30 reviews
A Skeletons one weakness is Lanterns
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.
Low Budget, Low Entertainment
Not even its "B" movie status saves this one.
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.
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.
- stormruston
- Mar 9, 2008
- Permalink
Soooooooooooo Baaaaaaaaaad
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
- merklekranz
- Jan 4, 2010
- Permalink
We're gonna need a bigger budget.
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 generatorideal 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 effectsexplosions, squirting blood, electrical power surgesare 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.
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 generatorideal 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 effectsexplosions, squirting blood, electrical power surgesare 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.
- BA_Harrison
- Jul 14, 2008
- Permalink
B movie of all B movies (Fake blood, Fake acting)
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
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
- dennisvanelten
- Mar 7, 2008
- Permalink
Very very very terrible
Not as bad as I expected, I have seen a lot worse then this.
- poolandrews
- Jul 20, 2012
- Permalink
CGI can make anyone a filmmaker - NOT!
Baaaaaaaaaaad to the bone!
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.
- bigdarvick
- Jun 8, 2008
- Permalink
Better than bad
"You never know what you will find in the desert."
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.
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.
- JSmith00234
- Mar 6, 2008
- Permalink
Bad for low budget
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.
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.
- joeymarkgraf
- Oct 17, 2008
- Permalink
Cheap CGI but a cool concept.
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.
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.
- DigitalRevenantX7
- Aug 25, 2015
- Permalink
bad acting
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.
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.
No Comment
- raypdaley182
- Mar 14, 2008
- Permalink
Why, oh why?
- john-ryan2-1
- Mar 16, 2008
- Permalink
Goofy enough to watch once
Worse than awful
Complete and utter garbage
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.
- david-byrne
- Apr 20, 2011
- Permalink
Just lifeless
The premise of reanimated skeletons on the rampage is as imaginative as "Army of the Dead" ever gets.
The characters are telling ghost stories at the campfire. Naturally, one recounts the film's backstory. The next day a greedy man tries to steal the treasure along with some mercenaries.
Naturally, to establish the mercs are terrible people, their boss pushes the greedy archaeologist to promise more riches, both from the treasure and otherwise, then tries to murder him after reaching the gold anyways, apparently his previous antics didn't qualify as obviously evil.
One of the expedition is rescued by the central characters, of which some exist solely to provide more deaths - literally, some people are only on screen in group scenes.
If you intend on watching a film almost interchangeable with many other horror movies, try viewing this.
The characters are telling ghost stories at the campfire. Naturally, one recounts the film's backstory. The next day a greedy man tries to steal the treasure along with some mercenaries.
Naturally, to establish the mercs are terrible people, their boss pushes the greedy archaeologist to promise more riches, both from the treasure and otherwise, then tries to murder him after reaching the gold anyways, apparently his previous antics didn't qualify as obviously evil.
One of the expedition is rescued by the central characters, of which some exist solely to provide more deaths - literally, some people are only on screen in group scenes.
If you intend on watching a film almost interchangeable with many other horror movies, try viewing this.
- BakuryuuTyranno
- Jun 15, 2012
- Permalink
A tremendous victory.
This movie is great for kids and those who never grew up
- Animatron01
- Mar 7, 2008
- Permalink
A generous 3/10 from this reviewer!
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)
- squirrel_burst
- Mar 28, 2015
- Permalink
A huge wasted opportunity
- Leofwine_draca
- Sep 1, 2017
- Permalink