A tiger shark bred by the Navy as a killing machine is wrecking havoc in the sleepy tourist town of Hampton Bay! In the meantime, the mafia is involved with sleazy real estate investments, ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
A tiger shark bred by the Navy as a killing machine is wrecking havoc in the sleepy tourist town of Hampton Bay.
You may also like
Cruel Jaws torrent reviews
Mike D (gb) wrote: A good movie at best. Kids loved it though!
Jiana W (us) wrote: I enjoyed "2 Days In Paris" way more than this. Like the first movie it is a clash of cultures film and the humor is mostly derived from this. But the real grating is mostly on Mingus' part, even though the characters are, for lack of a better term, on his "turf". They're not uncomfortable. He is. In fact, Marion's family is incredibly comfortable in their own skin, bringing their French culture to America and not thinking anything of the clashes or consequences. They are charmingly confident, if a bit embarrassing because of that fact. Sadly, in this sequel that had so much potential, I feel like I didn't laugh as much. I also didn't see Mingus as nearly as charismatic or funny as Jack was. You sympathized with Jack and could understand why he was reacting to things the way he was reacting to them, as his personality had already been developed earlier in the film (i.e., he was very neurotic and a hypochondriac in a country where he didn't speak the language and wasn't used to the culture.) I didn't really know/see where Mingus was coming from as I didn't have a good sense of who he was. Yeah he was radio host but that's all I really got from him. He was just kind of there to piss and moan about her families' eccentricities but he wasn't as amusing when he did it. Yeah Marion is a little wild and crazy, and her family just as so, but he's boring and whiny. I thought Chris Rock would be extremely funny here but he wasn't. "2 Days In Paris" also showed the city more, with the characters wandering around the streets/getting lost and whatnot. "2 Days In New York" doesn't really do this, surprisingly. Many scenes are within Mingus and Marion's apartment, or just indoors in the general and not exploring the fascinating bits of NYC. Unfortunate. So yeah, I was mostly disappointed with this movie.
Abby L (jp) wrote: A strange, stilted movie worth watching just for the erotic scene in the restaurant where the hero describes his seduction of the protagonist. Probably more appealing to the gals.
Enaid N (es) wrote: If I wasn't watching this with another person, I would have turned it off. What a lame excuse of a movie! I have seen "B" movies, that are much better!!!
Katherine C (us) wrote: Idealist Indians. A simple story but I feel very touching.
JJ H (jp) wrote: It's a troma film, enough said. Brilliant to watch, but pointless to own. See it with a group of friends.
Cameron J (nl) wrote: Huh, I reckon Sarah Palin really should have watched what she said about the environment, because here she is suffering the consequences of environmental problems, and if you don't get that, well, it doesn't matter, because you're probably not aware of this film enough to be reading this article. If you don't know about "Game Change", then you sure don't know about this early Julianne Moore vehicle, unless, of course, you do know about, and the reason why you're not reading this article is because you find the looks of it so bland that you're just not really bothering to look into it, even though, at it's core, it's a chillingly suspenseful dramatic thriller of intense proportions, or at least that's what the critics say. Seriously though, no place is safe here, as there is no escaping the horrible vengeance of the mighty one we've wronged: ... Mother Nature... or at least that's what this slow, two-hour-long dramatic "thriller" is telling me. No, this film isn't that underwhelming, but environmental messages and Julianne Moore trying to keep from getting sick don't exactly make this film quite as exciting as the "Safe" with Jason Statham, even though this film has been about as watched as 2012's "Safe". Ouch, that's actually kind of harsh, because this film does indeed raise quite the standard in terms of not being seen, and I can't say that I'm surprised, not just because this film was on a mighty low profile when it came out, but because the poster is so unappealing that it looks like some unpolished, amateur photograph. Come to think of it, the way that weird person on the poster in question is walking, coupled with a pretty concealing outfit, makes him look kind of like Bigfoot getting ready to fence, though that doesn't exactly raise the excitement all that much, because even though Bigfoot is cool and all, of all types of sword fighting styles he could be exploring, he's taking up fencing. I can joke all day, but I do actually like this film and found it to be adequately exciting, but the fact of the matter is that what marketing that went behind this project made it appear flawed, and sure enough, this film isn't "safe" from some complaints. The film gives you a little bit of info here and there, plus the effectiveness within the offscreen performances and Julianne Moore's onscreen performance keep you adequately invested in the story of Carol White, but immediate development is mighty lacking, and gradual exposition isn't too much meatier, resulting in considerable underdevelopment that ends up going a longer way than you might think in distancing you from a story which is too minimalist to afford you falling out. Not a whole lot happens throughout this film, as there's only so much to this minimalist story, whose natural shortcomings are considerable enough to perhaps secure the final product as underwhelming, while soften the ground on which compellingness stands enough for sinking even deeper into underwhelmingness to be a serious risk. Needless to say, underdevelopment isn't the way to go if you're trying to compensate for natural shortcomings, and dragging isn't exactly a much better way to go, because no matter how undercooked this film may be, it, at just shy of two hours, takes plenty of time to get fatty around the edges, taking on excess material that, before too long, devolves into repetition, maybe even aimlessness, which