Wrong Turn 5: Bloodlines

Wrong Turn 5: Bloodlines

A small West Virginia town is hosting the legendary Mountain Man Festival on Halloween, where throngs of costumed party goers gather for a wild night of music and mischief. But an inbred family of hillbilly cannibals kill the fun when they trick and treat themselves to a group of visiting college students.

A group of college students, on a trip for Mountain man Festival on Halloween in West Virginia, encounter a group cannibals, who want to save their cousin from jail. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


Wrong Turn 5: Bloodlines torrent reviews

Nichele P (de) wrote: This movie was an eye opener and sad to know that Africans are taken from their families and put into slavery.

Little D (br) wrote: I think we have enough horror films about deformed, inbred cannibals.

Andrew D (fr) wrote: Not as funny as his other stuff, but has its moments.

Nikki V (it) wrote: jai vraiment apprcier ce ifl qubecois dans une ambiance triste les personnage vive des souvenir et des moments fort... le spectateur passe du rire aux pleurs

Matthew P (gb) wrote: Survival Island (known as Three in some territories) is a film so bad that it makes The Room look mediocre. Not good, as I'm not sure if that's even possible, but mediocre. An average movie. If you've seen The Room, you know how enjoyable it can be in a so-bad-it's-good way. Survival Island, conversely, is so bad, so boring, that it's impossible to enjoy as a film. As an advertisement for Kelly Brook's body, however, it succeeds. Just look at the poster and tell me what drew your eye. The film begins with a cruise ship, and introduces the three characters we're going to be spending way too much time with. There's a married couple, Jack (Billy Zane) and Jennifer (Brook), and a servant on the boat, Manuel (Juan Pablo Di Pace). The boat catches fire, and before you know it, all three are marooned on an island, with Manuel being the only one who knows what to do. He grew up in places like this, you see, so he knows how to catch and cook fish, what plants you can eat, and so on. And he has his eye on Jennifer, and has since the first time he saw her, although we never find out exactly why. Survival Island wants to cross the love triangle storyline with a survival movie. It fails in both extents. None of the relationships established within work, and there never felt like there was any danger to being on the island. Why Jennifer married Jack is not explained, as he's an arrogant, self-centered man who cares little for anyone else. Why Manuel falls instantly in love with Jennifer never gets explained. Why Jennifer would cheat on her husband -- who she apparently loves and married despite his flaws -- the moment the chance comes up also never gets revealed. These happen for the sake of two things. The first is to create artificial tension, so that one of them might take it out on the others. The two men fighting over the woman means that it's possible that some fisticuffs might occur. The second reason is so that we can have sex scenes whenever one of the men goes off to hunt for fish or what have you. Jennifer doesn't seem to care with whom she has sex, just as long as she is showing off her body to the camera. And then there is the survival story. These characters are trapped on an island, after all, and they have to survive. But after the first couple of minutes, they figure it out and seem to have no trouble whatsoever surviving. The only danger is each other, although even after a big fight, the characters are amiable enough. They're not supposed to be on this island for a vacation, but that's practically what it turns out to be. So, both elements that Survival Island tries to mash together fail, but I'm sure a decent movie could still be salvageable. It could be, although it isn't here. Apart from Kelly Brook, whose American accent is simply awful and one of many reasons to watch the film on mute, who looks nice but can barely act, I can't think of a single element that works. Maybe Billy Zane hamming it up like he's known to do, but he's absent from the first portion of the island adventure and when he is there he gets few scenes of true fun. The main problem is that it's all so boring and repetitive that there's nothing to excite you. Characters fight with nothing actually resulting from it, one of them goes off to sulk or hunt, and then the remaining male has sex with Kelly Brook for a couple of seconds before we fade to black and presumably the next day. If that's not exactly what happens each time, it's pretty close, and about the only thing I can remember from the movie. In The Room, the acting felt forced and unnatural. That's the case here, too, especially on the part of Juan Pablo Di Pace. He seemed as if he was trying way too hard to be dramatic and came across as silly. It was like he was afraid to do anything that might actually be relaxing, so he had a stern and concentrated look on his face the whole time. Why Brook's character would want to hook up with him is also a mystery, but I suppose when it comes to Zane's character or Di Pace's, you can't win either way. Maybe she was just a masochist. That's a better explanation than anything in the movie. So, yes, the only reason to watch Survival Island is if you want to ogle Kelly Brook for 90 minutes. And you almost couldn't do that, as Zane and Brook tried to get some of her scenes removed from the film, as they didn't feel that it felt the vision they had of the project. The sued, unsuccessfully, and you can therefore watch whatever vision director/writer Stewart Raffill had -- which is to say not much of one. That little bit of trivia is also the most interesting thing about this movie. Survival Island is a horrible, horrible little movie with production values rivaling The Room. It features little plot, fewer characters, and is a complete waste of time to sit through. There's no tension, no romance, and not even a bit of survival after the first couple of minutes. It has no ambition other than to provide as clear an image as Kelly Brook on a beach as possible, and even that's only tolerable if you mute the pointless and poorly delivered dialogue.

