You may also like
Den hemmelige traktat torrent reviews
Austin G (de) wrote: Somewhere in between "It's not good, but it's not bad," Hands of Stone is a dull movie, but at least has decent fight scenes.
Paul E (it) wrote: It's rare that I really like a concert film. They just can't compete with the experience of being there. Also, they often throw in unnecessary effects or skits that take away from the main reason for seeing the film - the music. Led Zeppelin's "The Song Remains The Same" was one of the worst offenders. Each band member had fantasy sequences that were pretty ridiculous. All I wanted to see was the show. Well, Zeppelin has remedied that mistake, plus some. This is easily one of the best concert films I've ever seen. Full disclosure - Led Zeppelin ties with Queen as my favorite band, so I'm definitely not the most objective. But, I rate movies on how they make me feel. This one kept a silly grin on my face and my feet tapping all the way through it. If you're a fan, this is a must-see. Also, Jason Bonham acquits himself magnificently - his dad would be proud.
kostas t (kr) wrote: "einai eutuxima na exeis elpida"
Caesar M (it) wrote: Once again Invisible Target is another Martial Art movie that I've heard great things about, but didn't live up to those expectations much in the same way the Vietnamese Martial Art flick The Rebel. Though unlike The Rebel, Invisible is still a good effort in the genre even if it's nothing new. Invisible Target follows three cops who team up to bring down a criminal gang of seven, who all have their own hidden agenda. The movie brings nothing new to Martial Art genre but it's done well and is largely enjoyable despite being predictable. Though it is largely uneven, the first half is action packed with enough plot to prevent it from feeling just another brainless action film. The second half of the movie is slow with minimal action set pieces, plus it doesn't help that the movie is way to long for it's own good. At two hours it just pads out scenes that are too long and stretched out to the point where you just want to fast forward to the action. The action here is great, although a little too much wire work will take out some viewers from the realism of the movie. The cast acting is almost on the same level of their fighting skills and Jaycee Chan (son of Jackie Chan) is not to bad himself, just don't expect him to do anything like his father. Invisible Target also has one of my favorite underrated Martial Artist, Wu Jing, who has done some impressive work in his career and he doesn't disappoint here. He makes a great villain and it's disappointing that he doesn't get more roles that gives him a chance to showcase his talent. Invisible Target is predictable and nothing new in the Martial Art genre, but it still entertains thanks to a decent plot and great fight scenes. While too long for its own good you'll filled satisfied with the end result.
Court S (es) wrote: Now the woods have eyes too.... what's next?
Andrew P (fr) wrote: The music's the thing with this feature. The story's simple (as are the characters) but the music is great. Hard not to start dancing when listening to the music. Jennifer Hudson did a great job with her feature film debut. Eddie Murphy was great too. Shame he went and did NORBIT right after. He and Jennifer would have surely both won Oscars for their performances. His was a career defining performance. A true shame he kept up with the goofy (and gross) schtick instead of following his newly discovered dramatic talents.
Noah A (it) wrote: funnier than the first one. C
Marion S (br) wrote: ou le gros coup de vieux qu'il a pris !
Dot L (br) wrote: A sensitive look at cultural differences as young adults are caught between two worlds.
Janet L (it) wrote: brilliant and philosophical, integrates multimedia animation with photographic cinematography. It weaves mythology expressed in animation with reality when the author slips into his alter ego. Scenes are poetically beautiful and memorable.
Morten (us) wrote: As much as I dislike Tom Hanks today, just as much do I like him in his movies of the 1980's. With "Bachelor Party" probably being in the top 10 of the funniest movies ever and "Big" a huge landmark aswell, I watched "Nothing in Common" as it was being shown on the movie-channel.To begin with I thought I was about to witness a romantic-comedy, but luckily it wasn't as romantic as I had "hoped". To begin with it deals more with Tom Hanks' father's - played by Jackie Gleason - break up with his wife than it actually deals with Tom Hanks several female encounters. Secondly it focuses on Tom Hank's work life and how affects his incressing relationship with his parents. It is probably very classic in it's narrative structure, but it still has some great supporting characters and a very good ending.
Bryan G (jp) wrote: Now I love a good b-grade film, especially one that is either science-fiction or horror. The 1950's and 60's were a great time period for some of the most memorable b-grade films, some of which are among my favorite movies of all time. Released in America in 1962, Reptilicus is a joint production between Denmark and America, which probably explains the uneven balance and flow of the film. Two directors, Poul Bang for the Danish version and Sidney Pink for the American version, are listed and you can tell that both directors had two different visions for the film. It's unfortunate that neither of their visions came out clearly in the film, at least with the version that is readily available today. Now I can be forgiving with a film like this for its terrible acting and horrible looking special effects. But the one thing I can't forgive is when the movie is just plain tedious. Reptilicus has almost no idea what sort of movie it is. Sometimes it's a serious monster flick, with the traditional army and scientist banding together to stop some giant menace storyline. And then at times it is some campy flick, aiming to get cheap laughs. The movie is about an unearthed tail of some large lizard creature that is taken to a laboratory to be studied. Originally kept frozen, the tail thaws out and begins to regenerate itself back into the complete creature it originally was. Now this giant flying serpent terrorizes nearby civilizations, destroying everything and emitting some sort of neon green goo that does little to nothing other than obstruct the screen. And it can't be harmed by any traditional weaponry, because the creature continues to regenerate and heal itself almost immediately after being harmed. Though not as much of a presence in the film as other cast members I was still annoyed with Dirch Passer, who plays a night watchmen at the laboratory. Passer was apparently a bit of a comedian, and I suppose rather big in Denmark at the time that this movie went into production. But his bumbling idiot antics took me out of the film more than the cheesy effects and bad dialogue. Just watch for the scene where he comes across some electric eels in a small fish tank to see why his inclusion in the film was so distracting. As bad as Reptilicus is I would say that it is worth one viewing, since you have to see to believe just how terrible of a movie this one really is. It comes off like an attempt to be like the original Godzilla film, but stripped of any intelligence and merit that film had. Heck, I don't even think there are many needless Godzilla sequels that are as bad as Reptilicus managed to be.
Mark S (it) wrote: A quintessential British film - from a play by Noel Coward, directed by David Lean, and starring Robert Newton, Celia Johnson and John Mills. It's interesting to see a war-time film that shows the development of a country between wars; recovering from one and heading inextricably towards another; all through the eyes of the working-class Gibbons family and their friends, lovers and neighbours.
Dwayne G (it) wrote: I did not think this movie was that bad at all. Yes, it was not as good as the original but it was worlds better than Terminator 3.