Angels Over Broadway

Angels Over Broadway

A playwright persuades a con artist to help an embezzler go straight.

A cuckolded embezzler on the verge of suicide is helped by a tout, an alcoholic playwright, and a pick-up girl to reimburse the money with a gambling sting. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechers

Angels Over Broadway torrent reviews

Subash A (us) wrote: NANBAN is WELL....................................................

Greg W (ca) wrote: great big little love story

Thomas J (fr) wrote: The story is the only reason to watch this movie tie-in to the Dead Space videogame franchise. Voice acting is decent, but the dialogue is overladen with the f-word, making this sound more juvenile than it is. The computer animation is downright awful- it would have been shameful even on the PS1. The anime style segments fair a bit better. This is mostly for fans of the game, as gamers may appreciate some insights and an expansion of the Dead Space universe. Sci-fi/horror fans may also enjoy this, but most others can probably just give this one a pass. Rent if you must.

Eliabeth M (gb) wrote: This movie was funny!

Carlo G (ca) wrote: It was some time that I wanted to watch this film, an Italian movie by the Taviani brothers, but with a very international cast and talking about a subject which has very little to do with my own country: the Armenian genocide. It's hard to talk about the movie itself, it's more about feelings, it's not the story (from a book) that is particularly outstanding, but what you feel watching this movie, knowing is't not science fiction, not drama, but just reality. I've seen many films about the holocaust, and they are hard and make me feel guilty as an Italian in love for Germany, an European. It's the first time I see a movie about the Armenian genocide, a subject which few people dare even to talk about, in fear to have troubles making business with Turkey. So this time I can feel a bit proud thanks to thes two Italian film-makers who directed a wonderful movie, simple, tragically sad, touching people's hearts deeply. I don't remember when it was the last time that I cryed watching a movie, probably watching The Pianist and Schindler's List, but this time I really cried a lot at the end, thinking about my Armenian and Turkish friends and this tragedy which, almost 100 years after it happened, still seeks justice and still goes on on everyday's hatred between these 2 people and countries. A movie which should be shown at ALL schools in Armenia and Turkey, to learn from tragic events to help building a better world.

Becky T (es) wrote: Cute movie with notable actors, but not particularly special. (Just about what you expect for a Christmas movie)

Thomas H (es) wrote: Usually too dark to see what was happening. The plot and trailer are a lot better than the actual movie. Zombie children are pretty scary, however.

Rolands (au) wrote: The plot of the movie is nothing too original, but it's a nice romantic movie with a happy ending. Half star for the movies' soundtrack - 'Smart in a stupid way' by Steven Strait and Ashlee Simpson is on my playlist now.

Jose Luis G (it) wrote: That score is only for the second half of the film.

Duncan B (gb) wrote: I saw this and learned that aliens can't read your mind if you wear a collander on your head. Better than Independence Day, but so is a napalm enema.

Grant F (au) wrote: This has to be one of the most under credited horror films of the 1960s. Each tale is entirely chilling. Boris Karloff brilliantly pulls together these three tales of horror.

Allan C (fr) wrote: Charming musical from director Rouben Mamoulian is irresistible. I'm generally not a fan of musicals, but this one is a real winner. Mamoulian has made a visually arresting film and has a lot more camera movements that you'd typically see at this time. I wonder if watching this film at the time was like watch Baz Luhrmann's "Moulin Rouge" today. The film is a light, enjoyable romantic comedy about Maurice Chevalier, who I don't think I'd ever seen as a younger actor, as a tailor who falls in love with a princess, Jeanette MacDonald, but all the while being pursued by another sexually aggressive princess played by the amazing Myrna Loy. This is the film that made Loy a major star and rightfully so. She steals every scene that she's in, even if she's not the star of the picture. The film also features memorable songs by Rodgers and Hart', including "Isn't it Romantic?". And an interesting note of trivia, this film was made before the restrictive production code but when it was re-released later during the era of the production code, a number of cuts had to be made and as a result the original uncut version of the film is now considered lost. However, despite that, there is a fair amount of naughty pre-code boundary pushing including MacDonald in a neglige being measured by Chevalier, someone is called a jackass, and Loy's generally very sexual behavior. Overall, this one is a very fun old fashioned musical that would appeal to audience members outside of musical fans.

