Hurricane Season

Hurricane Season

Based on true events amid the wreckage and chaos dealt by Hurricane Katrina; one basketball coach in Marrero, Louisiana just will not give up. Coach Al Collins(Forest Whitaker), gathers other players from hard-hit schools and builds a team actually worthy enough to go to the state playoffs. A very honest look at what can be done with the right people having the desire and fortitude to pick up and

The film is set in a year after Hurricane Katrina. It is the time when Al Collins, a high school basketball coach in Marrero, Louisiana, assembles a team of players who had previously attended five different schools and leads them on the way to the championships. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechers

Hurricane Season torrent reviews

Prach P (ru) wrote: The second film I've watched about education this week. The Class (Entre les Murs) makes us reflect on questions about discipline, authority, methods of learning, and ultimately the purpose of education. These questions are presented within the limits of the fact that teachers are ordinary people, with the usual flaws of ordinary human beings. Anyone who's thinking of being a teacher should watch this.

Josh H (gb) wrote: This whole schizo thing is getting old fast. You can see this coming a mile away. pseudo-intellectual art house crap. Don't get me twisted, I like B-horror, but this one blows.

Deshawn M (nl) wrote: 5 Star Rating. This movie was funny as F..... Laughter from start to finish. Mike Epps was a star in this.

Randy T (br) wrote: Love the story but to Much useless moment

Jeff B (jp) wrote: This was bad. Ice-T and Angie Everhart stretch their acting skills...thin, Richard Greico gives eyeliner a bad name, there's a terrible shootout scene with toy guns, and I think this was edited by a 3rd grader. The Diceman was the best thing going here. Yes, it was that bad...

Jason S (ru) wrote: its a pretty good mob movie

Machrur A (de) wrote: film favorit gw banget, i love you chaahat...emuah emautg

Timothy M (br) wrote: Brilliant film!! Just gave it a revisit. Tilda Swinton is sublime! Should be shown in every film class!

Juli N (es) wrote: This tasty little morsel is a recipe for an extraordinarily good time

Mike N (us) wrote: A watchable and mildly amusing story..with good performances.

Campbell P (fr) wrote: Stripes is a perfect example of a solid comedy. It provides a lot of good laughs and a good plot to go around it. John and Russell have nothing to do with their lives so they decide to go enlist in the US army. Along the way we meet funny characters (most notably Ox) and get treated to a really funny training session. All the people who enlisted in John's group are nutjobs and get themselves into more trouble with their sergeant than anything. Bill Murray plays the same guy he used to play and is really good at what he did. Harold Ramis (R.I.P.) plays his hilarious partner in crime who plays out his humor to the maximum. Although the story was very funny there wasn't enough to take from this movie. The only thing you really learned was that determination gets you places which is a bit overdone but that kinda thing doesn't especially matter here. Stripes was a very funny and clever point of view on a war training and war zone environment and gets comedy geniuses to play the lead parts. This Bill Murray classic has a very high rewatch value too and will hopefully get to see it more. B

Stefan G (ca) wrote: You'd think that by 2013 Hollywood would have figured out that there's simply no room for the old action films, but apparently somebody actually wanted a "Die Hard 5". I can think of so many reasons why a fifth Die Hard film was a terrible idea to begin with, and most of them exemplify a central problem - Die Hard as a film franchise was only good for a few meritorious films, and then it hibernated for over a decade, and immediately lost steam as soon as the producers tried reviving it. Essentially, Die Hard was a film franchise that died, and was quickly forgotten, and the producers honestly thought they could just bring it back without even trying to make it relevant to a newer generation of cinemagoers. Needless to say, they failed spectacularly, and right from the beginning it's painfully obvious that they couldn't hide from that. Even the title sequence tries using trendy graphics to make gullible viewers think that this is a next-generation Die Hard film, but really it's just a Steven Seagal movie with Bruce Willis filling Seagal's shoes. Making matters worse is a clearly uninspired story plagued by wildly liberal use of outdated action film clichs, and an extremely frail script. This could be forgiven in a low budget straight-to-DVD production, but for a film intended for cinematic release, there should have been higher standards. Despite this being a by-the-numbers Die Hard film, the most jarring aspect of the film, believe it or not, is how much of an insufferable jerk John McClane became in this film. If you loved him in the classic Die Hard, get ready to hate him as he shouts at a Russian man because he can't understand what he's saying. Is that the action hero audiences came to love in the late 1980's? Also, he and his son are quite horrible to each other, but then again, I highly doubt that any of the actors playing them had any interest in the plot. As for McClane's son, who is played incompetently by Jai Courtney, his character doesn't surprise me that much. In fact, one could say that the apple didn't fall too far from the tree. The other characters simply blend into the background due to bad acting and even worse writing. Another thing I should talk about is the film's poor presentation. For a film that apparently needed an excessive $92 million to make, it looks absolutely appalling. There's a noticeable absence of colour here, to the point that most scenes look like they were coloured with a bad mix of grey and blue. The production values are beyond awful, and it just makes me wonder how the producers spent their money. Did it go towards marketing, makeup, drugs? It seriously begs an explanation, since I find it hard to believe that a project this expensive looks so cheap. Even the action scenes look badly done, to the point that it's extremely obvious that the producers were hoping to compensate for a badly written plot with guns and explosions, as if the producers had no idea that 1980's are long gone. Overall, it's definitely the worst Die Hard film ever made, but somehow it goes beyond just being that. In fact, I'd say this is undoubtedly one of the worst action films of all time. In fact, we'd probably be better off if the Die Hard franchise would simply stay dead.

Steve A (es) wrote: Forget the negatives - it's worth seeing just for DeNiro's performance as a stroke patient trying to recover. Philip Seymour Hoffman nailed this role too - equally awesome!

Denislav R (it) wrote: The only thing in the movie I did not like are the special effects. They have`not aged well it seems. Outside o that- it's an amazing movie.

Jenny S (br) wrote: I've forgotten it lol

Taylor B (ag) wrote: While I like the Penguins in all the Madagascar films, I think them having a stand alone film wasn't such a brilliant idea. I'll admit because the story kind of lacked interested and lost me quite a bit. Few jokes made me laugh but other then that it was pretty much a cash grab film.

SailorMoon797 F (it) wrote: it's a Horror film of all time.

Eric J (it) wrote: A bit longish but quite good. For once a cast that seemed ho-hum on paper did much better than I was expecting. Similar to "Dangerous Liasons". This film was the more serious production and probably the better of the two.