Deathlands

Deathlands

2003 ""
Deathlands
Deathlands

Deathlands

3.5 | 1h28m | en | Horror

Following the destruction caused on Earth by nuclear weapons, Ryan Cawdor returns after twenty years to a ravaged part of Virginia he used to call home, where his brother and stepmother plotted to kill his father, the baron. With his companions in tow, he has come to take on the empire of tyranny that has been built all around this wasteland in his absence.

View More
AD

WATCH FREEFOR 30 DAYS

All Prime Video
Cancel anytime

Watch Now
3.5 | 1h28m | en | Horror , Science Fiction , TV Movie | More Info
Released: May. 17,2003 | Released Producted By: Syfy , Kinetic Pictures Country: United States of America Budget: 0 Revenue: 0 Official Website:
Synopsis

Following the destruction caused on Earth by nuclear weapons, Ryan Cawdor returns after twenty years to a ravaged part of Virginia he used to call home, where his brother and stepmother plotted to kill his father, the baron. With his companions in tow, he has come to take on the empire of tyranny that has been built all around this wasteland in his absence.

...... View More
Stream Online

The movie is currently not available onine

Cast

Vincent Spano , Jenya Lano , Traci Lords

Director

Jon P. Goulding

Producted By

Syfy , Kinetic Pictures

AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

All Prime Video Movies and TV Shows. Cancel anytime.

Watch Now

Trailers & Images

Reviews

Paul Magne Haakonsen I guess someone had been playing a bit too much "Fallout" and "Borderlands" and decided to make a movie out of that concept, and while they were at it, toss in some elements of classic fantasy. The only problem is that it just did mix well.The story wasn't well knitted together, there were too many elements trying to be mixed together, and it came out as very confusing and lacking a wholesome unity.One thing that really didn't sit well with me was the red light that was supposed to be how the world was in 2021, a chemically induced toxin sky. Well, the idea was well enough, but seeing a whole movie in red was just a bit too much. It was more frustrating and annoying to look at than it was beneficial to the movie.The cast in the movie was fairly good enough, nothing overly impressive here. Seeing Tracy Lords in the movie, might be interesting to some. I, however, found her to be too much and I am sure her name was on the poster just to entice the male audience. Sales tricks like that might just work, eh?The overall impression of the movie, for me, was really bad. The movie had a weak story, weak continuity and weak entertainment value. I am sure that some of the ideas for the script worked well enough on paper (or even if it was published as a book), but on the screen? No, not so much.
scottnhaworth I have to say that i was really disappointed in this movie.The scifi channel could have mad it a lot better.Every character in this movie was nothing like the way that they are presented in the books.if anybody has read the books they know that J.B.Dicks is now way as lame as he is in this movie.Jack is not a mutie for one thing he is an albaino, also he always wears an army jacket not a sports Jersey.All i have to say is I wish that when people make movies out of books that they at least read the book first. and know what each character is like. also they need to get with the ballgame on this stuff. I hope one of these days they will get it together.
dasa108 I think this movie deserve a watch from people. The director made a great job doing the action scenes, really fine. Even if you think how near the characther of Vincen Spano is to Kurt Russell (Snake), is a great pleasure see how the producers can do a fine film with few dollars, and give us something decent. Traci Lords maybe will finish her career in the hardcore again. She is not a great actress, even a character actress, and is necesary to understand that only a character actress can play her role (a bad girl) with success. I think could be better if they do a second part. The better point of the movie: the John Woo influence in action scenes.
yojimbo999 Well, I've never read the book or anything, but it's probably a given that it's better than this clunker of a movie adaptation. The film suffers badly from a low budget and just silly villains. Let me get this straight: 100 years after a nuclear war, and these uneducated, primitive survivalists will let two nutcases "rule" them like a king and queen, when any one of them could shoot the "rulers" in the head if they so chooses to? Yeah, right.Some groovy editing work can't save it. This is just a poor movie, and should never have been made. Really, really bad.