Young mattress salesman Brian decides to adopt a baby from China but is distracted when he forms a relationship with quirky, wealthy Harriet whom he meets at his mattress store. As their relationship flourishes, unbeknownst to them, a hitman is trying to kill Brian.
- Stars:Paul Dano, Zooey Deschanel, John Goodman, Edward Asner, Jane Alexander, Ian Roberts, Robert Stanton, Clarke Peters, Daniel Stewart Sherman, Mary Page Keller, Zach Galifianakis, Brian Avers, Leven Rambin, Susan Misner, Matt Walton,
- Director:Matt Aselton,
- Writer:Adam Nagata, Matt Aselton
A mattress salesman finds his plan to adopt a Chinese baby augmented by the arrival of a young woman, who comes into his workplace, falls asleep on one of the beds, and starts to affect his life upon waking up. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Gigantic torrent reviews
(ca) wrote: 7.5/10 Great acting by Dench. The character of Martin is a bit 2-dimensional for this movie, but overall a nice story, albeit given one-sided as it is.
(gb) wrote: A funny monster movie!
(jp) wrote: Love all the Monaros :)
(ru) wrote: Even though this film was intentionally suppose to be mindlessly entertaining, it is misguided in its attempt. There is some good action and some over-the-top Nicolas Cage but there is piss poor character development, storytelling and handling of villain(s). You don't have to dumb down a film completely for it to be entertaining and you piss off comic book fans as a result because of this film existing. Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance might entertain you if you're high or drunk but if you want good entertainment go watch The Avengers instead.
(au) wrote: one of my favorite movies. The guy from Ichi the Killer actually pulled a great performance off. Very versatile actor. The girl also gave a touching performance. The film is character centered which is great. Makes me want to read the novel
(mx) wrote: At times, VERY funny; however, when Robin Williams appears as the defected-from-Russia animal-now-human obgyn, the movie becomes ridiculous. BUT I'll watch anything with Hugh Grant in it!
(gb) wrote: If the art teacher from "Ghost World" decided to make a video tribute to her deceased pet, it would be this film, and the fact that I managed to sit through the full 75 minutes is a testament to my masochism. I actually had free admission; after it was over, I wanted my money back.The film's whispered, sing-songy narration is an incoherent mess. Anderson engages in an intellectual name-dropping that's calculated to impress the type of person who desperately wants to be well-rounded but doesn't like to read. She quotes David Foster Wallace and Kierkegaard and Wittegenstein - though I'm sure she's really quoting Bartlett. What she quotes is devoid of context and, of course, depth. I suspect her greatest intellectual influences are actually the hits of acid she dropped back in the 1970s, or perhaps the pamphlets she picked up from the airport Krishnas.She refers very liberally to the Tibetan Book of the Dead, the one work I'm sure she's read. I suppose the film is meant as some kind of personal essay; if so, it has no overarching argument. It's more a pastiche of totally disconnected musings. If you pepper your conversations with phrases like "getting locked into your thought flow," then this film just might be for you. For me personally, as she flashed words onto the screen with pictures of snow-covered trees, YouTube-style videos of her dog, and then tried to connect it all to 9/11 and the national security state, I began to wonder: am I being punked? Is somebody filming the audience right now? Is this film the abomination that it so clearly appears to be, or is this supposed to be a comedy?"Heart of a Dog" is self-indulgent, excruciating New Age garbage. Instead of wasting your time on this monstrosity, do the following: watch a short film by Maya Deren; go to "The Intercept," and skim an article chosen at random; search online for "cute dogs," and play whatever videos pop up; and finally, go re-read the terrible poetry you wrote when you were in sixth grade.
(au) wrote: The director's cut, which excludes the god-awful mother ship interior, is one of the greatest movie experiences ever.
(ag) wrote: Powerfully austere and poignant - childlike innocence meets adult prejudice and tyranny, and yet the story holds a shimmering line of hope and dignity that perfectly personifies the fully dimensional characters from the Pulitzer Prize winning book.I read and loved the book in tenth grade, and had the opportunity to see the movie just before writing my book report - I watched it late night at a neighbors house bc they had cable, and only asked that I make sure the tv and lights were off when I left. hahaI had dreamed up a different, more graphic ending with the image of the knife scraping the chicken wire being an important visual metaphor for the evil of this world always going after the innocence of childhood. On reflection tho, it's better the focus was on Atticus defending his kids. Despite being an older gentleman, he had a deeper and higher purpose, perfectly reflected by Gregory Peck.My want for graphic violence was really gratuitous and unnecessary.As a tenth grader, I truly saw this as an adventure from the childs point of view, and the racial tension hadnt fully sunk in until a few years later. Stunning to me how the film worked completely on both levels.Classic cinema, not to be missed.5 out of 5
(ru) wrote: Un pessimo doppiaggio e sonoro nella versione italiana lo rendono davvero di difficile visione. Spero di poterlo rivedere in lingua originale sottotitolato.
(gb) wrote: Not a very compelling story and mediocre performances even by Tina Fey.
(es) wrote: I thought this movie was amazing. You're either going to love it or hate it though.