Brenda L (de) wrote: One of Hitchcock's worst. I don't blame Michael Caine for turning down the role of the serialkiller. Read DARK SIDE OF GENIUS, by Donald Spoto, to get insight into HItch's life when this film was made.

pepsi k (fr) wrote: Not good im afraid not memorable and in the pile of that Sunday afternoon film when you have nothing to do. It was cheesy and made me feel i was too old for the film. Miley Cyrus also spend the whole time trying to be funny not much i can say really sorry not the best

Don S (ru) wrote: A found footage extravaganza (using the term very loosely). Wrapped in a ridiculous framing story, this is a mix of directors using short movies to attempt to scare us. The product is uneven as you'd expect, with the best being mildly interesting to the worst being extremely boring. None are frightening to this horror movie vet, and all seemingly had no point or explanation. Snippets of some drugged up writers' nightmares is what this is. Junk. Don't understand why a sequel was made. It certainly was not needed based on this.

Jesse D (fr) wrote: just watched this on netflix watch instantly, eh...what a good film of my childhood ye knob..those of you who haven't seen it yet, watcha waitin foor you hosers.....

Phil H (jp) wrote: Based extremely loosely on the Dr Seuss story of the same name and as usual with Hollywood they have fudged it all up.The story is an environmental one, an eco plot if you will about the effects of cutting down trees. Put simply (just like the original book did) there is a small town which is gloomy and polluted. The reason for this is because all the trees were chopped down to mass market 'thneeds' by the one they call 'Once-ler'. Once-ler tells a young boy the whole story of how he destroyed all the trees to create his thneeds and ignored the advice and warnings of the Lorax, guardian of the trees.Once-ler regrets his actions and gives the young boy a tree seed to plant so that trees may return as well as the Lorax. There is a bit more to it but that is the basic premise.So what does Hollywood do you ask? well do you really need to ask? I'm sure you can all guess but I'll tell you anyway. Hollywood strips the story down and refits it with tripe filler and made up characters to fill out a decent length run time. Throw in some ridiculous vehicle chase sequences, cliched slapstick and jokes and some hideous musical numbers and there you have it, typical Hollywood trash.Now I will admit the film looks lovely, full of bright bold colours, its cheerful, light-hearted and with some nice CGI animation. BUT the lesson has been diluted and cluttered by fancy ass visuals and 'action' sequences. Yes there is still a nice message within the film, the finale shows what can be done if they jettison the crapola but that's only about a 3 minute sequence out of an entire film!I simply cannot understand why they thought to create new characters! The new character Aloysius O'Hare is REALLY annoying too, he just looks annoying, making him short...yeah that's not funny. I realise they needed to fill the story to reach a reasonable film run time but if that can't be done then don't do it. Maybe try another route, don't just make a whole load of stuff up! Once-ler was suppose to be faceless, a boogieman like equivalent of modern faceless companies/corporations that destroy nature for their gain. You can't uproot that, that's the whole point!The world where this takes place isn't named, plus it isn't some bright, colourful, 'Willy Wonka' type place with fancy technology!! I see what they did with that sure, but why?? stop changing the whole premise!! it all looks like something outta 'Despicable Me'. Of course we don't know how Seuss would take to it but I'm pretty sure the original fable wasn't meant to include futuristic vehicles, buildings, Once-ler playing guitar, airship things and some god awful songs including the now obligatory hip hop pop song for the final credits which happens for almost all kids films now (more manufactured faceless nobodies singing forgettable songs that will fade into obscurity as quickly as they appeared). I like the fact that Hollywood has tried to put across a good message...of sorts. I'm sure they are more concerned about another franchise to milk that will rake in the moolah but the initial positive effort is there. If only this could of been done more down to earth, with a little more sense towards the source material and maybe in a different media (stop motion would have been nice, Selick directing perhaps?). At the end of the day its merely been mutated into another flashy, churned out, in your face CGI flick (in 3D...ugh!). How ironic, a polluted vision of Dr Seuss' simple little tale, such a shame.Ignore this, stick to the original book or 1972 TV special, don't deny your children these.