Young Limburg cattle farmer, Jacky Vanmarsenille, is approached by an unscrupulous veterinarian to make a shady deal with a notorious West-Flemish beef trader. But the assassination of a federal policeman, and an unexpected confrontation with a mysterious secret from his past, set in motion a chain of events with far-reaching consequences.
- Stars:Matthias Schoenaerts, Jeroen Perceval, Jeanne Dandoy, Barbara Sarafian, Tibo Vandenborre, Frank Lammers, Sam Louwyck, Robin Valvekens, Baudoin Wolwertz, David Murgia, Erico Salamone, Philippe Grand'Henry, Kris Cuppens, Sofie Sente, Kristof Renson,
- Director:Michaël R. Roskam, Michaël R. Roskam,
- Writer:Michaël R. Roskam (scenario)
A young cattle farmer is approached by a veterinarian to make a deal with a notorious beef trader. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Bullhead torrent reviews
(es) wrote: amazing cars and lots of fun
(jp) wrote: really strong performance by newcomer jack reynor!
(ca) wrote: Alright this could be a campaign for God or Jezus , but the story was nice , interesting....The boy who went to heaven while he was operated on a exploded apendicides , it was believable but i won't go to church this Sunday !
(us) wrote: What the hell is this shit?
(it) wrote: Visually stunning, this tale of a Japanese style Robin Hood is well worth watching. The English dub is a step above most, but the original Japanese probably conveys the acting better. There are plenty of wild action set pieces that should please fans of the genre, and there is also plenty of humor sprinkled throughout the film. A must see, especially if you enjoyed Kiriya's earlier film "Casshern".
(us) wrote: I've seen some crap in my time as I'm sure my friends and reviews will testify to. Then I decided to submit myself to the 'El Chupacabra Experience', which is certainly something not for the weak. The acting is terrible and the camera work poor, once you get past that there are plenty of other things to make you look to the heavens and shout "Why?!". With the way that the days disappeared so quickly I was beginning to think I was watching Dark City. There was one scene in which it is the morning after the cousin of our 'hero' has been killed, he gets in a car to drive off and as the conversation continues it's suddenly night, but don't worry as he soon cheers up and is laughing and joking. Normally I might have been wondering why the heroine decides to wear a short skirt and heels to go chasing after the critter, but by the time I got to that point I wasn't really caring. It also would have been nice if the film-makers had thought about how their characters were getting from A to B as sometimes they just seemed to teleport in. The funniest part of the film was watching a gang member trying to outrun the Chupacabra on his crutches. This film have affected me psychologically as I even started to 'enjoy' the film as it went on, but I refuse to give this one and a half stars.... must resist.
(ag) wrote: Worst Movie Sequel EVER
(nl) wrote: Trs amusant. Very warm colours.
(es) wrote: Not a film that improves with repeated watching. It's interesting enough but the pseudo-documentary scenes jar with the rest of the film and the cod psychopathology fails to flesh out the characters with any sympathetic traits.
(mx) wrote: This movie has William Shatner in it. But it's not as good as Star Trek 3 or that motorcycle movie with Andy Griffith. one thing it does have going for it is a murderer who dresses up like Squigy from Laverne and Shirley. The man character lady is supposed to be a feminist or something but I guess people were so sexist in the seventies that now she just seems like any lady would be now. I wouldn't have walked out of the theater with this one. One and a half stars.
(es) wrote: although the execution of the movie itself was lacking, it had a great script. It could have possibly been the unbelievability rate, the off-and-on poor acting, or maybe the drastic 80's low-budget movie feel that dissapointed me. However, the feeling of defiance was there, and Tim Burton's radio personality made this movie somewhat though provoking. the common story of a rich girl who wants to be an outcast and finds a counter culprit but the friendship can only last so long because the rich girl will always need to go back to her roots just as the orphan will always be alone. I would love to make a re-make of this movie, setting it in Los Angeles and using the underground hipster to portray the sub-culture and have the rich girl own a loft in downtown Los Angeles and have her friend stay there etc. it could be good. hey flixsters give me some money i'll make a movie and the soundtrack will be incredible too! Overall, Times Square captures the innocence and desire of breaking free from shelter and being 'punk'.
