Criminal psychologist Cameron Grainger is Detroit's go-to hostage negotiator. Blaming herself when a crisis she's handling goes wrong and a young man is killed, she removes herself from service. But she is called back into sudden and terrifying action when her own sister becomes a hostage and the assailants-with an agenda to be revealed-demand that Cameron be the one to negotiate her release. Written by Anonymous (IMDb.com).
- Stars:Rhona Mitra, Erika Rosenbaum, Marc Menard, Richard Jutras, Elias Toufexis, Denise Fergusson, Jordan Hayes, Nick Walker, Matthew Kabwe, Zack Peladeau, Liz MacRae, Erin Agostino, Jamie Elman, Katherine Dines-Craig, Tristan D. Lalla,
- Director:Adrian Wills,
- Writer:J.B. White
A hostage negotiator is unable to continue with her job after a siege she tried to resolve ended in disaster and a man was killed. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Crisis Point torrent reviews
(it) wrote: 24th April 2011Only just seen it but remember barely any of it...says it all really.
(ag) wrote: Your True Romance got in my Before Sunrise! Superb performance by Shia LaBoeuf. It might not be a solid film, but I was entertained. Plus: Mads Mikkelsen!
(es) wrote: Ricky Gervais is not funny. He never has been Just because he constantly laughs at himself, does not mean he is funny. Stop paying attention to him and he will fade away, as he should.
(de) wrote: She was sick,no doubt in that,nice one...
(ca) wrote: Frankly I hadn't seen Assante fit for Nietzsche's part, but, in spite of his Italian accant he fought to hide, he did a very good job expressing the inner conflicts and drama of the bright philosopher who was ahead of those times.... The intensity of the dreams (nightmares) is well screened as well as the debates between Breuer and Nietzsche. Freud was, however kept aside somehow, it seemed a character without enough force, which he definitely wasn't, even as a young man...
(ca) wrote: I remember watching this movie with my dad a long time ago. It's actually about the Japanese side of the war and it make them human. Instead of soulless monsters like some directors but surprisingly not Clint Eastwood. It's also a companion of Flags of Our Fathers also directed by Clint Eastwood as well. It was great as a foreign film as well as a war epic and Ken Watanabe was amazing in this. They basically knew they were going down but not without a fight. I hope I'm not spoiling it because that's history. They also talk about almost all of the soldiers stories. This move even got a gold globe for best picture foreign language and it shows.Haven't really watched Flags of our Fathers yet but I will when I can. I'm sure it's as good as this movie but I'll have to watch it entirely one day.
(us) wrote: I've seen it for the 2nd time and now I can say that this is a masterpiece.
(kr) wrote: hilariously kitschy with a deliciously nostalgic soundtrack. the younger girls definitely stole the show from the adults. can't deny the hamminess but bloody hell, this was darn enjoyable.
(ag) wrote: I personally love this movie. Orson Welles displays his incredible editing talents and his style was undoubtedly ahead of its time.. When I watch certain scenes of F For Fake I think of Wes Anderson but then I remember that this was released in 1972.. Orson Welles was a genius. The Criterion Collection 2-Disc DVD of F For Fake is a must see for any Welles fan. The supplements contain rare footage about Welles and some of his unfinished projects including "The Other Side of The Wind".. Check it out! You won't regret it!
(br) wrote: Delightful romantic fantasy, Veronica is truly bewitching, March is unusually lively, their chemistry is wonderful, you could never tell they absolutely loathed each other behind the scenes. Susan is a superlative bitch and all the other supporting characters are cast to perfection. All and all a marvelous experience.
(de) wrote: Fourth entry in The Invisible Man series is a semi decent horror adventure with bits of comedy thrown in. The film had a great idea, but I felt it lacked the real fire that the plot suggested. I mean, really the plot was interesting, creative and interesting. However the film ends up feeling somewhat silly, and the finished film lacks somewhat to really make it good. The film is a decent entry in the series, but it never becomes anything better than it is. The ideas were fantastic for this film, however the execution feels a tad poor and it wasn't really a fulfilling experience. Considering the plot direction, the film could have been a lot less silly and considering how the film starts out, it's surprising that the film has more gags going on on-screen. I liked the film, but as much as I'd wanted to. It's too bad because the story had the potential to be excellent, but really it leaves a lot to be desired. The film had plenty of things that could have been improved upon such as the attempt at humor. The film is and entertaining, but it lacks as well. The film had the potential in being something very good, but it's only somewhat decent. The film is decent, and entertaining, but in the end it leaves unsatisfied with the finished film. Considering such a unique plot, this could have been one of the best of the series. Though not perfect, this is still entertaining, but you'll notice that it could have been done much better.
(gb) wrote: Booth Tarkington's book about class distinctions came out in 1922. The George Stevens' movie in 1935. As I write its 2013. That's a lot of water under the bridge, as they say. Kate Hepburn's character, a young woman desperate to bridge the class gulf society has set for her, willing to do all in her power to cross that divide ... I found shallow and despicable. She lies, she puts her family through hell, all to "get" oblivious MacMurray (as the objet d'desire), who never seems to question her endless machinations. The dinner scene, the height of tension in the film, where everything goes wrong, is still the best thing about the work. Maybe they should remake it ... ?
(au) wrote: The fire scenes were quite remarkable and overall it was a very interesting movie.
(de) wrote: Tan genial como imperfecta, a pesar de la poca tiene planos irrepetibles
(ru) wrote: Enjoyable even if not great.
(es) wrote: Sometimes you watch a movie when you are younger and think it is the best thing ever. Jerry Maguire was one of those movies for me. For years I would say it was a good movie, when in reality, I only saw it once as a younger kid. Well, I am 32 now, and was home sick from work one day and it happened to be on, so I watched it from start to finish. I sat there dumbfounded about how I could ever think this was a quality movie. It is just flat out, for lack of a better word, corny. Yes, I guess in the grand scheme of things it is a love story about two unlikely people who come together and football just happens to be in the backdrop. It was actually comical how cheesy it was. Then I started to think, wait a second, Cuba Gooding Jr won an Oscar for this !! Are you kidding me ! Possibly the single most undeserved Oscar award of all time. He wins over William H Macy in Fargo, a young Edward Norton in Primal Fear, and James Woods in Ghosts of Mississippi. This has to be a mistake, right ? And not to mention Cruise was nominated for Best Actor, there must have been some serious dope smoking that year while the voting was going on, but I digress. In the end if your looking for a sports movie turn elsewhere, if your looking for a cool movie about sports agents and athletes, turn elsewhere. if you are however, looking for a movie to watch with your girlfriend when she suggests a chick flick night, then I would go for this one, at least you have some type of football action in the backdrop. Overall though, this movie is just plan cheesy and corny.