Something is missing in Tom's life. His marriage has lost its spark, his job is suffocating him, and his childhood best friend Dan still clings to the past. Every day he goes through the motions, becoming increasingly detached from those around him. Dan has the solution... something Tom's got to see to believe... tonight. What Dan shows him leaves Tom unsettled, flooding his mind with disturbing images, and binding the two friends together with its ugly secret.

Tom has seen the mysterious video sent by his best friend, Dan. After watching this video with Dan, it makes Tom’s mind flood with disturbing images and desires. Both of them now is bound together with its ugly secret. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


Gut torrent reviews

Steffany S (ag) wrote: stupid hippy bullshit

Anna C (br) wrote: This film is so bad that is good! just like a '70s b-movie, who knows... maybe some day it will become a cult!

David J (it) wrote: What starts out as a promising martial arts film about a turf war between schools soon turns into a Chinese "Rocky IV," complete with boxing, racial stereotyping, and xenophobia. Much like the first "Ip Man," "Ip Man 2: Legend of the Grandmaster" suffers in the story-telling department. But, unlike the first film, the fight sequences aren't nearly as exciting or realistic and the performances aren't nearly as professional. However, what is most disappointing is that director Wilson Yip has adopted the Hollywood formula by sacrificing an interesting real-life story in favor of a fictitious one tailored to dispense thrills.

Justin M (nl) wrote: It's a feel-good heist film that doesn't require much brainpower. What's not to like?

Sean C (ca) wrote: When this started it struck me that this was another American comedy that thought it was funnier than it actually was. Once the needle had settled in its groove Hank and Mike turned out to be the best cult comedy since The Blues Brothers. It's not gonna win over everyone but those seeking out something a little off-the-wall with its heart in the right place would do well to check this out. Not funny funny but a damn fine view all the same.

Bernd S (br) wrote: in compare with the first movie totally crap but so its just a movie u dont have to watch

Rudy C (it) wrote: This movie was damn good.

Dillinger P (au) wrote: Danny Deckchair is a quirky and wacky enough idea executed well enough by the cast but it takes so long to get the ball rolling and you can literally tell exactly what is going to happen a mile in advance that any enjoyment you get from this film is purely on character alone, which is odd for such a wacky premise. Danny, played very well by Rhys Ifans, is stuck in a life in a big city that he doesnt really care much for. His girlfriend is a complete bitch, which seems to lead Danny to depression. He longs to go camping and doing bizarre and exciting things, only when his girlfriend decides to cancel their trip in order for her to go on a "Date" with a big shot celebrity and lie to him about it, Danny gets this wild idea to tie as many helium balloons to a chair as he can just to see if it will lift him off the ground, it does and before you know it Danny is whisked off across the country into a small town called clarence, landing in Glendas, Otto, back garden where she lies to the people of Clarence that he is a long time friend in order to save him and he becomes like a saviour/jesus like character within this town due to his nature. All the while his bitch of a girlfriend fakes a big screen time plea for him to come home to make money. Naturally even by reading that premise if you have watched a good couple of films in your life you know exactly where this is going to go, Danny falls in love with Glenda, they are the perfect couple and naturally the stereotypical hiccups occur. Its saving grace is its quirky moments such as Danny doing the most bizarre things in order to get his kicks or watching him change a small town by just being who he is, but none of this is even remotely original and the pacing takes sooooo long to actually get the ball rolling that your sitting there working out the ending before the half way point. it ruins the sporatic enjoyment that the film thinks it can give you. The cast do well in their roles, nothing ground braking, they just fit. The cinematography is well enough exectued with some seriously shoddy CGI for his deck chair scene, ill admit it would have been a difficult feat to execute this in real life but as it stands it takes you out of the entire experience. Simpley put, its a rom-com with a touch of the quirky. nothing special but nothing painful. ho hum really.

Nicole M (br) wrote: I rented this on a whim when I was 14 and never really thought much of it. The title left an impression on me. Not really my kind of comedy, I was a little bored.

Jenna I (mx) wrote: Screw this movie. Big fat 'whatever.' I guess this is meant to be entirely religious allegory but I know nothing about Christianity so it just felt like a big fat pessimistic and defeatist mess. The donkey was the only redeeming factor and the best actor.

Rob L (fr) wrote: If you are looking for something with a very unique plot then this is it. Great story and characters.

Jack W (ag) wrote: Possibly the best film I've seen this year. Intriguing metaphors on life and existential discussions about the nature of the soul. "Are you on the Glow, lad?"

Tristan M (ca) wrote: Given this is the movie that I got my name from, it gets a good review from me, but it is of course still a great film. It has a bit of everything, from war, to western, to romance, to bootlegging. It has some of the days popular actors, some of who are so today, who but up good performances overall. The script is good, the soundtrack is catchy and sorta like the Titanic theme, and cinematography is good also, which won an award. The story makes this movie above all else, it's deverse, sad, and interesting, and always is catching us off guard. Something new is always happening, and more often than not, it's not to the benefit to the characters. The whole movie is one of tragety, death, and just overall bad things happening to more character than one. The World War One part is good, the loneliness at home is showed often, and the changing of hands with the seemingly love curse their family has is the main focus. The ending where they hunt down those responsible was good, although I was disappointed that they didn't kill more, until the ending where they finished off the bad cops at their house in a great final scene. Overall is a good movie, a sad one for sure, as nothing seems to go right the whole time, but it's defiantly a good watch.

Shipon R (jp) wrote: I love the urvashi urvashi tune.

Luke R (gb) wrote: While the book has a more complex story, and in my opinion, better ending than the film, the film has Vincent Price. Ergo it' a hand's down victory for the film!??Basically the story follows the life of a young girl who hears word from her mother's cousin at Dragonwyck (the name of a huge gothic estate), the letter announces the cousin, VanRyan (Price) would like for his cousins daughter to come to him and see what life is like for the upper class as well as perform the duties of a carer for his daughter.?Originally she is drawn in by the beauty of his home and by his charm. But slowly realises that VanRyan is a loveless man, wholly obsessed with his goal of having a son to carry on his name.?Price, as always, delivers a phenomenal performance, especially in one of the later scenes when we see how, due to his secret drug abuse, his mind has began to wither, leaving him fanatical and increasingly bitter. He, as per usual in my opinion, outshines all the others who act with him. The story is interesting, and is based on some truly great literature, nowhere near as popular as it deserves to be.?I didn't care for the borderline supernatural element of the film however. If your involving curses and ghosts etc, I find myself being in the all or nothing camp. PLus the bible bashing father was annoying, and I really didn't understand the problem everyone had with VanRyan! He owned some land and din;t want to sell it to the farmers that worked it? IT'S HIS LAND! Why the hell should he? If some one walked into your house and said, this room is my now, here's some money, you wouldn't think 'huh, guess I'll have someone to talk to all the time now' you tell them to leave!?There's little more that I can say without giving the plot away, while it isn;t the best film ever made, I think it's a lot better than some people believe, and a great movie if you want to see Vincent in one of his rare 'not cheesy' horror performances. Four stars.

Jacob F (it) wrote: Pointless remake of the classic horror film. The Carrie remake is forgettable and just far too average for its own good. I really like Chloe Grace Morets but she is so miscast here, it's kind've laughable.