Far Cry

Far Cry

Jack Carver, a former member of the Special Forces takes the journalist Valerie Cardinal to an Island to visit her uncle Max who is working in a Military complex on the Island. As they arrive Valerie gets captured by the minions of Doctor Krüger. After the destruction of his boat Jack finds out about the true purpose of the Facilities on the Island, which is the creation of genetic soldiers.

The film follows a seaman and a reporter who is caught on an island by a cruel band of mercenaries. They must struggle with the ups and downs to fight for survival. Do they succeed in the fatal battle? . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


You may also like

Far Cry torrent reviews

Marcio R (nl) wrote: D-O-L-L-H-O-U-S-E I See thing that nobody else sees...This song by Melanie Martinez fitos so well here. Another Happy Day is a movie with an amazing cast and a sad story that makes you think about how there are so many families like this nowadays... The biggest proble here is probably the ending, that is kind of ambiguous, with doubt but hope, too. Ellen Barkin and Ezra Miller are really into the spirit of their characters, and their acting by itself is a very good reason, already, to watch this movie.

Bikram Kabir B (br) wrote: A nice satire about corruption,,, Boman Irani is outstanding, story is also good, direction strictly okay,!!

Eric W (kr) wrote: Funny movie, reminded me of when my best friend came out to me... Hillarious film!

Thomas C (nl) wrote: It starts with a good premise and sadly transforms into a flat, no-brain action movie.

Peter A (jp) wrote: In a near-future USA its citizens are under perpetual surveillance from Eyeborgs, mobile robotic cameras, used by the police to stop crime happening and to convict any criminals they see. A big hairy ranting paranoid man is arrested when tries to shoot Jarrett Hewes (Luke Eberl) the nephew of the American President as he is performing with his punk band. Agents from the Department of Homeland Security 'Gunner' Reynolds (Adrian Paul) and his partner Bradley investigate to see if there is any other threat. During the investigation Gunner become suspicious of the Eyeborgs and his suspicions are confirmed by evidence from TV reporter Barbara Hawkins (Megan Blake).This film covers a lot of old ground but it is a pretty good take on the ideas that make up it main story. While 'The Matrix' and 'The Terminator' had humans at war with the machines this film suggests that their route to dominance and control may be through taking advantage of suspicion and fear to encourage humans to surrender their freedom to the machines.The design of the robots was okay especially the little two-legged ones that almost look like toys but they turn out to have more in common with a certain silver ball from 'Phantasm'. This is film is worth a watch, not too deep and not too dumb. Rating 7/10

Juha P (br) wrote: A movie mixing three "hot" topics, today's Orwellian society, the secretive British monarchy and the neverending gossip of gay royals. Add one Murdochian media mogul whose son ends up dead and you got a typical, yet interestingly composed whodunnit semi-actionmovie. The result is nothing we haven't seen (or read in the Sun) before but the British do tend to make classy films. So, once again, acting was pretty good and instead of huge CGI chases, suspence was created in more old-fashioned ways. Not for those who cannot handle gay themes ;-)

Miguel Angel A (ru) wrote: Almost great movie, the only thing that i didn't like was final loop. Because it contradict the surreal world of Karen.

CJ C (fr) wrote: " I'm looking for a snuff film, called The Nutbag." lol. Tedious, overly bloody, badly written & horribly acted, it's like a very bad 70's slasher drive-in flick. The trailer is more interesting then the movie, believe me.

Asma M (it) wrote: Sweet love story at heart but didn't like Jim Carey! At-ll

Hawk (gb) wrote: This movie is more interested in capturing a moment in history as opposed to telling a compelling story. The first half, for instance, seems almost entirely without conflict, it's only when Max shows up that we get some sort of drama. However even that drama is half baked in that we never really get a chance to know the damsel in distress here and thus the whole thing feels undercooked. The final just takes things in a completely bizarre direction that totally is beyond comprehension. There's a good idea here but it's ruined by various factors: Avoid.

Grant T (ag) wrote: A bad imitation of the book...

