Bela Lugosi Meets a Brooklyn Gorilla

Bela Lugosi Meets a Brooklyn Gorilla

Two goofy entertainers meet a mad scientist on a jungle island.

Two goofy entertainers meet a mad scientist on a jungle island. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


Bela Lugosi Meets a Brooklyn Gorilla torrent reviews

Trevor D (nl) wrote: "Bad Milo!" is like a grown-up, more disgusting version of 80's creature-features like "Gremlins," although the premise actually sounds grosser than what actually ends up on screen. The story feels oddly neutered in this regard-- never quite giving proper follow-through on each new story development, never really delivering any singularly memorable set pieces, and never fully exploring certain questions that might arise over the issue of a symbiotic demon baby living in a man's colon.Regardless, it's surprising how much genuine emotion is wrung out of the premise. Ken Marino gives a great, desperately sweaty, anxiety-ridden performance that still carries weight and sincerity, and he plays well against the wonderfully designed and practically-realized Milo. The central metaphor becomes too heavy-handed in the end (especially a final monologue that literally explains everything), but I dig how the film takes conceptual body-horror and turns it on its head with a lighter touch (I can only imagine what Cronenberg would have done with this concept-- although I probably don't want to).I'm torn over my feelings for the rest of the cast, as Peter Stormare and Patrick Warburton-- hilarious as they are-- are so blatantly wacky that I'm not sure if they really fulfill the proper functions of their characters to the extent required to keep the story grounded. Kumali Nanjiani, on the other hand, is hysterical in his sadly-brief but perfectly-modulated appearance, but Gillian Jacobs is totally wasted in a thankless wife/damsel role (made all the more apparent when considering what an incredibly gifted comic actress she is on "Community").Still, there's a lot to like about "Bad Milo!" It's a noble effort from first-time director Jacob Vaughn (and again, serious kudos for cool practical effects).

Laurie W (us) wrote: I thought I would watch it for myself before I would decide its true worth, but in reality, this movie isn't even worth watching the trailer. I was so excited thinking I finally found a movie that would fit what I wanted on a Saturday night, but this movie was a huge disappointment. The acting was terrible as was the plot. The only thing that was worth it was the animation of the BURTs. Definitely not a movie I want to see again any time soon.

Sean C (ag) wrote: This movie was worth just for the look at how people who are involved in role playing games can become so obsessed that they begin to interfere with reality. On the whole, though, I found this movie to move a little slow, which is too bad, because it has a lot going for it.

Steven H (kr) wrote: raquel merono alone is worth a star

Jeremiah N (au) wrote: this movie was at least a 60

Andy C (it) wrote: Only those who have seen nothing but G-rated films will find this tired genre entry thrilling. A terrible waste of talent.

Tim S (mx) wrote: Stuart Gordon's Castle Freak went straight to video in 1995 without much support from the horror community, but in the years past it seems to have grown a better following. It's actually one of Stuart Gordon's better films when it comes to the performances. The way that everything is set up and the performances that Jeffrey Combs and Barbara Crampton give are heads and tails above what they've done with Gordon in the past. Not to say that their performances weren't good previously, but not quite as good as in this one. This also has the look and feel of an old-fashioned Italian giallo, despite it being filmed in 1995. The monster is pretty good too. Overall, it's a much better entry into the genre than most people give it credit for. I'm glad that some people out there recognize it now as such. It deserves it.

Samuel J (br) wrote: Another Great Wing Chun Movie!!!

Jessica L (ru) wrote: Lame plot but I love Alan Alda regardless. He's funny but the film, although a comedy, wasn't.

Wouter v (es) wrote: Why on earth did this movie get such high ratings? It's dragging, never gets off the ground, never builds up to something and Tom Hardy is constantly talking on the phone while driving but speaking so quietly there's no way the persons on the phone can actually hear him but yet they do. Overrated.