When Erica finds Fjällbacka's photographer Stigge murdered in his studio, she can't help but take interest in the investigation regarding his death. Patrik and his colleagues at the ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Fjällbackamorden: Havet ger, havet tar
When Erica finds Fjällbacka's photographer Stigge murdered in his studio, she can't help but take interest in the investigation regarding his death. Patrik and his colleagues at the ...
You may also like
Fjällbackamorden: Havet ger, havet tar torrent reviews
Phillipe H (ag) wrote: Disturbing, revealing of deep-seating corruption in South Korea and of the many disturbing issues that plague the society today" misguided religious zealots, bribery, a questionable law architecture, and an obscenely misguided attitude towards the disabled. Unsettlingly the film spins off the theme of helplessness (the protagonist especially), questionable actions propel the good guys to righteousness, only to be blocked by the very light at the end of the tunnel. Although somewhat typical of "revelation" or "controversy" expos (C) films, the cinematography and tightly-knit script keep the action close to the heart and stirs some very unsettling feelings.
Laura P (fr) wrote: Move was pretty good. Just didn't care much for the ambiguous ending. Story moves along pretty steadily and the main characters are engaging.
spencer f (au) wrote: pretty cool for little kids.
Chris H (us) wrote: I was surprised how good this movie was. If you like action, and "Call of Duty" games, then this is for you. It's non-stop action from beginning to end. The best of the 3.
Brandon W (mx) wrote: I'm not really a fan of the horror genre, but it doesn't take a horror expert to realize when you're watching a poorly-constructed film. House of Fears revolves around six self-centered, one-dimensional teenagers who decide to break into a local haunted house shortly before it becomes open to the public. The haunted house has nine different areas, each with their own specific "fear" such as clowns, spiders, knives, etc. Once they arrive, they realize they're locked in and there's no way out. Slowly (and painfully), each character is killed off, one by one. First and foremost, what irritated me was how predictable it was. I'm not exaggerating when I say that I have NEVER watched a more predictable movie in my life. About twenty minutes in, I could already predict nearly everything that would happen for the remaining hour. Before they enter the haunted house, each character orally declares what their biggest fear is. Once the first character dies of said fear, it becomes quite obvious that that's how every other character will die. Also, whenever characters enter the room that involves their biggest fear, shouldn't it have occurred to them that they should get the hell out of there? Somehow, though, that train of thought never entered their thick skulls. They even had a chance to kill one of the main antagonists. He was just lying, seemingly lifeless, on the ground next to them, and one of the six teens had a chainsaw in her hand. For some reason, they just left. But guess what? As soon as the birdbrains leave, he gets right back up again, still thirsty for blood... The acting was laughable. All six teens made Jennifer Lopez in "The Backup Plan" look like Marlon Brando in "The Godfather." The script is filled to the brim with cheesy, unrealistic dialogue such as "I don't like it here. Let's go to my house and then make out" and "My biggest fear is getting struck by lightning on my crotch." The visuals were solid, but other than that, it was horribly scripted and acted, and was plagued by so many cliches. To be completely honest, it wasn't even very scary. I really advise against seeing this stinker.
Rabab M (ca) wrote: i so want to see that movie
Sheri H (it) wrote: Excellent entry in the series. Gives sonme good background to Stone's character.
Gregory W (br) wrote: didn't think i'd like it since its a movie about socceer its also about the rivalery between brothers kinda like a mexican cane & abel. and that keep me watching love seeing luna & garcia-bernal work together kinda like crosby & hope!
Kenneth B (kr) wrote: Although this is lethargic in parts it does manage to gather itself before the end. Oh and Ferrell does a decent Woody Allen impression.
Julia W (mx) wrote: Kind of a crazy series of events. Not the best, but good entertainment while cleaning the house.
Hannah D (ru) wrote: I thought I would really love this, but I was quite disappointed. I found the singing irritating, and I just found it rather confusing and uneventful. I quit enjoyed the atmosphere of it, but I don't understand the high praise.
Craig G (kr) wrote: Quite terrific. No need to see the Killing Fields to enjoy, but it doesn't hurt. Gray is a master of storytelling and can inspire vivid visualizations at the drop of a hat...or the launch of a banana.