Edith N (us) wrote: When I discovered that this movie was a William Powell/Myrna Loy picture, I made the not-unreasonable assumption that it was a comedy. After all, that's what I've seen them in, over and over. To be fair, I'm pretty sure [i]Manhattan Melodrama[/i] isn't, but I've never seen it, so what do I know? Indeed, it was on those terms that I convinced Graham that we should watch it. It's a William Powell/Myrna Loy movie, I said. It should be funny. Oops. Well, I've made greater errors in judgement; there's at least one William Powell/Myrna Loy movie, as I recall, that we just turned off. It was supposed to be a comedy, but neither of us found it very funny. Powell plays John Prentice, wealthy defense attorney. Not unlike Billy Flynn in [i]Chicago[/i], he seems to make a practice of getting beautiful women off murder charges. When we first see him, he is defending a young Rosalind Russell from a vehicular manslaughter charge. She decides that he must love her, so she pursues him pretty aggressively. Evelyn Prentice, John's wife (Loy), finds out. She is being wooed by Larry Kenard (Harry Stephens), who wants the power over "an influential man's wife" to get backing for his new play. He blackmails Evelyn with some letters that she sent him, and she shoots him. Kenard's girlfriend, Judith Wilson (Isabel Jewell) gets arrested for the crime, and Evelyn must decide if she's going to turn herself in and save Wilson's life. Most of the people in this movie behave in the most ridiculous ways. Evelyn was pretty stupid to let herself get trapped by the lothario Kenard. John was pretty stupid to let Nancy Harrison (Russell) get her hooks into him and make it look as though they were involved. (Unto having a bracelet engraved and "accidentally" leaving it in the train car where she "happened" to encounter him on the way to Boston.) Kenard was pretty stupid to let things build a situation where somebody would be that angry at him--and to actually open a drawer with a gun in it while he was at it. Only Dorothy Prentice (Cora Sue Collins, a child actress with an impressive career) seems to have gotten out of the thing without ever seeming to be letting herself in for more trouble than she ought. Loy and Powell were fairly big stars for MGM in those days, and the effort made to make their picture a good one shows. The filming is of fine quality, and the costumes--while kind of silly in places--are all appropriate to the characters who wear them. The Prentices are shown to be easy with one another and kind to their servants. Their relationship with Dorothy is good; she takes her parents' affection for one another for granted. She also takes it for granted that she will be on the Europe trip as well. Evelyn has a good friend in Amy Drexel (Una Merkel), who is also well-costumed. The secondary performers are still talented; no one feels clunky and out of place here. There are people we don't like, but even Kenard is charming at first. This is an early example of the Dramatic Courthouse Scene, though I intend to give as little away as possible about that. We know that Evelyn is slowly cracking under the pressure, though, and we know that something is going to give way. Will she confess to her husband? Will she confess to the DA? Will she just blithely run off to Europe and confess to no one? It is a delight to guess, and the answer doesn't disappoint.

David K (us) wrote: Described as a surrealist film, "The Blood of a Poet" is more of a filmmaker's experiment rather than surrealist. In fact, the film does have a narrative to string together seemingly odd events. The entire film is an allegory for filmmaking, at least, in my opinion. Director Jean Cocteau was very adamant on not defining "The Blood of a Poet" and letting the film speak for itself. If I decided to then sit here and explain what the movie meant then I'd be going against the artist himself; the poet himself. The fact is that "The Blood of a Poet" is examining art, while trying to tell a story, while trying to experiment with camera techniques and optical illusions. The film proves that cinema is a legitimate art-form and should be taken seriously like painting, sculpture, and music. At least, that's how I saw it. Again, the film has been open for debate since its release. Who am I to define it now?

Daniel t (gb) wrote: Very poor comparing the previous films of the franchise. Tried to use jokes and storylines from previous that fell flat. Awful not worth the money I paid to see it

Vitaliy S (jp) wrote: Favorite movie through the years come by

Riff J (ca) wrote: Huge build up, without a climax. Tries unsuccessfully to drump up anxiety and suspense, hence when the climax arises, it's neither scary nor enjoyable. It just left me wanting more. Sometimes a movie successfully builds up the tension to then strike out on the finale, but imho Willow Creek couldn't even drum up the tension.