(ag) wrote: Just for the treat of seeing Bette Davis and Maggie Smith (yeah, those two!) bikering like evil Queens, this movie gets lots of bonus points. The whole cast is gold, Jane Birkin, Mia Farrow and Although its a poirot movie , Angela lansbury is there as truly flamboyant romance novel writer and is hilarious. Nino rota provides a mysterious although sometimes too grand score. The directing is nothing to mention , just apt so ok, if a tad uninspired. It would be wise not to compare to orient express wich benefited from a great director like Sidney Lumet, and appreciate it on its own merits. And the story; with Agatha Christie your always in good hands! For fans of the whodunnit, its a very fine specimen!
(nl) wrote: Originals are always better but it's not that bad for a sequel.
(au) wrote: Once the homosexual subtext is brought to the surface, everything seems to be a joke. Are they gay, kidding, or just considering?
(us) wrote: It;s easy to see, while watching ? nous la libert how much Rene Clair loves the cinema, full of interesting angles and ideas, it's easy how everyone from Chaplin to heck even Jamison Handy ripped ideas off of him for this film. This film is more flash then substance, and I am sure Clair knows it. The story is simple, 2 con men escape prison, one ends up more financially successful then the other. Although rich with neat ideas, it's incredibly boring at times, and sometimes you're waiting for the next nouveau idea to come up to start picking things up again. Much has been said about Chaplin "borrowing" from this film, and that's painfully obvious. But watching this film one wonders how much Rene Clair stole from OTHER people, like Fritz Lang's Metropolis or even the socialist Russian films of the 30's...
(br) wrote: Every genre of literature has its own milestone, Fantasy has "Lord of The Rings", romance has "Romeo & Juliet", espionage has the James Bond saga, Burlesque has "Don Quijote de la Mancha" and science fiction has "Dune". While all of said examples have been adapted to the silver screen, the weakest adaptation of the group would be David Lynchs version of Dune. But what would you think if you found out that there was a more ambitious, artistic and visionary adaptation of Frank Herberts work? Alejandro Jodorowsky has been a figure of controversy through his entire artistic career due to his surreal and religious style/beliefs but even you don't like his work or have never heard about him, you have to admit that his vision of "Dune" was one of the most ambitious ideas ever presented in the cinematic industry. This documentary tries to describe this gigantic film that was never made and it shows pieces of Jodorowskys vision/ideas. Some of the choices Alejandro made were incredibly bizarre, like the casting, but at the same time you understand why/how they could have worked marvelously in this surreal and mystic vision of space. The artwork that's showed is either descriptions of every single scene or are beautiful paintings that would have created a unique take of the science fiction genre. The big issue I have with this documentary is that it treats this unmade film as the second coming and completely bashes Lynchs version, sure you may agree with some of the statements said in here but it's pretty ridiculous to give this film that level of praise when it could have been a major disaster. "Jodorowskys Dune" is well-made documentary that shows respect to this never made potential masterpiece and it manages to get your full attention and interest (even if you don't believe in Alejandros vision as much the people that worked with him). This documentary should be seen at least once just for an educational aspect: To learn about one of cinemas biggest tragedies (regardless of your opinion about this surreal vision, it is undeniable that a film this ambitious should have seen the light of day)
(ru) wrote: Seeing the 2 generations come together is a "fun" adventure, as Kirk would say. It shows how this next generation could carry the flame, until they went back to the beggining again with "Star Trek".
(es) wrote: One of the most unwatchable messes in movies i had to sit through this year. Its different sure, but once that wears off in, oh, i don't know, 4 minutes it still makes DOOM look like THE RAID. 0 STARS.