Victims of oppressive town boss Honey are offered help by an unusual alliance of gunmen and circus performers
You may also like
Boot Hill torrent reviews
Emma H (it) wrote: I don't get why people hate it so much, I mean it wasn't great, but it really wasn't terrible.
Kareem s (gb) wrote: Well briefly speaking it is an OK film ... I wasn't amazed at any point of the film ... however the thing that really bugged my throughout the film wasn't the script or the leads ... It was Nadine Labaky herself ... she didn't overcome the Music clips Techniques she used to apply ... and led to a 95 min music clip... Which drove her off the storytelling course ... and lead to numerous beautiful scenes which where completely meaningless and ineffective to the whole storytelling.
Angela A (us) wrote: I love how the big hook of this installment was "What's happened to Neil?" although I have to say I was also quite pleased to see Tony and Sue's happy stories and to find out about Bruce's job. And now the fact that I can talk about them by name is starting to scare me a little.
Nathan F (us) wrote: A pleasant, sensitive, and thought-provoking film that affirms the vital importance of human relationships, esp. those that cross generations.
Bryce L (nl) wrote: It's everything you would ask for in a police drama action movie. Car scenes, drama, love, action, shooting. Nowhere in this movie did I ever feel rushed or did I feel the movie moved too slow. it was right on. The plot of the movie is excellente
Michael W (nl) wrote: Climbing expedition attempts to conquer treacherous K2. Some nice backdrop and scenery offset some stock characters and the predictable life and death struggle on the mountain. Enjoyed the self-centred Michael Biehn giving a speech about teamwork only to follow this up shortly thereafter with a lecture to his best friend about 'every man for himself'.
Martyn M (jp) wrote: A grand spectacular. How the great, difinitive events of history should be portrayed, if only it was a difinitively accurate portrayal.Richard Harris, born a Catholic, in a superb performance as probably one of the most Anti-Catholic characters in English history. Alec Guinness is superb as his royal antithesis, Charles I. Both actors portray their respective parts with more sympathy than the real individuals attracted at the time or since. A testament to the deserved reputations of each actor.Typically for a "historically accurate" movie it suffers from a broad range of historical inaccuracies. Cromwell's role in the causes of the outbreak of the war is seriously exaggerated. For a start he was not in regular meetings with Charles, he only met him once and that was on the Ilse of Wight. Cromwell did not enter Oxford to arrest the king. Neither was he at the Battle of Edgehill. Charles surrendered to the Scots and was handed over to the English, to Cornel Joyce's troops.Oliver Junior did not die at Naseby 1645, he died of smallpox in 1644.Historical accuracy sucks, but it is a good film.
Martin T (mx) wrote: Exquisitely photographed. That's the only nice thing I have to say about this movie. Ridiculously melodramatic dialogue brought to life by ridiculously bad actors. What a waste of time.
Greg W (br) wrote: year s/b 1956 not 1958 4 this French sex farce flixter
Michael C (nl) wrote: In my opinion, this is Hitchcock at the height of his craft. Most of the critics above don't know what they're talking about. I even saw one refer to it as documentary like...If that's the case, I had no idea the Cabinet of Dr. Caligari was a documentary. Next to Shadow of a Doubt, it contains some of the most honest emotional moments in the director's canon, beautifully visualized and perfectly edited.
Josh L (ag) wrote: Do you like terrible, boring movies that don't follow any form of reasonable logic while over-explaining everything while it trudges along? If you liked this movie you are probably suffering post epileptic seizures from the accident... Oh you don't remember an accident? Ask your mother.