Bilbao. The commander of the Guardia Civil, Evaristo Torrecuadrada discovers that his son Paco of 17 years old is a heroin addict. His hope was to see him in the Military Academy. Paco, by differences with his father, runs away from home with a pistol. The commander begins his quest aided by co-Body, using the means at its disposal to achieve its objective. Lt. Alcantara, an expert on drugs, will be one of the most prominent in this quest. The Civil Guard Commander begins to discover a world that knew nothing. Urko's father, nationalist leader with a heroin adict son, helps in some way to find out. His principles, his life, his struggle, fall into a deep crisis, exacerbated by the developments ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
|Download||El pico.DVDRIP.||DVDRip||37||41||699.59 MB|
|Download||El Pico||Other||26||46||4 GB|
You may also like
El pico torrent reviews
William F (ag) wrote: Delightful film that everyone can enjoy.
gary t (gb) wrote: WARNING YOU HAVE GOT TO WATCH THE END OF THE CREDITS THROUGHOUT THIS MOVIE AS SOMETHING HAPPENES AT THE END OF THE CREDITS THROUGHOUT THIS MOVIE........
Chris A (gb) wrote: Highly entertaining and funny. Doesn't take itself too seriously. You cannot help but grow fond for the characters - good or evil..or both!
Conner R (mx) wrote: Extremely effective and paced in a way that is both aggravating and genius. The first 30 minutes are amazing because they put you a completely relaxed and safe environment. After that it's just disturbing. A lot of it has to do with the creepy score that managed to get to me after a while. The other reason has to do with the amount of suspense, it's really like nothing else. What's so odd about this movie is that at times it looks like someone's home movies of a hunting trip, that's what makes it truly an effective horror movie.
Jessica D (ca) wrote: BLAHHHHHH Soo shitty. Acting was horrible, all the flash back scenes werent in chronological order. UGH. and more UGHGGHH!!!!
Monique H (nl) wrote: very excellent, true and intense movie. it shows true struggles and challenges of trying to be a person of God.
Alex W (it) wrote: someone tell me what that was. this movie wants to be terminator and alien so bad.
Trev B (au) wrote: Lou Ferrigno, not painted green - boooo
Tim S (kr) wrote: Scarecrows in an obscure 1988 action/horror hybrid. The plot centers on a group of military personnel who decide to make off with their base's payroll and hi-jack a cargo plane. One of the thieves decides to turn on the others, dumping the money and parachuting out of the plane. The group follows him down to an old farmhouse, whereby they come upon a field full of rotting scarecrows. When watching the movie, it's easy to see why it slipped between the cracks so easily. The ridiculous amount of dialogue (which is ridiculous itself sometimes), as well as some slightly over-the-top performances make it a movie that's prime for the trash heap. However, I wouldn't go so far as to call it complete junk either. It's certainly a movie that requires a bit of patience because of all of the aforementioned details, but for a horror fan, it has plenty to embrace. The scarecrows themselves are actually quite spooky, especially considering what they do with their victims, which is stuffing them full of straw and turning them into zombies (more or less). To say the least, the real star of the film are the make-up effects (courtesy of KNB alumni Norman Cabrera), which are quite gruesome, as well as effective. There's also plenty of suspense that's built up over the course of the movie. Shot by cinematographer Peter Deming (who also shot Evil Dead II, the Scream sequels, and Cabin in the Woods), and with an effectively creepy score by Terry Plumeri, it's a movie that's surprisingly successful with its plot at times. Director William Wesley managed to make a horror movie that uses what it has to the best of its abilities, and that's all you can really ask for.
Sylvester K (jp) wrote: This is one (Excuse my language) "Fucked up" film, there's no artistic intention in the film, but pure sadism. Acting? Nope, reciting lines. The soundtrack was so 80s, failed to be scary. The film is long and dreadful, to say the least, disturbingly boring. The only thing that really made this film controversial was the title and the central theme: necrophilia. The problem is, he like the Decomposed corpse (4 weeks), not the fresh one: it's not easy to be a B-movie actor.
Wayne K (nl) wrote: Joe D'Amato is not a man known for subtlety, being one of the most prolific and blatant rip-off artists of the modern world, so I watched Beyond The Darkness expecting it to be mental, an utterly riotous time. What I got instead was a stunningly lethargic and completely disjointed mess, devoid of any vestige of enjoyment. There's very little dialogue, and what there is isn't exactly compelling. It trundles along at a snail's pace, and seems constantly unable to work out what kind of film it should be. Clearly there was no thought put into the plot, which is so shockingly thin that it's already worn out in the first 20 minutes. From there it repeats itself over and over, staggering around ineptly before stumbling to an awkward finish. It's not even enjoyable in an ironic, so-bad-it's-good way, since there's very little to make fun of. Boring to the nth degree, D'Amato has made much worse films, many of which are, paradoxically, much better than this one.
Matthew S (nl) wrote: I've never quite figured out what makes this movie so interesting. When I step back away from it and think -- there is really nothing all the special about it (opening credits aside) Yet there is style here and it is just odd enough to have justified itself as an all time favorite cult film.
jay n (ru) wrote: Solid crime drama with excellent cast. Holden and Nancy Olson play well off each other and Lyle Bettger oozed slime like few others, on top of that there's Barry Fitzgerals as the wizened chief of police. Some of the procedures are a bit quaint now but taking into account when it was made an entertaining little programmer all in all.
Chandradeep D (nl) wrote: okay....so its 1939...& Renoir's sitting at his place thinking how to dismantle the french upper class ...and well he cums up with 'The Rules Of The Game'...so now wat to show---juxtapose the servants against the ruthless hunting scenes... the minuets of adultery and seduction...A luxurious and careless and carefree get together....well all these can be accomplished .....But wat makes this film one of the greatest films in cinematic history is Renoir's direction....the movements of the protagonist...1st to start with its altogether a new style of direction....a deep focus film.....the movements are so brilliantly choreographed that it reflects the confusion perfectly...but the brilliant acting andd the brilliant screenplay are only the warm ups ......for me...its the unbelievable character development that sets this a class apart....One of the best scenes in the history of cinema for me is the scene where Renoir and the servant Marceau meet before after all the confusion & the killin is ova...they say gudbye to each other before parting...and these wer the two characters who sets up the storm in the house quite silently...the core characters of the movie the real players of the game....dats was brilliant...& well it was 1939 then...we cant even think of making this kinda movie nowadez..