You may also like
Blood Gnome torrent reviews
Peter H (it) wrote: Between art film and Hollywood: After I watched this movie, I was reminded of one of my favorite movies, an "art film" I saw in 1995 or 1996 in Budapest in a movie theater that featured art films, not Hollywood films. I can't even remember the name, nor have ever succeeded in finding that film again, but it was about a sound man who shows up at the director's house (or ?) in Spain or somewhere in the Mediterranean and records the entire soundtrack based on notes left for him by the director without ever meeting him. I don't think there was any dialogue. The two films aren't alike in any way, except for a quality of the cinematography. The "sound man" film was completely symbolic, while when watching "Third Person" it seems to tell the story of the painfully raw circumstances of the characters in the film, which in the end you realize are also meant to be symbolic of the deeper theme of both films: trust. Worth watching, especially for the contemplative mind.
Sol C (kr) wrote: While watching this film, I kept thinking of French Kiss. Both Hutton and Ryan were in that film. This film made me think of, what would have happened if French Kiss ended with Ryan and Hutton getting back together. Both Ryan and Hutton have a great on screen chemistry in any film that they do. The film isn't bad, but it isn't good either. I was surprised by the short running time of the movie. The film feels like a stage play at times. Kristen Bell and Justin Long offer great supporting work in the film. I was surprised that Chery Hines directed the film.Overall it is ok, but I say see French Kiss instead.
bill s (ag) wrote: A well done salute to the brave men who fought at Iwo Jima.
Don S (fr) wrote: Disturbing look at the life of a dysfunctional family and the mother's struggle with drug addition. The story drags in spots, but overall the experience is worthy of a look. Harry Eden does a fantastic job (even though the constant tongue movements drove me crazy), and the reason I even thought about watching this movie, Keira Knightley, holds her own as a strung out pal to the young lad.
James Z (jp) wrote: The Final Frontier is scorned by many for being the weakest of all the feature films. A movie posing theological questions such as the existances of God to the audience, was never going to end well. How do you conclude such a movie? I can only imagine that at the time in the late 80's, it seemed like an amazing idea on paper. With guild strikes, budget cuts and no ILM, the producers of ST:V had their work cut out for them. There are plenty of moments when this movie touches on the original series, such as Kirk longing for his old chair, the camp fire scene for me was a touching moment, with three actors who know each other well and play the part of old friends with a genuine warm familarity. Lawrence Luckinbill was well cast and makes the part of his own, his character while playing the part of the protagonist Sybok, is still warm and likable. All the old cast are back in this movie, I was also glad to see Shatner made use of them, giving them more lines then "now in standard orbit" or "Hailing frequencies open.". I keep trying to put my finger on why I'm not one of those fans who hates this film and the only thing i can come up with is the acting of the original cast, who seemed more like their former TV 60's selves. The Bones and Spock banter is there, Kirks fighting aliens and Scottys fixing the enterprise. I dont know if this has anything to do with Shatner directing, but it's for this sole reason the movie scores more then a one for me. Plus Jerry Goldsmith is on top form with his score, the sound track is back to what fans know and love and not the disaster which is ST: IV. If the story had been worked on more and the budget not so tight, perhaps things might have turned out differently. I've seen worse movies and i've also seen much better one's as well. Star Trek The Final Frontier is one of those movies you will like for it's few good moments or you'll simply not want to see it again.
Jade S (it) wrote: I loved this movie!!!!!!!!! Mr. Vora Made my day by making us watch this!!!!!!!!!!! :) :) :D
Dalton N (br) wrote: Dark and tense, not to mention it is beautifully filmed, and brilliantly acted.
Trevor C (kr) wrote: a classic artistic dramedy about the industrial revolution. the version i saw, which i think is the only surviving version, is one that is only subtitled at certain points, so the story is told mainly through its images (also a good portion of it is silent), so unless you know French you have to rely mostly on its imagery to understand what's happening. its basically a very powerful satire on industry of the early 30s and the greed that can come about it.
Noah A (mx) wrote: Why doesn't it end?! F
Desiree V (gb) wrote: Stick to Dracula wouldent ya!
Bruno V (jp) wrote: Very carefully made , no real suspence ...story oke ! Lot of Were-once actors and B-actors ! Predicteble
Cassandra M (es) wrote: This movie is second of Pasolini's so called 'Trilogy of Love' (Il Decameron, I Racconti di Canterbury, Il fiore di mille e una notte; 1970-1974). All these movies are quite specific, there are said not to be that provocative or intriguing. They are greatly influenced by the fact that while directing them Pasolini was contented because of his intimate relationship with the 'innocent barbarian', actor Ninetto Davoli. It is also said that in 'Trilogy of Love' Pasolini became resigned to the present time world by escaping to the past.However I don't think it's true. In these movies, Pasolini introduces to the audience an incorrupt world where people don't care about 'material aspects of life', they try to live at the full stretch, they seek love and, of course, sex and they do not respect 'the repressive limits imposed by religious and bourgeois morality' (Gino Moliterno). This is probably why Pasolini later declared that these three films were most ideological of his career (in his famous and long interview with Massimo Fini). I suppose Pasolini tried to confront such 'primitive' world with the world he had lived in and which he had hated so much (this confrontation is present all the time, especially by the contrast between the love and the death, by the contrast between the first tales, in which the human naked body dominates, and the last two tales in which pursuit of money causes death and perdition. Because of such end it is also suggested that I Racconti di Canterbury are very close to Pasolini's disillusioned last movie, Sal).It is common to hear that Chaucer must have rolled over in his grave after this movie was released. But if you try to understand The Canterbury Tales in the context of Chaucer's attitude towards love in his (other) literary works, you will probably find that Chaucer would resemble to Pasolini alias Mr Chaucer ends the film with writing 'Here end the Canterbury Tales, told for the mere pleasure of their telling, Amen'.
Jon T (gb) wrote: This rather gruesome retelling of the now famous SNOW WHITE fairy tale has a lot going for it; it starts off magnificently and continues on that note for at least one full hour. Unfortunately, it goes downhill in the latter half, resulting in a climax that feels rushed and unsatisfying. Too bad, because there's a lot to praise about SNOW WHITE: A TALE OF TERROR. Sigourney Weaver turns in an effectively creepy and almost scary, but subtly handled performance as the antagonist of this tale, the vain and obsessive Lady Claudia. Every scene she is in is positively chilling. In a rather interesting twist, Claudia doesn't necessarily start out so vicious and evil. Snow White, incidentally (who is called Lilliana) isn't so pure and innocent either, in fact starting out being rather unappreciative of her new stepmother. In fact, the strongest element of the film is the psychological examination of the relationship between the two and what ultimately begins the famous conflict of the tale. This makes for a rather refreshing take. And instead of seven cheerful dwarfs, we get rather surly, gruff, borderline unlikeable miners. It's in this latter aspect of the film that SNOW WHITE begins to lose its appeal. The transition of their hostility to friendship with Lilliana feels very rushed and jarring to be believable. Then there's the love triangle between Lilliana, her Prince Charming Peter Gutenberg (David Conrad), and the youngest of the miners (Gil Bellows). It just... happens without much development. If only those two aspects of the film were improved (in addition to the final scene, which sort of just "stops" the film instead of ending it), this SNOW WHITE could have been a compelling one. As it is, though, it's a mixed bag.