You may also like
Bansi Birju torrent reviews
Ayrton Anthony C (de) wrote: Puntaje Original: 7.5Elevada, profunda e introspectiva. 20th Century Women cuenta con un exquisito guin y una excelente historia que afecta a muchos jvenes en sus pocas ms tempranas bajo una magistral visin de Mike Mills.
Leilani M (nl) wrote: want to know after story of this..
Mereie d (de) wrote: Lourdes? is a charming French movie with a minimal plot, but a great eye for detail. The theme is unusual, but fascinating. It takes its time to introduce us in the bizarre world called Lourdes: a hybrid of religion and tourism. The film is serious, but also mildly ironic: it subtly exposes many of the absurdities surrounding the world-famous holy place for pilgrims: from the seemingly oddly thrown-together collections of entirely different individuals (who are all ill and/or religious, though) to the awkwardness with which the disabled pilgrims are nursed and fed to the immature or even unfeeling responses to some of the so-called cures (does it count officially as a miracle if it doesn(TM)t last long enough, why do some people cure and some not, is it fair that someone not-so-very-religious should be singled out for cure instead of others, etc.). It is funny to see people being deadly serious about what(TM)s going on in Lourdes, but quite casual at the same time (the volunteer girls in habit smoke, use make-up and flirt with the young men; some of the religious people tell each other jokes with a religious content, etc.). The continuation of scenes is not in any way surprising (visits to ritual baths, church, confession, cave, tourist shops, surrounding countryside, dining room, closing party, etc.) but keeps you glued to the screen all the same. Christine(TM)s (Sylvie Testud) miraculous? cure and her amorous advance to Kuno (Bruno Todeschini) alone are touching enough to make this film really worthwhile.
Timm S (de) wrote: Takes A While To Get Going. Once It Does It Is Funny And I Very Much Liked The Ongoing Joke With Mark Wahlberg. He Does Have The Body For It Thought, Particularly In Comparison To Complete Opposite Steve Carell.
Enrica C (it) wrote: A good thriller, but still a useless movie that doesn't offer anything more than a few slightly tense scenes and a quite dumb and rediculus ending... I liked how the director managed to bring the pre-graduation tesion and stress to the screen - that was probably the best thing about this movie. On the other end, I didn't get Catherine's behave in a few scenes - was she a whore or just an outstanding student? - and didn't like how she just killed people with no remorse and no consequence at all, if not getting promoted to a great job in NYC. Still worth watching if you feel in the mood for some thriller mixed with psychotic people and policeman who have a troubled past.
Private U (fr) wrote: It annoys me when people refer to this film as a QT rip off. Its not, QT rips off other peoples films! This film is a just an average revenge movie. Worth a watch though!
Caesar M (ru) wrote: The first Tiger Cage was an average movie for me, so why would I watch the sequel if I didn't think much of the first. Simple, Donnie Yen is the star of the movie. The story is an improvement, though nothing special is more entertaining this time around. A tough-as-nails ex-cop (Donnie Yen), Alan, and a lawyer, Mary, accused of murder, team up with a unscrupulous lawyer, David, as they intend to solve the case of laundering dirty money. It turns out that David was involved, but was betrayed by his cohort Wilson. Now Alan, Mary, and David must fight Wilson and his henchmen. What I didn't like much was it comedic relief was timing was a little off, but it worked for the most part. The action sequences are much better, just slightly above average to keep you enthrall in the action. The action is more exciting and better done in this sequel. Unfortunately I can't say much for the acting, Donnie Yen is great as always, unfortunately his co-stars aren't always good. Like the first Tiger Cage, you want something more from the ending instead of an abrupt end. Tiger Cage 2 does enough improvements over it predecessor to bring us the audience a more memorable experience. Though it lack improvement in certain areas, it's doesn't ruin this good movie.
Ed V (ru) wrote: two hours twenty minutes of genius. Yugoslavian version is 4 hours 30 minutes. I only wish I could find it.
Jim W (nl) wrote: They should have just stuck with the book. The 1978 novel by Whitley Streiber, easily his best writing, was unique and frightening. An advanced species of wolf, preying on the week and outcast of humanity for centuries comes into conflict with a couple of cops investigating an unwise killing by one of their young. The book keeps the reader tensely engaged right from the opening death of a cop by a young wolfen to the end. The movie, on the other hand, just plods woefully.Why is there a focus on security technology? What is up with the terrorist geopolitical themes? Why are all these needless elements added to a tight and rather original thriller-horror-cop-procedural story-line? You have a good couple of cop characters, scary advanced wolf predators, scenes set in urban ruins - why on earth mix other crap in?Maybe someone will do a remake, and stick closer to the book.
Scott W (ru) wrote: Robert Redford. Was pretty good if I recall right. Watched when I was ten.
Joseph S (au) wrote: This is a story of an angry young man borned as a mixed Black-Korean dispised by the entire society he lived in. He lived in an abandoned school bus with his mother who wrote letters daily to her American lover; who always got her letters returned and stamped with "address unknown" from the US. He worked with a violent ex-militant step-father who brutally killed dogs for money. He tried not to learn to hate but still dispised himself and his mother's hopeless insanity of writing letters every single day. The young man later helped an often-bullied friend, also an outcast, who wished to go abroad and study English, to fulfill his long American dream. His friend then fell in love with a next-door girl who lost an eye but also wished to go to America. Later, she betrayed her love to be with a drug-abused American G.I., who's frustrated by this meaningless cold-war, so she could get her eye fixed. All four youngsters met tragic endings. This is a reflection of reality of all the scars that fills in a post-war and a divided country. Through the fictional but very possible reality of hatred and regrets, the movie is not to teach us to hate but to learn to stop hating before the chain and result of hate begins .
Nolan M (es) wrote: The creepiest silent film I have ever seen.
Erik H (ca) wrote: a great experience with a wacky-as-hell sci-fi plot. not perfect, but once again, a great experience. it made me feel kind of exhausted and sick, frankly. very stylish. cronenberg-lite, but still with plenty of cronenberg.
Georgina R (au) wrote: dying for city of ashes to come out
Clint S (de) wrote: i liked the fx, the story sucked and was a boring go between for the gruesomeness.