Cameron J (br) wrote: This film's title makes me think of melanoma, which would indeed make for a pretty "bad night". ...I'd like to joke that no one gets the pun there, but I feel that too many people understand Spanish too well to not figure out that this film's title translates as "Bad Night". Sorry, but Spanish isn't too attractive of a language to me, but then again, this film is about a lot of unconventional attractions, which makes it the perfect debut for Gus Van Sant. Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you a prelude to a career dealing with gay people problems, set around a time when they were more relevant, what with AIDS issues and what have you. Come to think of it, this film missed out on a great opportunity to deal with very relevant AIDS issues, but instead, it chose to not really deal with much at all. Okay, maybe this film isn't that do-nothing, but if Van Sant keeps making these gay-themed films in an attempt to draw as much attention to issues he stands firm by as they do towards stuff like "Good Will Hunting" or something, maybe he should make dramas that more people would like to see. I like the film just fine ultimately, but it can get carried away with its artistic license, among other things, that is, not including exposition. Quickly moving you along its story and ultimately taking on a runtime of not even 80 minutes, this film is mighty thin with its expository depths, saying a fair bit about the characters it focuses on intimately, but not enough for you to get as invested as you probably should in more than a few, maybe most characters. Well, perhaps you shouldn't get too invested, because as thin as developmental value is, the story concept itself is about as thin, with conflict and scale so relatively light that one can kind of understand the 78-minute runtime, despite cut-backs on development. Still, as short as the film is, it takes some time to drag, with filler, something that you'd accurately figure the final product wouldn't have too much time for. Needless to say, it's not too long before filler overtakes the focus of the film and thins it into dissipation, resulting in bland narrative cold spells, made all the more blanding by atmospheric dry spells within a thoughtful directorial performance by Gus Van Sant whose questionable aspects don't tap out with the sense of momentum. I joked about it earlier, and sure enough, about as misguided as anything in this film is Van Sant's storytelling style, partly because it's uneven, underusing narrations that may be intentionally mixed in a way which makes it difficult to distinguish from dialogue, and breaking up relatively traditional storytelling with some abstractionism that is questionable enough by its own right, anchored by frantic visuals and other odd artistic expressions that are neither as gutsy as they want to be, nor as subdued as they should be. The film is ambitious in a lot of the wrong ways, and Van Sant was too fresh to the scene at this point to meet his own expectations, let alone the expectations of those hoping for a more tight, focused and stylistically grounded interpretation of subject matter that was always to be kind of forgettable. With that said, while it occupies a small window of your time, it doesn't squander it, being a generally fair debut for Van Sant, particularly as an orchestrator of, if nothing else, visual style. Its cameras' possible shortcomings to technical quality being at least very nearly obscured by a near-intensely deep black-and-white palette that's heavy on shadows, the film's visual style, powered by John Campbell's fine cinematographic eye, is unique, with a rugged, almost noirish grit that Gus Van Sant makes all the more nifty through stylishly dynamic angles that consistently impress aesthetically and, at times, immerse you into the environment of the film. This film is pretty heavily reliant on its style, particularly visual style, and the sheer quality of such style goes a long way in not simply saving the final product as decent, but in bonding you with the artistic heart of this drama, as surely as the performers bond you with the drama's substantial heart. The characters are so unevenly developed that the film stands a chance of falling flat as a should-be intimate character study, ultimately carried by performances - particularly that by leading man Tim Streeter - that, while nothing more than charismatic, charm, often greatly, further endearing you to a film of very limited substance. Of course, it's not as though the narrative is cleansed of intrigue, being dramatically lacking, but kind of unique as a portrait on the life of a love-struck gay man in the humble city of Portland, Oregon, with a certain color that Van Sant, as screenwriter, captures with some lively set pieces and clever dialogue and humor. Missteps in storytelling are considerable, but the strength nonetheless stand, with wit, charm and style that, in order to save the flimsy final product, but be well-arranged. An adequate arrangement is just what you get from Van Sant, as a director whose lack of experience and considerable deal of artistic ambition are problematic, yet met with enough inspiration to style and subtle pacing to craft enough fair entertainment value to endear through and through. Maybe the film could have been more, but it also could have been a lot less, and when it's all said and done, no matter how misguided, Van Sant's efforts engage enough to make a perfectly entertaining, if underwhelming art drama. At the end of the night, limited development to a story that is already of limited consequence, combined with unfocused, dry and stylistically uneven attributes to storytelling threaten decency, secured by the outstanding visual style, charming performances, clever writing and reasonably well-paced direction that make "Mala Noche" a fairly entertaining and endearing debut for Gus Van Sant, despite its rusty touches. 2.5/5 - Fair
Ken S (es) wrote: This is one oddball movie. George A. Romero switches from his usual horror genre to embark on an odd personal drama about a weird group of folks who adhere to some Arthurian legend and joust on motorcycles for show, but there group is somewhat cultish too. It has a unique idea, some cool motorcycle stunts, and decent moments...but it is definitely too long, and drags a bit in the middle. I would definitely say its worth a look, to see if it is for you, or if you're interested to see what Romero can do outside of horror, gore, and zombies.
CJ C (nl) wrote: I really cant stand James Coburn, but the 60's super spy FLINT series is funny. I still prefer the MATT HELM series with Dean Martin or MODESTY BLAISE tho.
Gary D (fr) wrote: Over-the-top European violent chase comedy, if a triple amputee having a fight with a lethal Mary Poppins-like assassin is your idea of fun this is your movie. Bring the popcorn. A senator accidentally kills a prostitute in Eastern Europe and a hooker who is a mother with a heart of gold escapes the slaughter of witnesses and steals the car and cell phone of two Americans. The two decide to start a detective agency. First case - tracking her down before the assassins.
Steve Y (it) wrote: True story about a swim team for troubled teens at the Philadelphia Department of Recreation.