Ghosts Can't Do It

Ghosts Can't Do It

Elderly Scott kills himself after a heart attack wrecks his body, but then comes back as a ghost and convinces his loving young hot wife Kate to pick and kill a young man in order for Scott to possess his body and be with her again.

Elderly Scott, who kills himself after a heart attack wrecks his body, but then returns as a ghost and convinces his loving young hot wife Kate to pick and kill a young man in order for Scott to possess his body and be with her again. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechers

Ghosts Can't Do It torrent reviews

Elliot W (ag) wrote: This is an unarguably underrated movie. Funny, sad, eccentric, profound, heart-warming and the swear jar has an important part. It won't change the world or change how movies are done but well worth the time spent, unlike many movies these days.

Christina E (fr) wrote: haha! The penguins are awesome! oH and so is King Julien!

Greg T (jp) wrote: you know Segal old fat a$$ dont move like that no more

Pravin P (au) wrote: Salim :- Why ten? you'll find tens of thousands of us. But only if you can trust us. you listen to me, sir! Don't you ever tell any Salim that this country isn't his!ACP Rathod :- l won't

Ivan D (fr) wrote: Call it dated, silly and extremely campy but still, "Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill!" is classic exploitation fun that brings us back in a time where the deadly combination of femme fatales and some high-octane machinery equals to titillation. This, I think, is one of those films that have definitely made men salivate back then. Cars, violence and sexy women, what more can you ask for? Yet despite of its superficial display of violence, sexual innuendos and car chases, there's no doubt that this film, directed by Russ Meyer (who has also produced and co-written it), still has something much to say than meets the eye. Is it a film about women empowerment? Well, definitely a big no. In fact, this is the kind of film that will definitely make feminists shake their head in disgust and disappointment. This was never how they envision women to be. It portrays women as unpredictably murderous low-lives and nothing more. To make it even worse, the heroines of the film (if you can call them that) are a bunch of go-go dancers, which is not exactly the most ideal job for the female populace. So, if it's not a film that empowers women, then what is it all about? Personally, I think that it's merely a film about power. Director Russ Meyer, with an intention to exploit and entertain, was successful in putting into the screen the things (sexy women, cars and violence) that sway men into complete submission and reduce them into libidinous losers. In a way, it's not the female characters' sexual force that dominates the film but Russ Meyer's power as a director. In a way, he reflects, by way of this film, the ultimate male fetishes of the time while also relishing in it himself. Now, imagine what kind of film would be made of today's male fixations? What kind of 'pussycat' will we see at this point in time? Oh, well, enough of that before it gets all too... sleazy. Back to the subject at hand, this is a film that's undeniably sexy and spell-binding. It is a fun little film that has since been one of the genre's cornerstones. Yet at the end of the day, it's also considered as trash. Yes, the kind of trash that has inspired Quentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez to create "Grindhouse" in sarcastic ode to its peculiar art. Then why, despite of the fact that the film was made specifically for its own era (the 1960s) and nothing further, has it become timeless? Well, I think the answer lies in the very execution itself. Buried somewhere in the middle of the curvy presences of Varla (Tura Satana), Rosie (Haji) and Billie (Lori Williams) is a quick-witted script and a fast-paced plot. The story is simple enough: three go-go dancers, after a day's work, found themselves in a contagious mood for reckless fun. Enter a young, harmless couple who have obliviously joined the unpredictable triumvirate in a picnic of sorts. A little trouble occurs and the male half of the couple was killed by one of them crazy ladies. This is where the carnage starts. From here, "Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill!" picks up the steam like there's no tomorrow. With the female heroines increasingly becoming more and more dangerous, so do the male characters in the film, particularly the crippled whacko (Stuart Lancaster) and his 'all brawns no brain' son (Dennis Busch). There's also the other son named Kirk (Paul Trinka), who may or may not be your usual decent Southerner. In a way, I occasionally found the script, with all those wonderfully-placed puns and whatnot, to be even more fascinating than the narrative itself. I also found the performances to be even more engaging than the characters themselves. Although I can see where the logic of the characters are coming from and what motivates them to do what, I still can't help but be more smitten by how these actors and actresses have gotten themselves in the spirit of camp even though there's this brooding sense of futility in what they are doing. They are, after all, merely acting in a cheap exploitation film. Why should they give their all, right? Well, energy and passion indeed perform mysterious wonders to people. What the actors and actresses lack in talent, they make up for intensity. Acting more like cartoon characters than actual people, there's this comedic feeling that, inevitably, there will be an Acme box that will fall from the sky and hit one of them in the head, resulting in an explosion of unearthly proportions and a bump of mountainous heights. It's a laughable thought, really, but this is also the very reason why the film is so much fun. You just can't help but picture the surprise appearance of a carrot-eating, wise-cracking bunny in there somewhere, or perhaps an arrogant, constantly salivating duck suddenly coming out from one of them desert shrubs. Ultimately, "Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill!", unlike the curvaceous wholeness of the three lady characters in the film, proved to be less than the sum of its parts. But still, that does not take anything away from the film's wildly alternative vision of America; a vision where liberated women are given free reins to do whatever they want in the middle of the desert, with men ironically at their mercy and the revving of car engines as their symbol of authority. Ladies and gentlemen, what we've got here is a new wild west.

daniel m (us) wrote: before ben affleck was batman he was daredevil. hard to watch after netflix show was awesome

Clinton P (fr) wrote: Surprising that someone remade a movie that was so awful in the first place. It slightly beats the horrid Stallone version.

Ramon V (br) wrote: Amazing movie. So underappreciated and bold. Ahead of it's time (though it's about the past - financial crash of 2008).

Daire F (it) wrote: An adventurous romance drama of a young girl with a wish to find the man who brought her a purpose in life, the man who she fell in love since her childhood.

Liam P (br) wrote: First things first, I think this is a criminally underrated and forgotten masterpiece.Why? Because it's just freakin' brilliant!Seriously though, the films sense of menace is palpable. Carol White is a void within a void of meaninglessness, her life lacks direction, purpose; her life is as plain as her own name. She's the stereotypical waif 'homemaker', reserved, delicate, sensitive and stuck in her routine. She starts physically reacting to everything around her. Fumes choke her, fragrances cause panic attacks, chemicals make her bleed; she simply has an allergic reaction to everything around her for no particular reason.Todd Haynes camera frames Carol extremely wide within her world, he uses the sets/locations as a subtle indicator of the void she resides in that now bares down on her. In particular, her house is a huge vessel of modernist design, clean living, perfect in its layout. The house overwhelms the character, a new sofa the first indicator of a threat to her health. The films use of framing and movement is undoubtedly inspired by Antonioni and his use of cinematography, architecture and placing a character within this metropolis. It is the perfect device to present how Carol becomes unable to live within the modern world.Though it'ss set in the mid 80's, the world appears to get more contemporary as it goes on. The first half is filled with signifiers of the time yet the final scenes have no immediate sense of time or decade. It could be any time, any decade, anywhere.Julianne Moores performance is wonderful, she plays the character with such subtle reservation but quiet determination to find out what is happening to her and how she can fix it.The film offers no easy answers and doesn't guide the viewer to a definitive answer of what it's really trying to say. It doesn't even ask the viewer to sympathise with her plight but it does provoke a whole load of questions.Is the world really toxic to Carol? Is she making it all up to seek attention? Does this simply provide her life with a sense of meaning or purpose? Is illness contracted externally or does it originate from within? Is living in a white box the only answer to truly remove oneself from the toxicity modern world?As much as I love Todd Haynes other films (particularly Far From Heaven) I think this is his best film to date and one of the most essential American films of all time.