You may also like
Badmaash No.1 torrent reviews
Tanner B (au) wrote: The Running Man (1987) ?? 1/2Wrongly convicted Arnold Schwarzenegger must try to survive a public execution gauntlet staged as a game show (sort of a futuristic "Most Dangerous Game" story). Trashy action movie is aided (greatly) by Richard Dawson as game-show host. Available on Netflix.
Morgan S (au) wrote: This film was alright. But this guy obviously doesn't know any rules about video taping. You can't video tape someone without their consent. Plus he is WAY too insecure about his penis. lol There were just way too many awkward moments for it to be very enjoyable. So you have a small penis. Big deal. Go find a girl who likes small penises or prefers the tongue.
Calvin B (au) wrote: Everone who lives in this country should watch this movie.
Felipe S (ca) wrote: Very sweet story about a young couple living a forbidden love.
Juan I (br) wrote: Excelente pelcula, super recomendada para las personas que les guste el flamenco, la guitarra y en general la cultura gitana.
Solomon G (kr) wrote: If you haven't seen this yet and have the chance, you should. Great animated movie with a good story.
Claudy R (it) wrote: North Korea is crazy! Sounds like they would be too hungry to fight if something ever went down..
Johannes J (ca) wrote: Det merkelige med denne dokumentaren er at man innser hvor faa filmer som virkelig vaager aa gaa rett i strupen paa Religionen. Det gjr Dawkins, og han klarer aa stille noen ekstremt gode spm. samtidig som han klarer aa vise hvor ugudelig religion generelt er. Problemet med filmen (og boka) er at han bruker darwinismen som alternativ til religionen konsekvent. Og han kveler gode intervjuer med aa angripe de ulike religioese med sitt darwinistiske preik. Det kunne han klart seg uten, og skapt en mer interessant film.
Linda K (br) wrote: Amazing directing from Turturro and amazing cast (especially Christopher Walken)!
Edgar C (kr) wrote: "Thou shalt not kill."A dark look at the human's psyche, A Short Film About Killing unleashes a debate on how moral is relative from the personal perspective of whoever handles it given any situation. Despite some random emotional fillers that distract the viewer from the original intentions of the film, Kieslowski accomplishes a disturbing sepia tone for highlighting relevant issues, among which are:- The contradiction of a death sentence as a condemnation of murder.- The events that are behind the curtain of each individual: his personal life background that we do not see.- The implications of standardizing human actions and restricting them to what has been accepted as an agreeable consensus.It is easy to point the finger towards what you condemn, but remember that when you point with your index finger, there are three other fingers pointing at you. Silence is the wisest judge. Remember that our nature is flawed and dual, but complex too. In that sense, I also think that the intentionally darkened corners in the film plays a role. Notice several things about it:- It only appears when the main characters are on screen, but not during the landscapes or neutral events.- 90% of the times, the killer walks towards the dark corner, whereas the sentence executioners walk to it around 50% of the times (mmhh...), and the lawyer usually walks towards the bright side.Maybe an invitation from the Polish auteur to form our own opinions? Great idea; I'll accept that invitation and construct my criticisms.85/100
Walter M (ag) wrote: Max(Michel Piccoli), a police inspector, is angry that he is too late to prevent another lethal bank robbery. Not only that but that his pet informant may have been less than reliable. And then said informant turns up dead. The trail is not entirely cold as Max has a lead that turns out to be Abel(Bernard Fresson), an old army buddy down on his luck who steals cars and scrap with a motley gang of fellow criminals on the outskirts of Paris. All of which Max confirms with Rosinsky(Francois Perier), the local police inspector. So, Max hatches a plan to lure the gang into a bank robbery in order for them to be caught in the act in order to restore his prestige in the department. His first step is to approach Lily(Romy Schneider), a prostitute and Abel's lover. "Max and the Junkmen" is a compelling movie that moves at its own idiosyncratic rhythm. At the same time, its deliberate pace does allow for suspense to build nicely towards the film's climax. In fact, it is a rather deceptive movie in that it is something of a reverse caper. Consumed by his obsession to catch criminals, not prevent crime, Max acts like a criminal, not by planting evidence or something similar. He is running a long con by making the mark think they are making the decisions when in fact he is pulling all of the strings. In its own topsy turvy way, the movie does not side with its police protagonist but with the gang who only seem dangerous to themselves. This is in a world where most of the characters have military experience in colonial wars.
Vanessa C (jp) wrote: If you are not used to how some British comedy works, then perhaps this is not the film for you lol. Being a fan of their style, I can "get it", and enjoy it. And if you know any of the history of WWII and especially that of the UK, then you will laugh for sure!
Ben L (es) wrote: Strangers on a Train starts off with a subtle opening and eases you into the plot. It actually takes us on the journey with Guy as he slowly starts to understand what's going on. I liked the premise and thought it kept the tension heightened through most of the movie. I also didn't have any idea how it would end, which kept me interested all the way through. Farley Granger was good as the protagonist, but this movie works because of the oily charm of Robert Walker. I absolutely loved his performance as Bruno and wondered why I've never seen his name as one of the greatest movie villains of all time. The rest of the cast is also solid, especially Kasey Rogers who is perfectly sweet-looking and yet wicked as Guy's wife, which is exactly what that role needed.I would have adored this movie if it weren't for some issues in the third act. There's a long sequence where it seems that the movie is just stalling and that bugged me. I think the intent was to increase tension as everyone approached the climax, but by delaying both parties it started to feel pointless. I was almost annoyed waiting for things to finally resolve. The idea was good, I just found the execution lacking in that section of the film. The other issue I had was with the carousel sequence at the end, which seemed a little over-the-top and almost ridiculous. It had some exciting moments and certainly was shot in an interesting way. But the sequence was just odd, and perhaps a bit far fetched. I was satisfied with how it ended, though. By the conclusion of the film, I was satisfied with Strangers on a Train, but not as wowed as I expected after the way it got started. It's a solid Hitchcock film, but one I won't revisit as often.
Scott J (mx) wrote: a love letter to the previous movies and fan service to the fans who love those but fails to stand on its own as an original piece shoehorned into an hour and a half movie