All About Actresses

All About Actresses

While shooting a documentary about all kinds of actresses, the director falls for one of them.

While shooting a documentary about all kinds of actresses, the director falls for one of them. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


All About Actresses torrent reviews

Matthew B (gb) wrote: Can the film be cheesy at times? Yes. Are the CGI scenes a little dated? Yes. But you can't deny that it has great action, edge of your seat suspense, and a hell of a lot of heart. Tobey Maguire delivers a charming performance as Spidey and Willem Dafoe is downright sinister as the Goblin.

Joe D (mx) wrote: Lovely wee Aussie film. No major stars, no special effects...

Erik M (jp) wrote: Nice action segments.

Alexander C (ag) wrote: Could be worth a viewing, would like to see it sometime in the future.

Sharice H (de) wrote: It's funny when you're 5. Good kids movie that parents can laugh at too (if they're being forced to watch it). But doesn't make the cut when you're grown up.

Hans J E (br) wrote: What? Am I going to be the first one to rate this Pamela Anderson movie? Jesus, what's wrong with you people? The movie sucks, by the way, but you see plenty of Pam-skin, so I'll give it a five.

Philip G (ca) wrote: Well, with an average of 4.5 from 2 reviews, I have to balance the books. This is an absolutely-hilarious turd of a movie. You will laugh: only if you've been drinking heavily. The dialogue comes out of a Corn Flakes packet; witness the pause before each line, as the "actor" reads the cue card, before delivering the perfect stilted clich. Stuart Whitman, surely blackmailing the producer, is horrendously unconvincing as a Steven Segal wannabe (yes, *Steven Seagal* wannabe). Meanwhile, the DVD cover (I was *lent* this, btw, by my crazy dad) makes comparisons with The Magnificent Seven and The Seven Samurai... That's like comparing Nora Batty to Laeticia Casta! Avoid... unless you're drunk (then still avoid unless you've no choice).

Derek W (us) wrote: The greatest monster movie ever made. I love this movie.

Carlos M (br) wrote: The main problem with this first Star Trek film is that it is not original at all and looks more like a stretched TV episode that tries too hard to be 2001: A Space Odyssey, dragging endlessly in long, contemplative scenes that seem to exist only to show the higher budget.

Tommy H (ag) wrote: Way too pretentious and lazy for my blood. I see what Herzog was going for, and I think he succeeded, but it's not the kind of thing that impresses me. Also, I liked the over-the-top performance from Isabelle Adjani in the movie Possession, but here I found it a little irritating. Kinski did a good job as the vampyre. Max Schreck was creepier, but Kinski is his usual unusual self. I swear that guy could host Sesame Street dressed as a yellow happy face and holding a box of muffins and he'd still make me feel uncomfortable in my own skin. The thing I like most about his performance is the way he moves. Where every other vampire is a man with supernatural powers, this Count Dracula does seem like he's more vampire bat than vampire-human. If people didn't keep saying that his skin feels cold I wouldn't have even thought he was undead, even though that's kind of necessary for the vampyre mythos.

Daniel J (es) wrote: I must start my review by mirrowing Cool Hand Luke. From the begiinig one is compelled that Woody is broken yet an inspiration indifferent to Luke. Woody paints signs for free in the midst of the Great Depression and helps his neigbors even though he his poorer then a prisoner. The force that drives him just like Luke is at a divine distance. Woody is an outcast but one with many redeemable traits. Woody's path is straighter then an arrow; it skips from train to train across contiental America but arrives at its destiny. Director Hal Ashby delivers his tour de force in his Grapes of Wrath like setting. He strums his actors in harmony with the times. Randy Quaid is both innocent and effective, while Carradine proves why Tarantino's work was a ressurection in Kill Bill. The movie is an adequte biopic to Woody's life a true inspiration and the reason behind workmaen's unions. It is a story of love, divorce, loyalty, deceit and above all preserverance. If you find yourself living an inadequate life, distant from your destiny then sit back and enjoy your redirection to this timeless film. Favorite Quote: Woody New York (as to where he is going from SF)"When you leaving?" Now, so I can sing (banned union songs) while I'm walking!Stand for what you believe.

JeanPaul S (mx) wrote: Like a Cohen Brothers' plot, shot with some of Hitch's trademark flare and humour. I was expecting decent, but got a fair bit more.

Russell K (au) wrote: I hate horror. I hide and jump and feel sick. The plot is usually awful and the gore pointless. But this film is Beautiful, well written, cast and from the moment I saw it I knew it was a classic must see movie like Jaws or Aliens or the Matrix. It has changed movies, mini series and computer games for the better. There are few films that had such a ripple effect and raised the bar. It is desperate and free and as with low budget films was free to experiment with new ideas. It out shines every Hollywood movie thought up in a board room or remade. They still desperately steal from this film now and often fail. Every zombie or outbreak film before it which I loved, became redundant. This is what movies should be.

Nicki M (fr) wrote: Not the best. Pretty c grade. Evan reminds me of a younger, cute Drew Barrymore here. Just made me wish I was watching one of her cute rom coms from the 90's! Most of it is a bit sketchy with some stereotypical unlikable supporting characters and idiotic scenes. The romantic ending is nice, and if the rest of the film had been more like it, I might have been more impressed.

Thomas S (br) wrote: I've always contended that a great conclusion can make even the most brainless movies seem worthwhile. Fortunately, I wouldn't consider Coldwater brainless by any means, but it does suffer some near-fatal story mismanagement problems, like improperly paced opening scenes, distracting flashbacks, poorly developed supporting characters and ever mounting suspense that only serves to clarify a few "hows" rather than uncover a major big reveal. The film does actually boasts a surprisingly strong performance from its lead actor though and somewhat relevant themes and messages for the audience to walk away thinking about, but for me, it wasn't until the compelling finale, when the film resolves its mediocre external conflict and puts an emotional spotlight on the internal conflict, that I finally felt satisfied with the production, and could justify the hour and 45 minutes I spent trying to understand it.

Serge L (mx) wrote: Another slasher movie. Some critics called it bland but they are jaded. Anyone sensitive can feel just scared enough. It has a reality feel. I liked the not quite linear storyline. Talking about storyline, the end explains some and confuse more. Even if we adhere to the preposterosity of it (for entertainment sake), some of the logic needs more explanation. At least, we have some originality and compexity in the denouement, which was nice. Plus, no one is quite all right and no one is all dark, even the psycho. Most characters are intelligent enough to root for. There should be more of these films. I suggest Prisoners by Villeneuve, for more depth in the captured theme. We've all been prisoners in our youth.

Calvin M (br) wrote: A classic that I hold near to my heart.

Fagatron P (br) wrote: This is the first time I saw Alec Baldwin and I knew I had to have him his cucumber and all but at last it has yet to happen. This movie is a solid 80's romance comedy, with all the excess of the 80's and a little mob action to keep the guys interested.

Mark C (ca) wrote: As long as De Niro keeps making that De Niro face, I'll watch anything he's in.

Luke S (ru) wrote: This is truly one of the worst films I have ever seen in my entire life. There is no good quality to the film whatsoever, every single detail of it is simply appalling. This is a disgrace to the classic universal monster movies, which have always been personal favourites of mine. I truly can't express my hatred of this film enough to completely relieve myself of the suffering that I went through while watching this. I feel immensely sorry for everyone who had to sit through this piece of revolting slime, as well as for anyone who made the horrifying choice of being involved in the making of this, especially since Hugh Jackman is a very talented actor. Do yourself a favour and avoid watching Van Helsing by any means necessary.