En la selva no hay estrellas

En la selva no hay estrellas

N/A

. You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechers

En la selva no hay estrellas torrent reviews

Brandon S (mx) wrote: This movie really impressed me. The cinematography was fantastic, the directing and editing were great, both due to the talents of Ti West, the sound design was amazing, and Sara Paxton delivered a really good performance. These kinds of films are what keeps classic genres like ghost stories alive and well. This is also the kind of horror movie that separates the horror film aficionados and the basic horror fans. Its slow but not boring and clich (C) at times but not entirely unoriginal. Ti West may just be the brightest new name in the horror community.

Shawn J (es) wrote: great movie. I love this series, they are bringing good wholesome movies into mainstream.

Kieran F (br) wrote: Really fun film and very interesting too

Nicolas P (es) wrote: Poco frente a tanto que ha hecho Dreamworks.

Jay M (us) wrote: I thought that this was in interesting film. . . There's then meets the eye, here!. . .

Blake P (au) wrote: "Cruel Intentions" is a marvelously devious teen film. Why, then, must it undermine what it has going for it during its last act, where malevolence turns into predictable, gooey trite, and where snappy sardonicism becomes sluggish and frustratingly moralizing? This is a movie that rides high on the fumes of manipulation, sex, and luring self-regard, and yet it closes itself off with an ending better suited for a teenage comedy. Villains, more or less, are the central characters of "Cruel Intentions," and I'd be lying if I said a part of me didn't want to see them be victims of petty revenge. But must it be done so artificially, so tactfully? I can't let the failure of its finale get the best of me, because most of the film works. A modernized rendition of classic French novel "Les Liaisons Dangereuses" (1782), it takes the sinful escapades of its source and successfully makes its erotic hoodwinks undeniably entertaining. We've seen its story many times before, brought to the screen five or so times with similar air. Unfamiliar with the most widely celebrated adaptation, the 1988 version, I'm perhaps the best sort of viewer for "Cruel Intentions," aware of the expectations of the plot but not so familiar with them that it inhibits my enjoyment. The adult, aristocratic characters of novel are traded in the film for an attractive teenage (played by twenty-somethings) ensemble well-suited for this kind of material (with the exception of Selma Blair, who takes coy to levels better fit for a child actress trying to make the transition into adult roles). It stars Ryan Phillippe as Sebastian Valmont, a poor little rich boy whose good looks and sly flirtations have made him an infamous womanizer. He savors his ability to seduce nearly any woman he wants, consequence slim because of his high familial status and because of the way he looks like an Abercrombie model on his day off. But his sexual conquests are only distractions from the girl he really wants. She is Kathryn Merteuil (Sarah Michelle Gellar), his provocative stepsister. Their respective parents have married only recently, and an animal attraction has existed ever since. But Kathryn is a twisted scoundrel of a woman, and, like Sebastian, uses the opposite sex like a dog chews up rawhide. But unlike Sebastian, Kathryn doesn't even seem to enjoy sex - she wallows in the process of temptation, but isn't so much enamored when the point of her being irresistible comes to a close. So while she likes Sebastian, and while Sebastian clearly likes her, she holds him off. Until a nefarious scheme pops up in his mind. He is planning to seduce Annette Hargrove (Reese Witherspoon), a girl-next-door of a blond who has achieved mini-fame from Seventeen magazine for an article in which she expressed her desire to remain a virgin until marriage. Since she's the daughter of Sebastian and Kathryn's new school headmaster, she'll be arriving shortly, Sebastian determined to put an end to her virtue almost as soon as she sets foot in the city. Kathryn, intrigued, makes a deal with her stepbrother. If he fails to entice Annette into a one-night-stand, she gets his enviable sports car. If he succeeds, he can have her all to himself for a night. Sebastian, wanting Kathryn more than anyone, takes the offer. Little does her know, however, that Annette is not the kind of girl you just seduce and destroy; she's the kind of girl you love and cherish, feelings he thought were only found in optimistic tall tales. "Cruel Intentions" is a classic instance of a film that begins with premier promise but invariably descends into bittersweet melodrama that doesn't suit it. For its first forty-five minutes, it is a terrific piece of teen soap opera, scenes written with pertinacious smash, the acting certifiably overblown in a good way. The evil of Sebastian and Kathryn is devilishly pleasurable to watch, their selfishness disconcertingly cerebral to watch. We, despite our best judgments, like watching them plot to destroy the lives of others. Compulsively fascinating villains are a difficult thing to write, and writer/director Roger Kumble brings the sinuous zest of his source to life with modern freshness. To transform Choderlos de Laclos's words into a teen movie is no easy feat, but Kumble does the impossible and makes a film depicting adolescent sex and malice with believability. For the most part. "Cruel Intentions" is a lot of fun until it isn't anymore, until its theatrics begin to lose their acidity in trade of unwanted sentimentalism. I despise the subplot involving Kathryn's ruining of Cecile (Blair), a virgin who stole a potential love interest, not necessarily because it isn't well-written but because Blair's performance so thoroughly destroys the careful camp Kumble so deliciously writes. Also despicable are the film's depiction of gay characters (one is seen throwing his Judy Garland CDs in the trash after a breakup, another a stereotype of misguided, stereotype enforcing femininity), and its usage of a black man as a token temptation rather than an actual person. But one can't expect a film of "Cruel Intentions's" tawdriness to be completely agreeable in its every move, and I suppose it is to be predicted that an elite piece of Hollywood popcorn might have a problem with authenticity. But there's also a lot to revel in in the film, from Gellar's fantastic performance (and her chemistry with Phillippe) to Kumble's savagely smart treatment of it all. If its final act weren't such an uneven mess, I might call it a guilty pleasure. But guilty pleasures should bring no pain, and the conclusion to this film does. It comes close to being adequate soap opera, but not quite.

