Junk

Junk

Four crooks rob a jewelery shop, then head for an abandoned factory where they plan to fence the goods to the Yakuza. Unfortunately, their chosen location happens to be the same place where American scientists had previously experimented on resurrecting the dead.

A team of jewel-thieves fight for their lives in a zombie-infested factory. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechers

Junk torrent reviews

Roger M (nl) wrote: OK but wouldn't watch it again

D M (mx) wrote: A family moves to a lake house where the owner had died from a crocodile attack. The young son finds baby crocs and secretly cares for them as they grow into adulthood. Of course they become a menace. Same bad cgi as the previous film, but much better overall.

Matthew H (au) wrote: Sadly lacking what a war movie needs.

Luiserghio M (kr) wrote: Muy natural, el mood, el dialogo, todo se mueve muy organicamente (aun cuando por momentos se sienta como pelicula para la television) en ocasiones uno questiona la motivaciones, pero creo que poco a poco uno va entendiendolas. Talvez mi problema es que tan poco hicieron a la mera hora (que es nada) y no es por pervetido que lo menciono, sino pienso que la pelicula jugo muy seguro y con miedo, hubiera sido mas interezante el ver sus reacciones si hubieran llegado mas lejos, no digo que hubieran hecho todo, sino un poco mas lejos... por supuesto que era una idea estupida, pero eso ya lo sabiamos todos y si ya nos habian convencido que estaba bien que lo hieran, pues como mencione, hubiera sido mas interesante que pasara, ya que lo unico que hicieron fue negarse la posibilidad de la reaccion, aun cuando la negacion fue una reaccion, pudo haber sido mas revelador y analitico. Buen trabajo de los tres actores principales.6.5 / 10

Kelly S (ca) wrote: *Shing* *sparkle sparkle* This film tackles the complexity of time travel and delivers a story that will have you wanting to "loop" around and watch it again. The movie had the potential to have the audience confused and wondering what was going on. Instead between the great acting performances and the overall script the only question we are asking at the end is why can't all movies take the time to be this good.

Dylan B (us) wrote: In this documentary, many great lessons were shown through the hardwork of a culinary arts program. The tough love of the teacher, Wilma Stephenson, combined with the dedication and reality of the students makes it a good movie and the audience doesn't really notice how into the movie they get until its over. The use of darker lighting and titles on the screen showing times really gives audience members an idea of the dedication put forth by all. Wilma Stephenson directly tells students how much time they will be putting in and what time they have to get up. This gives the audience a deeper respect for the highschool students. Also, the cameraman is sure to get the lives of the main students outside of school. This helps the audience know they came from a tought background and continued to succeed anyways. The life stories of these students also allows audiences to relate to it and connect it to their own lives. Overall, this movie very well represents struggles and lessons of life.

Shiuka H (ag) wrote: thoghtful and relaxed film. it has pretty colores and sweetness, very mellow out, good!

stefano l (ca) wrote: I didn't want to watch a serious movie yesterday evening, but my father was not attracted by hanckock and decided to watch this one (and after 20 minutes fell asleep...). It's always sad when you think of what the judes had to stand during the World War II, and it's even more sad when the ones that suffers are the children. Anyway, the story of Mischa seemed too much a tale more than a real story. Mathilde Goffard act very well, and the music were fantastic, nearly perfect. But the story and the contrapposition nature/good - human/bad were not convincing at all.

Kenneth B (nl) wrote: How can I say this? No I am not! It really is asking for trouble when you name a film Are You Scared only to unleash one of the least scary films ever made. This is a cheap Saw knock-off with barely any redeeming features, only the odd unintentional laugh breaks the monotony. To be fair this does at least pre-date most of the Saw sequels, Saw 2 (or maybe 3) was released in the same year as this so it was pretty quick of the mark and in all honesty at it's very worst the Saw franchise is probably only a notch or two above this. This is essentially bargain basement horror though so it looks amateurish but it there really is no excuse for the terrible dialogue and complete lack of anything interesting or even remotely original.

