Adapted from a series of short stories by Norwegian author Levi Henriksen, Bent Hamers Home for Christmas weaves together the lives of people struggling to find their way home on a Christmas Eve, beneath the colors of the Northern Lights. The plot unfolds during a few afternoon hours on Christmas Eve. The individual stories, which at times intertwine, are set in the small town Skogli. The characters in the stories cover a great range in age and life situations, representing both reconciliation with their own lives and strong frustration. Some show the will to understand and do something about their lives, while others have given up. Deeply tragic and melancholy aspects are mixed with humour and rather frivolous solutions.
KARLA E (it) wrote: Not as funny as the first one, but not that bad either.
Matthew H (au) wrote: Pretty shocking. Bruce Willis doesn't appear to be playing the same character anymore and there isn't a single character that is in anyway likeable. What exactly was supposed to be impressive about the action sequences? The stupid helicoptor scene in Diehard 0.4 appears to have inspired more of the same rubbish. Verdict ... gratuitous and irrelevent tripe.
Myra L (de) wrote: First of all it was filmed in Logan Square not Humboldt park like they claim. Second that wasn't a realistic depiction of your typical puerto Rican family in Humboldt park. Also we don't call our HS Roberto Clemente HS its just "Clemente". I could go on and on about everything that was wrong in this film but it wouldn't matter. If you watch this movie please don't assume this is how the Puerto Rican families are in Chicago. There should have been more humor in this movie since we Puerto Ricans are such comedians. Also practically every puerto Rican owns a guitar or guido that the elders usually jam to. There was no passion or pride in this film which basically describes a true puerto Rican. They should have done some research. Looks like they just pulled this movie out of their a$$.
Ted W (ru) wrote: Boring and terrible movie.
LaVaughn H (br) wrote: Conceptually, this could be seen as a shocking and significant wake-up call. Technically, it comes across as a political infomercial.
Hunter B (kr) wrote: A well made action flick with a great balance of mind and mindlessness.
Hector C (it) wrote: aunque algo fantaciosa es buena
mel j (us) wrote: This is a great documentary about the 70s girl band, The Runaways. Directed by a later member of the band- Vicki Blue. Hear from everyone except Joan Jett about their time in the band. You also hear a little bit from Cherie's mom and Sandy's mom. Interesting and wild, yet very sad and heartbreaking in some places. Kim Fowler is an even bigger scumbag than I thought. Shame we don't hear Joan's point of view, it would've made this documentary perfect. I'm hoping one day we can hear from her about it. For anyone who has heard of these girls, this is a must see! R.I.P. Sandy West.
Tim S (br) wrote: Kevin Smith followed his indie success Chasing Amy with Dogma, a chance to not only take a stab at Christianity, but also to honor it. The film really stands out in his body of work and isn't his typical fare. It's sort of whimsical and Wizard of Oz-ish, but also very much sounds like something he's had a hand in. As far as content and storyline goes, it's unique among the features he's done before or since. Visually, it looks phenomenal. Shot in widescreen, we're treated to some very nice camera work and some wonderul visuals. As far as the cast goes, everyone shines - particularly Alan Rickman. I believe that his performance along with the lovely score of Howard Shore elevated the film well above the level of a typical low brow comedy. Ben Affleck, Linda Fiorentino and Jason Mewes also give excellent solid performances. The only downside was that the film just wasn't the vision Kevin ultimately had in mind. Not that I'm insinuating that any changes would improve the film, but it's a shame that he didn't get to make the film he set out to make in the first place. I'm sure he doesn't see it that way, and it could've been either better or worse, but we'll never know. What he was able to achieve is not to be overlooked in the least. I really enjoy Dogma, and I'm happy that he got to make it at all.
D M (ru) wrote: A multi-cultural group of nature documentarians and their hangers-on venture to the Amazon only to have nature try to kill them. JLo looking hot, Ice Cube playing an inner-city dolt, Jon Voight with the worst accent, and Owen Wilson not getting enough lines. The snake looks dumb, the acting is terrible, and the action is overdone in that terrible late-90s-blockbuster-way.
Dylan D (ag) wrote: Hulk is a film filled with wonderful potential. Featuring fantastic visuals, a unique style of filmmaking, and a classic climax that is acted to perfection, the film ought to be a surefire winner. Unfortunately, a needlessly complex plot, a longer-than-necessary runtime that is further bogged down by slow pacing, and decent action sequences that become repetitious though visually impressive, Hulk is more of a letdown than it ought to be. Still, the film is worth watching for all the things it does right; just don't expect to be completely enthralled for every second.
Ryan B (fr) wrote: What is this? A center for ants?!?!