is, of course, at its worst when the excessiveness is cleansed of material and left strictly with filler, much of which is of a questionably artistic nature. The film will often follow a more controlled and traditionalist storytelling path, but then take a break to be driven by those long, artistic meditations upon nothingness, and not always organically, suffering from a certain unevenness in narrative style that throws you off about as much as the questionability within the artistic touches themselves. Granted, neither the over-artistry nor the narrative structure inconsistency is all that considerable, it's just that the problems feel emphasized by the atmospheric cold spells, of which there are many, for although the limp spots are rarely, if ever all that dulling, they retard pacing, while thinning out resonance to the point of tainting the film with extended periods of genuine uncompellingness. Were the coldest moments in this film more recurring, as well as backed by greater pacing problems, the final product would have fallen flat, yet as things stand, the film, while saved as decent, is brought dangerously close to the edge of mediocrity by the natural shortcomings, underdevelopment, bloating, unevenness and coldness that nevertheless secure the final product as barely memorable. That being said, as flawed as the film is, when it engages, it really keeps you going, and ultimately stands as decent, with relatively outstanding elements, such as musical ones. Okay, perhaps I'm going a bit too far describing this film's musical elements as outstanding, as Brendan Dolan's and Ed Tomney's score isn't too terribly unique, nor is it all that evenly explored, but it's still among the strongest attributes of the film, having a certain synthesized minimalism that is both refreshingly lovely on a musical level, as well as near-haunting on an atmospheric level. When Dolan's and Tomney's score really delivers, it's near-piercing in its effectiveness, and while I wish I could say that the often atmospherically chilled film is more frequent with its celebration of this stylish original soundtrack, the music that drives this thoughtful thriller is pretty memorable and entertaining, yet isn't the only stylistic touch that ends up doing quite a bit in bringing this thriller to life about as much as it can be. Todd Haynes makes more than a few questionable moves a director, whether when he's establishing a cold atmosphere that is often dulling and sometimes distancing, or when he's breaking a relatively traditionalist narrative style with questionable areas in artistic storytelling, but where Haynes could have gone the way of plenty of independent art filmmakers and driven his vision into flatness, what he does relatively right goes quite a ways, whether when he's playing up such genuinely nifty stylistic choices as a broad framing over tight environments in order to immerse you into a sense of claustrophobia, or when he's somberly drawing on atmospheric chill, not to the point of distancing you with the limp spells that are still more recurring than they probably should be, but just enough to breathe life into intensity. The film's tension is certainly not all the frequent, and when it comes to the surface, it's rarely as haunting as you might hope it would be, but it does arrive if you wait long enough, and it comes with genuine intrigue that reinforces your investment, and therefore draws your attention more towards what meat there is to this subject matter. This story concept is a seriously minimalist one, having too little to it to be all that firmly secured from the dark depths of uncompelling mediocrity, but it's not exactly cleansed of intrigue, boasting unique aspects to thematic depth and storytelling, some of which don't work, with most having a certain juiciness on paper that is brought to life by anything from the strong score work, and highlights to Haynes' direction, to a strong portrayer of a somewhat thinly drawn character. There are pretty good supporting performances throughout this film, but leading lady Julianne Moore, in her second lead role, really carries things, capturing the initial quiet, maybe even slightly awkward comfort of the down-to-earth Carol White character impeccably, then proceeding to explore the intensity and dramatic layers that you might expect from a person who grows more and more fearful for her life as the signs of the thing more-or-less killing her grow more and more ambiguous. As White falls deeper into her unknown disease, Moore compels more thoroughly, until you end up with a lead who is more gripping than the film itself, though that's not to say that this film is completely disengaging, being a mess, but one that has enough highlights to it to stand "safe" from mediocrity, which it still flirts with more than it probably should. To clear things up, development is considerably limited, and that, alongside bloating, questionable moments in artistry, inconsistency in narrative style, and distancing cold spells in atmosphere, leaves you to mediate upon natural shortcomings enough for the final product to run the risk of collapsing into mediocrity, which is ultimately kept at bay enough by genuinely intriguing story concept aspects - done justice by haunting score work, and truly brought to life by highlights in direction, as well as a strong lead performance by Julianne Moore - for Todd Haynes' "Safe" to stand as a barely memorable, but nonetheless adequately engaging dramatic thriller. 2.5/5 - Fair
Mike B (kr) wrote: Silly and with mostly horrible acting, this film wastes a fine cast. The only appeal that remains is the campy feel, which wears thin fast. Swank and Affleck's early acting is terrible.
Ben C (mx) wrote: Don't expect something that looks like the poster, you will go in disappointed. Instead, the audience gets an awful paper mache dragon(?) that really brings the movie down from it's already low rating no thanks to it's awful acting and blood.
Robert C (kr) wrote: I remember watching this movie when I was a kid and I always loved watching it. The action sequences are what I liked best about this movie. Burt and Clark both have such a powerful onscreen presence about them.
Nicky N (jp) wrote: This Was Horrible.The First One Was So Much Better.F