Amanda H (ru) wrote: Okay, it's a movie about spelling bees. You can't expect any great excitement. But there are also some great family discussions in this film, and for the most part I was pretty interested. It's nothing I'd be in a big rush to see again, but if you're in the mood for something low-key and intellectual, this is probably a good choice.

Wagaye M (jp) wrote: was gonna see it but couldn't

Jason M (us) wrote: Worthy of its Oscar nomination for Best Foreign Film that year.

Caesar M (fr) wrote: A while back I reviewed a horrendous dinosaur flick called Carnosaur which I really hated allot. While the original had its poorly written original plot, the sequel rips-offs a well regarded classic while still retaining issues from the first Carnosaur. Carnosaur 2 could be consider the biggest rip-off of Aliens without the horrid label of being a remake or reboot. You got a secluded base where everyone is killed by monsters except for a single child, marines type characters to sort out the mess, crawling through vents with one character going back and blowing himself up, a helicopter pilot being killed by a monster, and finally a climax where our character fights off the monsters with a industrial machine and pushes it into a pit. Unlike Aliens where it was entertaining to watch and had great effects, Carnosaurs 2 is heavily unoriginal with effects that makes even Barney the Dinosaur look menacing. We also have to wait thirty minutes for any dinosaurs to come up which by then a third of the movie is already finished and you're mostly likely asleep by this point. Would you believe this sequel also rips-off Apocalypse Now by playing "Ride of the Valkyries" in a helicopter. Wow that's two classics this rips-off from and unfortunately it doesn't fit the "so bad its good" category either. If you're wondering how Dinosaur exists in a military nuclear base, don't worry because the writers completely forgot to tell us that part. Even the first had the explanation of using chicken eggs to breed these plastic dinosaurs, which is completely stupid but it's something at least. I also like how in the sequel someone gets their leg eaten off and stops screaming. I wonder what's going to come off in the next Carnosaur, maybe someone butt-cheeks? The climax is very pathetic as the filmmakers actually used stock footage from the first movie, now that's what I call poor film-making. The way it's shot is very poorly done as it shows us the same angle and goes on for five minutes. You can't make a forklift battling a plastic dinosaur entertaining to watch if you're showing us the same angle over and over again. The acting is just as terrible, there's no passion or even the smallest effort in this shameless rip off. Carnosaur 2 is a shameless rips-off with no passion and should be avoided, or burning it which is more satisfying. I'll stick to Aliens over this piece of trash any day.

Tom R (it) wrote: i don't care, i enjoyed this film. so dam nice bikes.

Jonny P (nl) wrote: How could anybody, at any point in time, under ANY CIRCUMSTANCE, think that this movie was a good idea? "Going Overboard" is so awful that you can't even call it bad. You would have to invent a new term for this movie to explain the horrific stupidity contained within. This is truly worse than watching an animal die a slow, painful death. It has some of the worst dialogue that I have ever heard, maybe even worse that "Birdemic" and "The Room." For goodness sake, SOMEBODY BUILD A FOURTH WALL AND STOP ADAM SANDLER FROM TALKING TO ME! This 90-minute commentary between Sandler and the audience is absurd with lines like "These guys don't have anything to do with the film but we just threw them in for variety." I don't know who wrote the script or why they hired the worst cast of actors available (including Sandler) but this movie is painful. "Happy Gilmore" and "Billy Madison" are two of my favorite comedies of all time but the stupid humor in this film is delivered so poorly that it is just nauseating. Sandler's characters are always ridiculous and over-the-top (which makes them so memorable), but these ones are acted so unconvincingly that you just want to see them all go overboard with concrete shoes. I have watched some awful movies in my day but somehow, this film is a strong candidate for the worst movie ever.

bill s (mx) wrote: Great cast but ever time this car started up it stalled out.Never got any real momentum.

David W (ru) wrote: Modern Times gives a Depression-Era comedy of Charlie Chaplin's last ode to the silent film era

Kieron C (au) wrote: Guilty, guilty fun as indeed all of Sly's directorial outings are.

Raymond E (ag) wrote: This movie is EXCELLENT! The right story. The right cast. Everything works. You will feel good. You will feel in a "better place" when the final credits role. This is what Star Trek should be.

Bob E (gb) wrote: A very funny satire.. Cusack is very good