God's Pocket

God's Pocket

A boozy lowlife (Philip Seymour Hoffman) tries to bury the truth about his crazy stepson's suspicious death, but a nosy newspaper columnist (Richard Jenkins) and the young man's mother complicate matters.

When Mickey's crazy step-son Leon is killed in a construction 'accident', nobody in the working class neighborhood of God's Pocket is sorry he's gone. Mickey tries to bury the bad news with the body, but when the boy's mother demands the truth, Mickey finds himself stuck in a life-and-death struggle between a body he can't bury, a wife he can't please and a debt he can't pay. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


God's Pocket torrent reviews

Jay H (br) wrote: The 80's, what a great time for horror flicks. This movie is so low budget, it has two actors playing more than one part! The soundtrack is very synth heavy (not that its a bad thing) and some of the lines in the movie are GOLD (i.e. "Look what I brought in, and they didn't even cath it"). John Brace plays Mioke Strauber who catches his wife cheating on him with his best friend and then snaps. Recommended only for fans of the genre, and hardcore ones at that!

Reggie B (ru) wrote: Very interesting perspective on life. Well done and pretty whitty, comical and interesting :)

Belal K (br) wrote: life is about having a goal :)ah ya wlad el b3da kol da w ...

John A (us) wrote: Director Tim Sullivan's Sequel To His Remake Of "Two Thousand Maniacs", Is A Total Disaster. This Film Contains The Pointless Nudity And Violent Scenes Seen In Most Films Of The Genre. But That's About It Without A Solid Story Or Even Decent Performances This Film Doesn't Work & Is One To Avoid.

Halley M (br) wrote: i like dance movies..

Brock S (au) wrote: prooves that it's difficult to be funny in japanese. it really just is boring.

Sean H (it) wrote: Had a friend than lost it....

Nan Z (es) wrote: Interesting Doc/Movie which didn't make it like "People Vs. Larry Flynt". Still worth a try if you like hippy nudity and some black humor also Charlie Sheen amazingly did an OK job.

Private U (au) wrote: maybe not the best seidl but one of the most bizarre. definately worth seeing

Henning R (de) wrote: Well-acted and funny black comedy.

Alex G (es) wrote: Teriffic ideas squandered by an inability to tell the story. This film cannot seem to grasp when or how to present ideas or story beats. Instead you are thrown into random moments from start to finish with no context or reason to care. Unfortunately, this is a case where the director's cut fails to do anything but shove in scenes that add nothing to the movie and extend already overlong beats.

Jesse O (kr) wrote: I remember watching most, if not all, of the Ernest films as a child. It wasn't as much a formative part of my childhood as, say, the Naked Gun trilogy was, but it's not like I'm completely unfamiliar with this franchise. This, to me, reminds me of a low-brow version of the Pink Panther films from the 60s and 70s with Peter Sellers, I don't count Trail of the Pink Panther, released in 82, because Peter Sellers' scenes were comprised of deleted scenes from other films in the franchise. I'm not trying to suggest that Jim Varney and Peter Sellers are even in the same stratosphere as far as comedic performances went, Peter blew Jim out of the water on almost every level, but it's similar in that Jim Varney, essentially, played the same character for decades and nothing, if anything, rarely changed about any of the films. Maybe the locations and some of the story elements, but it all boiled down to Ernest being a child-like fool getting into increasingly absurd hi-jinks. There's a familiarity from one Ernest film to the next, much like in the Pink Panther. The one difference being that, to me, every Pink Panther film I saw was really enjoyable. This movie, eh, didn't really do much for me in terms of performance or comedy. Here's the thing about Jim Varney, when he ventured outside the Ernest character and actually did some more serious stuff, the guy wasn't bad at all. It's not that Ernest himself is a terrible character, there's a certain innocence about him that could've been endearing, but there's parts where the guy is just insufferable. Varney did a decent job at portraying the character, but I wouldn't say that he was the most gifted comedic actor on earth. Yes, he disguised himself as different people, and he did an adequate job as these different characters, but I wouldn't say that he made me laugh. And maybe it's not even his fault, but I'm pretty sure that Varney himself had a lot of input in shaping this character, if not a great percentage of it. So part of it has to be blamed on him, the rest of the story, however, can and probably should be blamed on someone else. The story is every bland and dull Christmas movie you've ever seen, except with the Ernest touch. And Ernest is either a love him or hate him type of character, there's no real in-between. Ernest films have never been known for their technical prowess, so it's even more of a step down from that end. The casting for this isn't particularly inspired. I'm not saying the cast doesn't try hard, but I don't think they do a good job at editing together performances for anyone to stand out. There's also a lot of filler, like everything with the storage agents and the reindeer. It doesn't really serve any real purpose but to pad the running time, which isn't that long to begin with. There's nothing wrong with releasing a movie that's shorter than normal, at least you're keeping the pacing in mind. These segments with the reindeer really just kill the pacing and they're not particularly funny save for maybe one or two chuckles. While this is a harmless movie in and of itself, I can't really imagine that many kids will actually enjoy this. It's weird, this film clearly isn't geared towards an adult audience, but it's not exactly geared towards kids either. It's stuck in limbo, because while it is a harmless family movie, that doesn't necessarily make it a good one either. This is kind of a disaster in a lot of levels. You can't expect high-brow humor with this kind of character, but there's no reason it couldn't have been, at least, a reasonably entertaining film. It fails at getting you in a Christmas-y mood, if that's what you're looking for, and that's really the ultimate sin for one of these types of films. I don't wanna say it fails at everything, but it's a bad film on many levels. Again, I never loved Ernest, even as a kid, but it goes to show you that your memory can play tricks on you. Anyone who may have loved this film in their youth shouldn't come back to it in their adulthood. I think they will be sorely disappointed. Isn't it sad that this is among the 'better' reviewed films in the Ernest franchise. Think about that.

Nishikant W (ag) wrote: awsome movie !!!! loved it...

Erik W (us) wrote: In interesting movie based on D.H. Lawerence's story. The performances are terrific and actress Glenda Jackson won the first of her two Oscars for this film. One thing I love about this movie is that it's well photographed. Cinematographer Billy Williams did an excellent job photographing the characters as well as the landscapes in the film leading him to receive a much deserved Oscar Nomination for this movie. Also features a terrific score by Georges Delerue and an interesting nude wrestling scene between Alan Bates and Oliver Reed which made this a ground breaking film for it's time.

Juli N (it) wrote: I was glued to the screen, slack jawed and drooling! I'm describing my recent viewing not my experience as a kid!

Timothy M (it) wrote: Terrific stuff. Preachy at times, but Wilder maintains a good pace and some solid suspense, allowing the film to function without the context of war. Franchot Tone and Anne Baxter aren't the most nuanced performers, but I enjoyed watching them here, and Erich von Stroheim brings his usual level of awesome. And there was a young Peter Van Eyck as well, which was nice to see. The standout though, as he so often is for me, was Akim Tamiroff. Hilarious comic relief throughout the film, but the look on his face in the penultimate scene is heartbreaking. Wilder still seems to be finding his feet as a director, but I think this is a very solid early entry in his canon.

Tommy K (es) wrote: This may be one of the most dreadful things I've ever seen. The fact that it has an 82% positive response on Rotten Tomatoes has me dumbfounded. I swear sometimes I just hate people.

Mark F (kr) wrote: This movie had potential but it turned out to be a childish religious dumpster fire.

Bryan F (nl) wrote: Loved the movie, hated the ending -- one of those "Oops, we ran out of film money, let's just wrap this up and leave" endings.

Alex S (au) wrote: Atmospheric but awful.Not scary or interesting.