festered upon my brain, forever burned into my memory, would never have happened.

Now, surely you must think "Fortey, what could be so bad? Why was the movie horrible? Didn't the end clinch it at least?"

Well, allow me to give you a guided tour of the special sphere of Hades that was this film.

To begin, this movie was filmed with a Sony Handycam. Possibly something older than a handycam made by Hitachi, from the mid 80's, I can't be sure. Some viewers appreciated the gritty look it provided. I was distracted by the "Uncle Carl's home movies" look it provided.

Describing the actors as wooden would insult furniture everywhere. Describing the dialogue as horrendous would be accurate and perhaps a little soft. But hey, I'm a tolerant guy. I like Ed Wood movies sometimes, it's hard to make my brain hurt with poor dialogue. But not impossible.

The producers of this film apparently saw the Matrix and a handful of vampire films (though I believe this shlock actually predates Underworld) and thought to themselves "Hey guys...let's take these ideas and then throw them in a blender with feces, slap it in front of a camera and see what happens." And so they did.

The ending though...ahh, the ending. What can I say about that except... I never saw it. I thought a sandwich would be more fulfilling than watching the rest of this film so I turned it off never to watch it again. And I forgot to make my sandwich. C'est la vie.

For those who liked this movie, I recommend Beaches featuring a young Mayim Bialik as well as tasty lead paint chips. It's the treat that can't be beat.

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!!

Now, I make it a point to see bad movies, and stick with them right to the end. I've only turned off one film EVER - "Miracles" with Jackie Chan. But now I have to add this to that list.

This movie was horrendous. Absolutely terrible. The dialogue was unbearable, the accents unconvincing, special effects were laughable and the plot was almost non-existent. It also had a look like it was filmed exclusively using security cameras, which gave them an extra bit of annoyance as one moment you can't really see what's going on because you're too far, and then the next not seeing it because the camera is shaking like mad.

The movie follows a scientist who, while trying to cure HIV, actually is making a virus that creates vampires. The amazing thing about these new vampires apparently is their skill at making kevlar clothing and the fact that they have absolutely no physical weaknesses - invincible to everything (sunlight, bullets, knives, garlic, etc.) - except being complete idiots who like to wear leather outfits and get beaten up as an excuse to move the "plot" forward. The main character tries to get back at the people who made him what he is, and I really don't care if he actually succeeded. I assume he does, but I wish he didn't because then there wouldn't be even the possibility of this movie getting a sequel.

Watching this film, I got the feeling that the filmmakers are goths who wanted to make a movie to show how much they liked vampires and how cool they looked in black clothing and shades in daylight. And sadly, it definitely does not have a so-bad-it's-good quality like so many Troma films because the filmmakers take this seriously, which gives it a completely unwatchable film.

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!