Charlie Chan in Panama
Charlie impersonates an employee of the U.S. government to foil an espionage plot which would destroy part of the Panama Canal, trapping a Navy fleet on its way to the Pacific after maneuvers in the Atlantic.
You may also like
Charlie Chan in Panama torrent reviews
Valerie G (ca) wrote: This is a good movie with high tension and really good effects. I must say I was yelling at the tv when Nelson went to get the equipment.
David C (es) wrote: This is s great movie and I love Jennifer Lopez but it's so basic. This movie has a theme that has been overused.
Ruby D (jp) wrote: Shit! There was no story to this movie it was all random!
Eric H (es) wrote: Alas, The Left Index has met its match. Usually, the index concerns seven variables when considering a film--acting, production scenes, dialogue, plot, character development, artistry, and continuity--on a scale ranging from a high of 10 to a low of 1.Generally, a mix of rating results in some score which demonstrates the strong and weak points in a film. With this film, every variable is ranked a 10, simply because the film is sensational in all areas. The film is powerful, intense and spellbinding. Everything is related to everything else, which, in effect, results in an organic whole which is seldom achieved in film. The acting is connected with the decisions the two children make as the travel to Germany, even not knowing where it is or what it is. They constantly have to decide whom to trust, how to avoid dangers, or which way is north. The production scenes are unparalleled, especially the snow scene at the police station, the horse and wedding in the town square, and the motorcycle rally. There are dozens of others just as good. The plot is propelled by constant dramatic action, which gradually intensifies towards the conclusion. Not matter what the viewer is prepared for, there are continual unexpected events which reinforce the plot. Character development is superb, as the children become both wiser and more experienced as they near their goal. Dialogue is sparse, words are spoken only when necessary, and some scenes are wordless. After all, film is a medium where one sees things happen. The films strongest point is in the combination of continuity and artistry. In a word, it is surreal in the classical manner of Salvadore Dali and Pablo Picasso. One is especially cognizant of Dali's "Persistance of Memory" in terms of the wide expanses of space. In fact, Theo Angelopoulos employs the three element of 20th century surrealism--land, sky, and water--very effectively. There are obvious allusions to Picasso's "Saltimbasques" with the traveling theater. Angelopoulos' illusion to the hand of God from the Sistine Chapel is unmistakable, especially with the missing finger which symbolizes human contact with salvation. All in all, The Left Elbow Index rates the film a 10-plus. I strongly recommend this film. Aristotle would have loved it. I think you will, too.
harrold j (us) wrote: Truly a classic movie with a performance by Diana Ross that seems to only get better with age.
Eduardo R (es) wrote: The Organizer is a grand movie (great reconstructions of epoch, a huge ancient textile mill brought back to full function, massive demonstrations in 18th century garb) and it is a great movie, In the way it takes you into the story and makes you empathize with its agonists. But, unlike what the poor plot description states, it is not so much about the organizer, as it is about the workers and their lives. The organizer, and his colleague the teacher Di Mateo, are paradigms of the ideologues of the time, for sure coming from a higher, more educated class. The organizer is generous and brave; he is also reckless and devious when the situation requires it. But the heart of the movie are really the workers, not the organizer, who is as much a paradigm as he is comic relief. After all, the original title of the movie is I Compagni, best translated as The Fellow Workers (The Comrades would be too loaded a term). Here, virtually every character is engrossing, developed, striking (except probably the bosses--this is not a balanced movie). Especially pay attention to Omero, the young boy, and Raoul, the hothead, in another memorable role by Renato Salvatori. This is what classics are all about.
Guido S (fr) wrote: I liked this when I first saw it when it came out. Watched it again, and have turned against this film. Clive Owen is a family man struggling financially with a diabetic kid. He runs into Jennifer Anniston on the train and begins an affair. Eventually they get robbed in a hotel room and the robber continues to get into his life and squeeze more money out of him. Since the villain is known right away, there really is no tension. Clive Owen's family is almost forgotten about 20 minutes in and really only play so he doesn't go to the cops, they really have no purpose only for that little bit of the plot otherwise the film won't work. Eventually the twist comes and it isn't as smart as it likes to think it is. The Rza is pretty good, but leaves about halfway through. Nice to see Giancarlo Esposito again. Plus the detective from Heavy Rain is in it too.
Jos M (jp) wrote: Ingeniosa y deliciosa comedia.