The true story of how a marine seal named Andre befriended a little girl and her family, circa 1962.

The film tells the story of a family of animal lovers befriending a lovable orphaned baby seal, naming it Andre. When it grows and starts getting into mischief, it antagonizes some of the fisherman in the town. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


Andre torrent reviews

Paul D (gb) wrote: A variation on The Texas Chainsaw Massacre with the principals and horror of the situation very similar.

Dann M (au) wrote: A return to form, Saw VI is an intense and suspenseful horror-thriller. While a shady insurance company CEO faces judgment in a Jigsaw trap, Jigsaw's accomplice, Detective Mark Hoffman, continues to try to throw suspicion off of himself as a joint task force closes in. Additionally, there are some interesting reveals about Jigsaw's backstory and Hoffman's role in the operation. The traps are quit inventive and are especially apt for the target. However, the gore is overdone at times and kind of undercuts the suspense. Yet overall, Saw VI is a noticeable improvement for the series.

Josh G (es) wrote: The only true criticism I could have of Gigantic is that it probably doesn't lend itself to multiple viewings, but to be fair I doubt there's any band documentary that really lends itself to multiple viewings. And I guess you could say that the movie is pretty biased in that it worships TMBG, but as usual, who is watching this if they're not in love with the band already? That aside, it's well done -- twisting legitimate behind the scenes information and awesome live footage, as well as actors speaking the lines of TMBG's songs (coolest part: when Michael McKean says, "There there was a knock at the door, which was odd"). Gigantic pretty much preserves the essence of TMBG on film -- it's wonderful. Definitely a must for any true fan. AWESOME.

MG A (ag) wrote: Shane Walsh is Shane Walsh in The Walking Dead but Jon Bernthal is really a Shane Walsh in every movies!

Patti L (mx) wrote: Already seen this, liked part 1 better but this was still a very sad movie.

Josina F (br) wrote: Entertaining enough but not really memorable.

Jeff D (es) wrote: For All Mankind is a textbook example of the importance of editing in documentary features. This brisk movie could have been merely a series of NASA highlights but director Al Reinert shapes the pre-existing footage into something brand new and a must see. For All Mankind is a 20-year-old film about a 40-year-old event that will remain watchable for the rest of time.

Aj V (gb) wrote: A great zombie movie starring Evil Dead's Bruce Campbell. It's even pretty funny at times, but still it brings the blood and gore you want in a horror movie. I really enjoyed it, and I highly recommend it.

Alex G (au) wrote: Captures a snapshot loosely based on real people and real stories of people in Australian of almost every political/musical counter-cultural stereotype circa 1970s forever. A tribute to the povo typical young chaotic Australian sharehouse to this day too (in my experiences!) Creepy the way Michael Hutchence's life with Paula seemed to mirror this movie. Him at his enigmatic beautiful best for sure. Shame he didn't do any more acting. You see a part of him in this film and the extras on the DVD you'd never have imagined just from looking at INXS.

Chris W (kr) wrote: It's Herzog, so of course.

Rob S (au) wrote: Years ago when I had seen Persona for the first time, I feel I was not mature enough to appreciate it in its entirety. The mind games at play in this relatively short film are key to this movie, and it makes the film a disturbing look at psychology and reality.I have to say that I am not a fan of the idea of Persona as an "art" film. The montages at the opening and closing of this film do not necessarily make sense of the images used, though it can be taken at the ending that the boy shown could be Vogler's son. I usually prefer a good narrative when it comes to film, though non- traditional narratives like The Tree of Life can be intriguing as well. I just did not find too much meaning or content in these montages within Persona.It is very interesting the way the two leads seem to represent two halves of a whole, though I do not agree with the fact that Bergman was going for the idea that the two women look very similar; I can distinguish them very easily. However, there is a brilliant image formed by half of each character's face, and it is manipulated in a way to show the two are one in the same. I am astounded by this effect and wish I knew how it was achieved because it is very interesting and is definitely at the core of the film.I love films that deal with psychology at its core, and I think that is why I am intrigued by this film on a second viewing. However, Persona could have been better if it was made to be a less pretentious film, one which has a reach which does not exceed its grasp.

Graham J (jp) wrote: Beautifully filmed and featuring many great performances. This is one of the most entertaining of Ford's films. Also includes the greatest performance ever put in by Victor McLaglen in his reoccurring role as Sgt. Quincannon.

Rameshwar I (gb) wrote: I wish the movie was 30 minutes or less instead of running around in circles. I know its a cheap shot but it deserves it. Watched it with big expectations coming after a hilarious ride in Zombieland but felt utterly disappointed with its half baked script resulting in actors trying too hard and loud. Dwayne (Danny McBride) is being robbed of his inheritance and comes up with a plan to revive it by including his acquaintance Travis (Nick Swardson). They kidnap a bored pizza delivery guy Nick (Jesse Eisenberg), attach a bomb to his vest and orders him to rob a bank or they will blow him up. Nick tries to take help from his best friend Chet (Aziz Ansari) who has just parted ways with him. Not that it does not have its moments but they are too few and rest of it is too crude. The storyline definitely has a potential to be quite funny and given the capable cast it could have been hilarious. But the writing goes bonkers pulling everything down along with it leaving too much for the cast who divulge to physical comedy for which they are not suited for. Running at over 80 minutes itself made me look at the remaining runtime at least 4 times through the course of the movie. A movie of this genre cannot afford to be boring being a thriller action comedy. 30 minutes or less runtime could have saved it

Stuart K (jp) wrote: After Candyman (1992) came out, based on Clive Barker's short story The Forbidden from Volume 5 of his Books of Blood, it was successful enough to warrant a sequel, from a pitch by Barker and directed by Bill Condon (who later did Gods and Monsters (1998) and Dreamgirls (2006), this is a cheesy horror, that does have it's moments, when they do come. Set in New Orleans, it has Cambridge academic Professor Philip Purcell (Michael Culkin) murdered after giving a lecture on the Candyman legend, by the Candyman (Tony Todd) himself, but Ethan Tarrant (William O'Leary) ends up being accused of Purcell's murder, as his father was murdered in a similiar murder with traits of the Candyman murders. Ethan's sister, schoolteacher Annie Tarrant (Kelly Rowan), doesn't believe Ethan could have done it, and her students believe the Candyman has come back, she dispels the myth by saying his name 5 times in the mirror. Although he doesn't appear at first, the murders soon start all over again, beginning with Annie's husband Paul (Timothy Carhart), but Candyman doesn't murder Annie, for a good reason. Candyman was a silly but memorable horror film, this manages to be the same, with the supernatural shocks that we've come to expect from Clive Barker's work. This is bloody and gory, but it's not as good as the original, but it'll do, and it doesn't stick around too long either.

Diego Martn (de) wrote: Fiel a las peliculas de este estilo,pero es entretenida,e interesante.7/10

ArYa DarMa D (fr) wrote: 3,5/5 Rating for Saw 2 F: 30%R: 70%Horror 50% Mystery 50%

Shae S (fr) wrote: Beautifully shot, well-edited, and includes some brilliantly hilarious moments of performance. However, there is something of a hollowness to the film, which I'm sure was at least partially intentional. It just doesn't quite have as much weight to it as it should have.