Justin O (gb) wrote: Not a bad action flick, but Liu is really the only good thing to see here.

nikita d (kr) wrote: remake of the parent trap. real fun

Michael S (nl) wrote: I'm a die hard, go hard or go home Philadelphia Eagles fan and this movie is for anyone including the ones who are NOT Philadelphia Eagles fans

Marcie F (br) wrote: great movie and great movie soundrack.

CJ C (es) wrote: Read the book first if you can find it.

Jake A (mx) wrote: The film that kicked off the disaster genre of the 70's and is one of the better ones out of the bunch. With a good cast (Helen Hayes is brilliant), good score and is wholly grounded in reality with no excessive action scenes and all the procedural efforts laid out to bare.

Millo T (us) wrote: Between 2.5 and 3. I do not like all the resources of this teacher, but...

Reginald R (gb) wrote: [b]The Senator Was Indiscreet[/b] stands as the only directorial effort of George S. Kaufman, the playwright known, among other things, for his Marx Bros. scripts. And indeed it's not a bad film at all. Funny and gentle. The foremost merit of [b]A Girl in Every Port[/b] is that it has Groucho starring. No other Marxes though. It's not a bad film, but not a memorable one either. Some good lines here and there. [b]Tom, Dick and Harry[/b] has Ginger Rogers. She's engaged to all three. It also has general funniness and good dream sequences. She's very adorable. [b]A Streetcar Named Desire[/b] has just about everything. Very close to perfection comes also Luchino Visconti's adaptation of a Dostoevsky short story [b]White Nights[/b]. A gorgeous, hypnotic, intelligent and involving lovestory. The very only reason I don't give it a 10 is to make A Streetcar...look like the winner of this bunch. [i]Upgrade: I'm pumpin' it up to 10. I feel I'm not giving enough 10s.[/i]

Dan H (kr) wrote: Long and slower but it kept your interest

Jax R (br) wrote: I rather enjoyed it. Acting was a bit sad, but it was interesting to watch. So when the count down ended and the congratulations was given......WAS the outside a make believe test...or did it really happen? You be the judge!

(mx) wrote: I don`t know why but I really like British horror movies and after watching a few Pete Walker movies, he`s become one of my favorite horror directors. This movie was surprising for me and I didn`t realize how good it would be. The whole movie reminds me a bit of George Romero`s Martin just in the way it was filmed. The plot follows Edmund and Dorothy Yates who were put in a mental institution for cannibalism in the early 1950`s. Twenty years later they have been released and are living in a farm house. Edmund`s first daughter Jackie is the guardian of their second daughter Deborah. But Deborah begins acting strangely and people start dying. The whole movie is a great watch. I really enjoyed it especially because I love horror movies from the seventies. This movie is no Dawn of the Dead or Suspiria or even Blood Feast. In fact, it is better then Blood Feast but is a different kind of horror. There are some unique scenes and even though the film is hard to follow at times it still comes out quite well. There isn`t really any gore in the movie. Just the aftermath of a murder, blood spatter hitting a woman`s face, and the only kill scene in the movie: a pitchfork stabbing a man`s face. This movie doesn`t need any gore to make it good, in fact even though there are cannibals in the movie, there are no cannibalism scenes what so ever. The movie is just atmospheric and suspenseful. The acting is amaxingly well done. Rupert Davies and Sheila Keith do amazing jobs as the Yates couple who are secretly insane. Daborah Fairfax also does a good job. The acting is what makes the movie what it is. The whole time you are wondering what will happen and what will they do. The ending is very unexpected and is a great twist. I love horror movies that don't have happy endings like Martin, The Omen, and The Wickerm Man. This is definatley one of my favourite horror movies.

Scot C (es) wrote: Generally very funny