Higanjima is an eerie island occupied by vampires, from where none has ever come back alive. When teenager Akira hears that his missing brother has been seen in the island, he decides to investigate with several friends.

  • Rating:
    4.00 out of 5
  • Length:122 minutes
  • Release:2009
  • Language:Japanese
  • Reference:Imdb
  • Keywords:one word title,  

Higanjima is an eerie island occupied by vampires, from where none has ever come back alive. When teenager Akira hears that his missing brother has been seen in the island, he decides to investigate with several friends. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


You may also like

Higanjima torrent reviews

Marco P (us) wrote: When he's not flipping out drunkenly ranting at the Jews, or for not having his blowjobs, Mel Gibson can still deliver top notch entertainment.

Anjori H (au) wrote: don't see it! it is horrible!! bad story, bad graphics, bad acting.

Bertolt G (fr) wrote: It definitely is a thought provoking movie, at least till the end. I don't really understood what that was all about.... So if anyone has any good interpretations, you're welcome to write me.

Noname (br) wrote: Pretty good horror/mystery movie and one of the better i have seen lately actually. The story is altho very familiar/alike other horror movies .. a family moves to a new house and strange things is going on there. Worth seeing !

Jake S (br) wrote: Hard to watch a lot of the time but also intriguing. Not sure the film ended with any specific point which was frustrating considering the mental stamina it took to watch.

Matthew C (mx) wrote: Hulk is a film about Bruce Banner, a scientist who doesn't realize what he has inside of him. When he is exposed to gamma radiation it, unleashes his inner Hulk when he becomes angry. Overall, Hulk is a thoughtful film, but is lacking in action and has way too many shots of comic book style panels for scenes. Not a bad film, but really needs better action.

Donnie B (kr) wrote: It's a sensual and disturbing affair with a cast that will blow your socks off.

maria j (es) wrote: I remmember whatching this movie wene i was a little kid. i gues i serpressed it from memmory because it is the creepyest thing i had ever seen. i dont wana talk about it any more.

Joel J (gb) wrote: I have no idea how this film slipped under my radar, but it was definitely right up my alley. Granted it has it's share of indy sloppiness and goofy scenes, but this is a dark/horror/comedy fun house that will give you the good ol' fashioned willy-giggles. A young Buscemi is wonderful and strange (imagine that), and Ned Beatty is just perfect as usual. Throw in a mad clowned grandma and some volumptuous nudity and you have yourself a film worth the trip to the mailbox.

William S (jp) wrote: The 2nd half of the film was actually good. This would be attributed to the fact that the first act was literally the first half of the film. I love seeing the 50s-style fantasy applied to late 80s- early 90s virtual world takeover hysteria. Kudos.

Matthew S (ca) wrote: "Shortchanged by the Lord, and dumb as a jackass. Look at him now! Yes, sir, all you've gotta be is white in America, to get whatever you want!" Hal Ashby's adaptation of Jerzy Kosinski's novel is one of the most sadly underrated and often forgotten film of the 1970's. In a film career filled with truly magical performances, it is here as "Chance the Gardner" that Peter Sellers delivers his best and tragically final performance. An entire book could be written about the artistry that Sellers' delivers in this clever satire of American culture and politics. This film also contains the last time we would see Shirley MacLaine actually play a character that is not some skewed form of herself. It is unclear how involved Kosinski was in the actual writing of the movie's script, but it was never much of a secret that there was an uncredited writer, Robert C. Jones, who was very much involved. However this is undeniably a Hal Ashby film. The movie offers profoundly comic moments without ever being an obvious comedy. It is a satire, but the film carries itself with a certain dignity that seems to oppose the idea of "satire." As the movie quietly slips into a surprising turn of Surrealism -- the credits roll. I've lost count of the number of times I have seen this movie. I can find absolutely no flaws in it. Movies seldom get this perfect. A must see!

Devlin R (br) wrote: Robert Altman's "Nashville" imagines America as a microcosm set in the heart of the bible belt. The film profoundly satirizes America through metaphors of country music, the nations' heart and soul. Each character and scene represents in some way a different layer of American culture, culminating in the film's controversial climax. Altman asks here: "what is America?" and "what does it mean to be American?", questions that nag the audience throughout the story unfolding. Despite being a satire on Americana, there are moments that address these big idea questions that elevate the film from simple parody to a thought provoking indictment. This is where Nashville succeeds and becomes an artifact of American movie-making.

Dax D (ca) wrote: A weak ending to an otherwise superb noir. Its sense of character and plot is unmatched in the crime genre.

John M (es) wrote: It grows on you. So this is about an airline stewardess name Jackie Brown (Pam Grier). When the ATF catches her smuggling cash into the country, she is placed in a delicate position: does she sells out of friends or does she go for the bigger risk in pulling one over on the feds? Now if you have been following this blog in any capacity over the past year, you already know what a die hard fan of Quentin Tarantino. I love everything that he does for cinema, and his movies just jive with me, for lack of a better word. In the past, there was always one of his movies that I failed to connect with: Jackie Brown. He has such an excellent track record that I was convinced that "it's not you, it's me", so I gave this more than a few chances. I've finally come around on this, and it has worked its way into my rotation of films I watch regularly. The reason why this may not stack up for some is all in the timing: this is Tarantino's follow up to Pulp Fiction. There are plenty of imitators out there, and if you go into this expecting it to be that lightening in a bottle that is that 1994 crime masterpiece, you'll probably be disappointed, which is what happened to me back in the day. This stands on its own merits, and it is easily his most grounded film to date. I love him for it, but his movies all usually reach the point where it hits violent insanity. While there is that featured here to be sure, it's less front and center, and only really happens in brief outbursts and because the story calls for it. This movie is much less about the extremes and more about this woman in a rough spot, being forced to play both sides, and seeing if she will end up double crossing, triple crossing, or even quadruple crossing these dangerous men. While I do feel much more positively about this than I did about a decade ago, I still have one critique: you feel the length to this. It's all quality elements, and I don't necessarily feel that anything should be cut out, but when you get to the end, you feel like you've watched a long movie. I have exactly 0 familiarity in blaxploitation on film, so I'm sure I missed all the insider references, but in a way, that makes it feel like a much more original piece, for me at least. I love Samuel L. Jackson here who plays this snake in the grass, and Robert Forster owns the role of Max Cherry, which is one of the greatest character names I've ever heard. The climax where you get to see the same scene from different perspectives a la Rashmon is amazing, the soundtrack is one that you'll want to buy or at least save to a Spotify playlist, and this is all together a well put together story.