Fogo e Paixão
Bus tour to São Paulo's touristic spots bumps into several strange people.
You may also like
Fogo e Paixão torrent reviews
Thomas S (br) wrote: Man this was so predictable when it start you new he was going to win
Konrad A (br) wrote: Not that great I thought it could have been a better movie. The only good thing about it was that it was about baseball. I was not a fan of the plot to the movie
Dean P (mx) wrote: Real dope Docu. I'm not a writer but it seems very thorough. It's to be put up there with Wild Style, Freshest Kids, and Scratch.
Dane P (us) wrote: This was always a favorite of mine when I was a kid.... But does it hold up now?Hell yeah it does, First off the movie really captures the Scooby Doo feel of the old cartoons. The characters played by the actors are spot on especially Shaggy. The characters actually end up having a bit of an arc by the end of the film. (tbh Fred's was kinda forced and quickly thrown in) but whatever. Second the screenplay.... Its a unique idea, monsters becoming real and attacking the city. Really cool, Not to mention the action scenes are really exciting, well choreographed and very entertaining. The jokes while hit and miss can really put up some really funny situations. Like I said earlier it really captures the spirit of the old cartoon. The CGI isn't that great by todays standards Scooby looks way too cartoonish and all I can think is Shaggy is talking to something that isn't there. But the charm overtakes that.The bad critical backlash could've been caused by the previous entry in the series which tbh isn't too bad either. Though this is a huge improvement and could possibly be the best a follow up to that film can be.............Or it was a whole lotta fun and brought back nice nostalgic memories. :D 8/10
Adam W (gb) wrote: Its good but all th "Better than Dances With Wolves" comments on the poster and the shit review looses it 2 stars. Don't mess!
Noname (mx) wrote: The last rambo movie or actually a 4th movie are on its way now. Anyway i like all of the rambo movies but more the first and second ones. In this he gets a mission to save Trautman in Afghanistan after a mission that failed alho he have retired he must out in war once again. Great action movie if u not taking it so seriously.
Robyn M (ca) wrote: One Magic Christmas seems to fall under the category of fantasy films that are suitable for the whole family, but especially relevant to adults. After 28 years from it's release the movie is out dated and astonishingly not Disney's typical sentimental garbage. The storyline is relatable but the slow tracking and jumping scenes throws my interest out the door.
Charlie G (it) wrote: Don't expect a dialog for this movie. Brilliantly done with body language and an adventurous quest for fire before they knew how to make it.
Bert M (mx) wrote: Great surrealist style! One of the most ultimate examples of creativity and intensity.
Mereie d (gb) wrote: In Under Fire (1983), Roger Spottiswoode succeeded very well in portraying the grim realism of the dictatorial regime in Nicaragua in the late seventies, focusing on the experiences of American journalists in particular. I was impressed both by the graphic insights he gave us on political matters and by the way he depicted certain unsavory characters in the story (Trintignant is excellent, and so is Ed Harris as an opportunist mercenary and Ren Enrquez as President Somoza). Like many directors, Spottiswoode tends to take a left-wing stance. In topics like these, this is understandable and only just, though I prefer a slightly more balanced view on things. Thematically, this movie is not unlike Salvador (1986), in which Oliver Stone depicts the political goings on in El Salvador in roughly the same period, also on the basis of the fieldwork activities of American journalists. Stone also takes a clear stand against the regime, but unlike Spottiswoode, he leaves some room for other views: at one point a (right-wing) American explains to James Woods that the regime may be objectionable, but the alternative (Communist dictatorship) would be ten times worse. In Under Fire, the Sandinistas revolutionaries seem to be glorified, but never criticized in any way. In Salvador, Woods is at least shocked to see that the victorious revolutionaries do not hesitate to execute possible adversaries just as easily as those they have just overthrown did in the recent past. The only ones with more nuanced views in Under Fire are Trintignant (a creepy individual) and Harris (a shameless opportunist), both of whom we are not supposed to sympathize with. For the above reasons, I prefer Salvador to Under Fire, although Under Fire is not at all a bad film. It is instructive and realistic (and perhaps a bit too idealistic, but who cares). The duration could have been shorter, but that would have taken some of the realism away, I should imagine.