Hangar 18

Hangar 18

During a Space Shuttle mission a satellite rams a unidentified flying object. The UFO afterwards performs an emergency landing in the deserts of Arizona. However the White House denies it's existence because of the near presidential elections. The UFO is brought to the secret hangar 18 and the accident is claimed to incompetence of the astronauts Bancroff and Price. But the two fight against this and try to hunt down the UFO.

Shortly after the launch of a satellite from a space shuttle the satellite collides with an UFO in front of the crew's eyes. Because of an election campain some politicians try to hide the ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechers

Hangar 18 torrent reviews

Jesse O (nl) wrote: I've been an atheist for, at least, more than half of my life. It's something that, once I hit the age of reason, which would be around your teen years, I decided that religion and the existence of god were incompatible with the world I see around me. While you can never say never in this life, I'm certain that I will never become a born again Christian. There are just too many things in this universe that can kill us, stellar black holes, gamma ray bursts, and solar expansion for one, that it's increasingly difficult to believe that this is all part of an intelligent design. With that out of the way, I was intrigued by this film's premise enough to give it a shot, knowing the fact that, at the end, it was more likely than not going to end up with Kanji finally believing in god. As far as I could tell from this movie, India is a very religious country. Probably due to the vast poverty a lot of people find themselves in that they see their religions as their only form of hope and/or happiness. So it was interesting to see how this film would broach that subject and whether it would really hit hard against religion. While this isn't India's equivalent to a Bill Maher/Richard Dawkins/Christopher Hitchens rant on religion, it still was a pretty ballsy move for, what seems to be, such a conservative country. Essentially, while the film does focus on Kanji's atheism and his insistence that god(s) doesn't exist, the film focuses more on the business side of religion. The side that people like the priests presented in the movie choose to exploit. They exploit people's spiritual needs for their own gain, not actually following the tenets of the gods they all worship. I think the film shines more of a spotlight on the charlatans attached to religion, a man-made thing, than on god(s) not being real. And I suppose that that's the easy way out. You attack religion but not the idea of god and, to me, that's kind of an easy way out to be perfectly honest. Like you're afraid of the backlash if you launch a full-out attack on god. And, to be honest, this was probably written by someone who was disillusioned by people who've used god for their own financial needs and not to help the people that need it most. They build extravagant temples, wear lavish clothes, and they abuse of people's needs. So it was really more an attack on these charlatans as much as it was on the idea of god. With that said, the writing of Kanji is pretty decent because while, being an atheist, and being presented as a hustler at the beginning, he hardly comes across as an unlikable person even in his search for compensation from god for the loss of his shop. He makes a lot of good, rational arguments that even religious people would agree with and he's a charismatic presence. So it was good to see that he wasn't presented as an out-and-out asshole. The film's last act is absolutely preposterous and really does take a bit away from what the film had been trying to achieve. Kanji has a stroke in the middle of the courtroom, which leaves his left side paralyzed, the priests, with help from Kanji's friend and employee, make it so that Kanji is said to actually be god, in order to financially capitalize on his popularity and his standing up for the people who really needed it. It was absolutely ridiculous turn of events. Then again, with the motorcycle scene here, you'll know the one, it shouldn't have surprised me. And, of course, there's the obligatory song and dance scene that is one of the reasons I've consciously avoided many Bollywood films throughout the years. It doesn't even make sense within the context of the film, they say it's part of a festival, but it's bullshit. It serves absolutely no real purpose and the thing is that it takes about 5 minutes of screen time. I realize that may not be much, but it is way too long. Trust me on this one. Particularly when the film could, and should, have been much shorter. It's not as insufferably long as some of these films tend to be. But for this, I think 2 hours is much too long for this type of story. Honestly, I'm not the type of person that's gonna hate a film with religious inclinations, unless it's one of those terrible, preachy Kirk Cameron films, if it's good. The problem with these Kirk Cameron films is the fact that anyone who opposes them is instantly wrong or the enemy. Like God's Not Dead, the main villain is an atheist professor who probably sees the error of his ways at the end and breaks down crying at his "mistakes". At the very least, this film doesn't try to force a religious message down your throat and it presents an atheistic character, for the most part, as reasonable and likable. The ridiculous climax, however, where they literally deify Kanji, really took it down a notch for me. This is average at best. Not good, not bad. The film offers some solid writing and acting and some decent comedic moments. Decent Netflix watch if you've got nothing else to do.

Jenn T (nl) wrote: This film has an outstanding cast. Very well filmed and excellent story line. A real diamond in the rough.

Leslie M (gb) wrote: Great for a laugh. Seems to be a Jerry Springer kind of exorcism movie. Loved it when the mom was like "I knew it! She's possessed!"

Carlos I (de) wrote: Great concept and story that gets lost in an amateurs convoluted handling of the material. I'm still confused by the end of it. I feel like if this was directed by someone like Aranofsky or Nolan it would be a masterpiece...

A Z (fr) wrote: Second viewing, was better watching as a kid. But this is a bit too cheesy and not enough real laughs to get it through. Anton still the best part.

Ng H (ru) wrote: A little offbeat comedy.

Richard D (ca) wrote: Near the start of this film, I thought it was going to be okay. It's really not. It starts out as a fairly routine police action film, but it has two main problems. It's biggest problem is that Seagal is clearly a raging asshole who's onscreen strutting is a constant annoyance. I don't really demand of a star of this kind of film that he be able to act, but I do ask that his onscreen presence not be so noxious that it pollutes the whole film. A secondary problem is that Seagal's character is really a terrible cop despite the film's repeated claims to the contrary. He never engages in anything recognizable as police work. He mostly just walks up to criminals and demands that they tell him what he wants to know. He seems surprised when that doesn't work. At least the character and the actor playing him are in synch ... they're both idiots.

Shaun B (us) wrote: Beautifully captivating for just over 40 minutes with stunning natural photography and unique camera/editing techniques. Loses a star for some head-scratching moments of how Ron Fricke decided to place certain sequences within the structure of his film (i.e., the first time we see NYC traffic flows is a jarring edit between scenes of natural beauty).

Private U (nl) wrote: Makes me want to learn Muay Thai/Martial Arts in general.

Al M (kr) wrote: Awesome sci-fi film from Roger Corman. The special effects of the x-ray vision are classically cheesy, but the films explores the implications of the technology in a fully in-depth manner. The doc begins by being able to see through objects and, of course, people's clothes. Then, he becomes capable of seeing into people's bodies in order to assess their physical ailments. Ultimately, his super-vision allows Corman to question the nature of morality and the implications of a man who can see into the very heart of existence.

Nicki M (nl) wrote: Been meaning to watch this one for a while. Glad I finally got around to it. Nothing terribly new for Woody Allen, but entertaining and Emma Stone is always good.