Sal is a wealthy and triumphant yuppie who normaly would not do everything in order to get a woman. But this time it is something special and he is about to give up his position for his ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
A working girl from New Jersey looks for love with a fast-lane Manhattan salesman from Queens.
|Download||Jersey Girl (1992) DVDRip [Majstor Dane]||DVDRip||47||34||744.01 MB|
You may also like
Jersey Girl torrent reviews
Jenna G (kr) wrote: I know Ang Lee only had good intentions making Billy Lynn. I know he did. And it looked great, at first, at least judging by the trailer. But the core of a good movie starts with the screenplay and this...was just bad, man. Just bad writing. I mean, the dialogue between the soldiers in Bravo Squad is almost unbearable. It feels so phony. Where there should be emotion, there isn't any. Where there should be laughs, there wasn't any. And somehow, given all of Ang Lee's technical work...the movie somehow looks cheap? Kristen Stewart is solid and Garrett Hedlund is pretty great, but everyone else is not memorable...even Billy Lynn himself. This could've been truly great. And it should've been.
Jon P (us) wrote: Woody Allen's cheeky Roman romance offers commentary on the likes of celebrity status, infidelity and love. Yet the whole endeavour feels flat, frivolous and achingly familiar. The film is beautifully shot and full of feel-good farce, but it's rarely ever laugh-out-loud funny, realistic or even interesting.Allen's vignettes spin round in circles, trying to, but never quite, overlapping or offering anything really original. To make things worse, it's hard to shake the impression that Allen wrote this script eons ago, chucked it in a box, and recently rediscovered it during a 2012 clear-out. Empty, star-studded garbage.
Joe M (ca) wrote: In all honesty, i feel this film has been swept up into a bit of a shit show that wasnt its making. The film is decent, with believeable young actors, some decent tension, and a very over played but reasonably accurate depiction of people from the north (from what i remeber from my last trip)
Michael T (kr) wrote: Tender examination of a love affair is slowly-paced.
Gregory W (mx) wrote: slow but watchable tells the story of a family coming 2 america but not nearly as fun as the eddie murphy movie by the same name (coming 2 america)!
Anthony B (us) wrote: Intelligent, suspenseful, and moving. Offers all the plot twists and intrigue of a great spy thriller even as it questions the morality of the surveillance state spy thrillers depend on
Michael S (ag) wrote: I found this rare gem in a box set of pretty horrid vampire movies. How it got to be there, I don't know... but I'm thankful for it. "Strange Things Happen at Sundown" is probably the smartest and honestly funniest vampire horror/comedy movies to date. You can tell they didn't have a huge budget, but what they did with it was a lot. The story was pretty original, and tweaks the vampire mythos a bit to bring some new stuff to the genre. The characters are likable, despite their evil vampire gnawing. The balance between the gore and humour is pretty good, though there is one scene that needlessly showed gore. The pace of the story is strong- which is especially important since it's two hours. And the camera work was better than some of the stuff you see in mainstream movies- not complicated, but visually interesting and innovative. Over all, for movies that have fun with the horror genre, this movie ranks up there with "Shaun of the Dead".
Fernando Jos G (ca) wrote: Hayden hace una majestuosa caracterizacion a un personaje real polemico, tanto as que parece el propio Glass dentro de la pelicula con una trama simple pero que los puntos se jerarquizaron de manera que no hubo fallas menores dentro de la realizacion. Rigurosamente, excelentemente elaborada.
Samer F (es) wrote: Good story, but apparently very limited budget..
Shawn R (au) wrote: Totally Fantastic movie.Excellent vocabulary and keeps your attention throughout the entire flick.
t w (au) wrote: Terrible, bland and embarrassing mess
Angel L (au) wrote: Typical good guy; always running after the bad elements. All in all the show was good.
Sarah P (ag) wrote: I think the substance of this documentary was excellent - very important views are presented about how people and information are controlled. Was it exciting? No. Was it informative and interesting? Yes.
Sausages M (ag) wrote: Interesting Woody tribute to ancient cinema works quite well, but can drag a bit. Amazing the amount of star turns- even Madonna shows up, and amazingly, doesn't suck too badly (probably because she plays a slut), but the plot keeps getting lost and it takes a startlingly long time to actually start making sense. Strangely, the most convincing character is Mia Farrow's sword-swallower, although she is very much Mia as usual. Woody plays himself, again. But I did largely enjoy it even if it got lost in its own symbolism a bit too much.
Eric B (ca) wrote: Robert Bresson's low-budget attempt to de-romanticize the King Arthur myth has no romance, no gallantry, no smiles, almost no score and just a smidge of what might be called "acting." Instead, the film is mostly about Bresson's strange obsession with incidental sound. Lasting impressions of this film are not about dialogue or plot, but rather rattling armor and listless, unnaturally loud footsteps trudging across forest duff and castle floors. Not exactly compelling. Violence usually occurs off-camera, though the bloody opening minutes can't help but evoke Monty Python & the Holy Grail's notorious "only a flesh wound" scene. The homely, untrained cast is just another way to rob the viewer of any easy pleasures. The story itself skips all the glories of Arthur's court and picks up after the failed search for the Grail, so the mood is nothing but bleak. Approach at your own risk, and don't bother bringing a shrubbery.
Michael L (au) wrote: Long, confused, hammy, terrible and compelling - Valley of The Dolls is cool, dark, beautiful people film with a disappointing cop-out ending. This is a great night in for all, the sets are amazing - from the black, white, red club with the singers and guests dressed to match to the cavernous powder room and the Hollywood Hills pool. The script and editing is a mess, it starts with first person narration but the central character changes so often and the timeline is just on dolls that it has nearly no focus with interchangeable ABCDEF plots. The soliloquies occupy the American Film Industry's top 5 worst ever, topped by Patty Duke's worst ever actress performance in an empty Broadway side street. It's hilarious, such a shame about the ending, which panders to the "No Place Like Home" conservatism that sells movies - problem is the punter who believes in that shit would have left long before. Terribly good.
hannah p (au) wrote: what an all star cast!
Aj V (ru) wrote: A classic movie, if you love old musicals and comedies, this is a must see. The movie has a lot of great stars, and they are really funny in this movie together. This one is a lot better than the other gold digger movies. I loved this movie, it was a lot of fun, and the songs are terrific too. I highly recommend this movie.