Robert I (gb) wrote: Could've been a good story if it wasn't Woody Allen writing, directing, or starring. The concept sold me despite Woody's name being involved. With him, none of the characters and, worse, the stories are interesting or engaging. Why is Hollywood remaking classics, when they could be remaking the fodder Allen's made? The concepts are usually great, but his execution is excruciating. What I wouldn't do for someone else to remake this film.

christina h (fr) wrote: a movie that makes you think like the ususal suspects.

Senor C (au) wrote: W/ a title like Hollywood Chainsaw Hookers this movies starts off w/ good intentions but after awhile runs thin even though it tries to be a cult item w/ the inclusion of Gunnar Hansen & Linnea Quigley (especially her dance of the double chainsaws). Personally I found it missed its mark. It too bad because @ the get go its a mad symphony of boobies, blood & of course chainsaws. I know you have to build a plot around such things instead of it just being straight out exploitation but I think becoming more of a spoof of old gumshoe flix & playing it for laughs it should have gone for the jugular w/ a motorized power tool

Paul J (ca) wrote: Another brilliant film from Morrissey and Warhol. It's ugly, funny, sexy, bizarre and crazy. At times you just may think, is this for real? It's totally absurd. Other times, it feels as if it's the greatest vampire movie ever made. Either way, it's an anomaly within the horror genre. Bloody zaniness in all its horrific glory. After all, Criterion collection released it for a reason.

Shdhshl G (gb) wrote: Liked it first time round. It gives me a headache

Allan C (au) wrote: Chevy Chase's best film and outside of "Vacation" is probably his only classic film. "Caddyshack" is a classic, but he was part of an ensemble and even that one had it's weak points. That may be too harsh, because he was in some funny movies like "Three Amigos!" "Spies Like Us" and the underrated "Funny Farm," but the quality of films he appeared in were not deserving of his talent (and I consider him a very talnted comedian). But to this film in particular, he plays a investigative journalist doing a story about drug dealers on seedy Venice beaches. While disguised as a beach bum, he's propositioned by Tim Matheson to kill him. Fletch then becomes curious about the story behind this proposition and gets sucked into something of a conspiracy. The mystery is solid, but it's the con-man elements of the Fletch character that make this film so memorable. It's a lot of fun to see Fletch con his way into tennis clubs as a guest of the Underhills, into airplane hangers as plane repair technician and any other number of disguises. My only complaint for the film is that some of the disguises are a bit broad (i.e. funny teeth) and I would have liked to have the disguises be more like those in "Burn Notice" which I think must have been influenced by "Fletch." And the one Lakers dream sequence, while funny, seems like it belongs in a coupletely different film. Written by one of the best comic Hollywood comedic screenwriters, Andrew Bergman, who's written the likes of "The In-Laws," "The Freshman" and even "Blazing Saddles," and directed by Michael Ritchie, who's a director who I can't quite tell if he deserves to be treated as a "serious" filmmaker. He did some smart films early in his career, like "Downhill Racer," "Prime Cut" and "The Candidate," but then spent most of his later career directing comedies. They were good comedies, but I'm not sure they contained any kind of deep subtext, although I will day that "The Bad News Bears" is the greatest sports movie of all time and does have a quite a few subversive elements. So add in a strong supporting cast (including Joe Don Baker, Dana Wheeler-Nicholson, Richard Libertini, M. Emmet Walsh, George Wendt, Menneth Mars, Geena Davis, James Avery, William Sanderson) and that off with a memorable score from Harold Faltermeyer, arguably his best, this all adds up to a classic.

Chris C (kr) wrote: Arguably the best horror sequel in the history of horror sequels. This picks up right where the original left off without missing a beat. The entire storyline takes place during the same Halloween evening, with killer Michael Myers continuing on with his murderous rampage. Even though this was made three years after the original, the actors and actresses from the first, who reprise their roles here, look exactly the same. One possible exception being Jamie Lee Curtis, who had cut her hair short in the interim between the two films and had to wear a wig to match her hairstyle from the original. The robot-like Myers gets creative with his methods of murder, from stabbing, and throat slicing, to exsanguination and deep-frying in a hydrotherapy tub (which should earn Pamela Susan Shoop the "best breasts' award for the entire Halloween franchise). Of course, they also had to get "creative" with Halloween III and take some liberties with subsequent entries into this franchise, but those are for other reviews. If you're looking for the definitive horror films to watch on Halloween night, watch this one back-to-back with the original and you can't go wrong. (My review is also at Amazon)