Leng mian ju ji shou

Leng mian ju ji shou

James and John are working in the Commercial Crime Bureau. Jointly they look into a case of which the suspect is an influential rich business man called Lee. James has a girl friend called ...

James and John are working in the Commercial Crime Bureau. Jointly they look into a case of which the suspect is an influential rich business man called Lee. James has a girl friend called ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechers

Leng mian ju ji shou torrent reviews

gary t (nl) wrote: WARNING YOU HAVE GOT TO WATCH THE END OF THE CREDITS THROUGHOUT THIS MOVIE AS SOMETHING HAPPENES AT THE END OF THE CREDITS THROUGHOUT THIS MOVIE........WOW.....WOW....SUCH AN ENJOYABLE MOVIE 2 WATCH WITH SUCH A FANTASTIC CAST THROUGHOUT THIS MOVIE IT IS SUCH A FANTASTIC MOVIE 2 WATCH WITH SUCH A BRILLIANT CAST THROUGHOUT THIS MOVIE......WARNING THIS MOVIE CONTAINS STROBE LIGHTNING EFFECTS THROUGHOUT SOME SCENES THROUGHOUT THIS MOVIE....... ITS GOT SUCH A FANTASTIC SOUNDTRACK THROUGHOUT THIS MOVIE IT IS SUCH A BRILLIANT MOVIE 2 WATCH WITH A BRILLIANT CAST THROUGHOUT THIS MOVIE........

Dehenna D (ru) wrote: Very surprised to see the formal reviews rate this movie so highly! Hoffman's character's traits (never seen on screen without smoking, drinking, smoking and drinking) were so distracting, I can't remember much else from the movie! McAdams was chatacteristically good, but couldn't say I'd recommend this film.

Joe M (es) wrote: For a made for TV movie, was actually pretty good. Good build-up, well acted, some real suspense and a creature that wasn't too cheesy.

Christopher S (nl) wrote: WWE Studios Half-assed, halfhearted attempt at a comedy film. As bad as I thought it would be. I can probably see the 3 to 5 year old demographic relating and possibly enjoying this film due to its heavy use of fart gags but anyone above that age will have a hard time sitting through this disaster. Dennis Farina and Will Patton should be ashamed of themselves....

Alexander W (es) wrote: It's been my favourite film ever since i first saw it.

Amokrane B (br) wrote: simple but yet fantastic movie,

Simon W (it) wrote: This is a very interesting movie, with one of the most flawed main characters I can remember. David Duchovny as a disgraced former doctor who falls in with the mob, who is always excellent, is about as good as he gets in this movie. Angelina Jolie is in this movie too, and this is as good as I have ever seen her. This movie has two shortcomings: One is that the story is somewhat hard to follow, and the other is that Timothy Hutton was such a weak villain, he just kind of sucked life out of the whole thing. But as a David Duchovny fan, it was entertaining just for him.

ladyvelvet V (ag) wrote: Awesome with some of the best Tap Dancers in history. Gregory Hines outdoes himself along with Sammy Davis Jr.

Robert D (fr) wrote: This sounds like a potential winner with Bauer and Spader as co-stars but the movie is ruined by the God-Awful soundtrack and the banal script. If you like goofy 80s films this might work for you but I think there are a lot better ways to spent 90 minutes.

Liam C (gb) wrote: This is a very traditional film and we learn that right as the film begins and even its poster was the Oscar 'template' for its time, not like that had any bearing on whether or not it won, it's just noticeable. It has one of our main characters walk past Chapel as opposed to running past it to show respect, even if he runs past it later, and the overall film is very accessible. Saying that, this does feel like the kind of film that The Academy falls head-over-heels for and this might be one of the earliest cases of that. The first clip I saw of this film was the boxer in the classroom hitting the other person in a very over the top way and I thought that this was going to be one of those old classic films that had a certain innocence to it that couldn't be replicated in any other time. But that was wrong as this is a very downbeat and gritty kind of film, which in turn makes that scene in the class look out of place as you can't just go up to people, in a school no less, and do that kind of thing. Although, he did seem to throw his hat a lot, which was funny. But the poverty was even worse in real life than as depicted here! The film has its humour which would be needed in that time, there was a scene very early on when someone puts water over someone with a pipe, and even if he was in a bath, would they do that? Also there was some unintentional humour, like when Mr. Gruffydd says to please remain seated and it didn't look like they were moving anyway. I really did get the feel of community in this film, (even if it seemed to be stereotyping only a little at the start), with everyone having to keep together to cheer each other up, especially with singing and the party scene where that person dropped the cake or the singing in the house, or at least as long as that lasts because even that has its breaking point. Whilst they might have a huge community and relationships with one another, I remained very distant as I didn't feel anybody was really developed at all and I hardly remember anybody's name, it doesn't really help when most of them don't have names and are only called by their surname. The only name I knew was Huw and that was just because of the fact that everyone says it so much, like people would, I had to look up everyone else after the film was finished. The film seemed to skip too much of these people's lives whilst, ironically, having not much happen; I like a good, slow character driven piece but when you don't know the characters or care that much, what is there to grab onto? It also doesn't help that the story never really seemed to start either, after about 16 minutes it finally looked like it was going to stop with the monologues and get going but then it goes to 35 minutes and it just keeps happening. The film seemed to lack focus as well, as gathered from the overheard narration, Huw is meant to be the centre of the story but he didn't seem like he was that important in what was going on and there are many scenes where he isn't even in it and the cover has O'Hara and Pidgeon on it. A story that is told by a single person doesn't necessarily have to have him in every scene as this is about a village, but the film didn't even seem like it was from his perspective, like I think was intended. What's worse is that Huw doesn't age at all making everything feel like the story takes place over a few months, but, for example, seeing how quickly the school storyline finishes, if it can so be called, that is clearly not it. I've read some theories that he is telling the story and imagining himself as a boy as a sign of the innocence of youth, but that just seems like an excuse to cover up a mistake. The only way to cover it up that he was getting older is that his hair is long when he is young but tidier when he is supposed to be older. It is just very bizarre to look at, we see a bunch of children fighting in the mine at one point and they are supposed to be older teenagers but it clearly isn't; they didn't even try to put makeup on his face to make him look any older. And good job that person in the mine didn't miss with that hammer when he was working with Huw. I was never bored but the film slowed down even further around 45 minutes but soon after when Huw started school, things started to pick up as there was actual conflict and something was happening but it is over as soon as it is begun and that is pretty much the whole film. Each scene fades to black and the next one fades back in with black and it feels like a bunch of home movies of these people's lives pasted together and called a film. It's like we're watching these characters every so often over an extended period of time and we don't learn anything. While it is clear that a character is having distress with her marriage and that also showcases a progression of time, we don't know anything about that particular storyline, like most, so in turn it doesn't really mean anything to us. We see Mr. Gruffydd earlier on when the marriage ceremony is going on and he is in the background and walks off, so there is some intrigue there, but still, it's vaguely touched upon. Again, some could say as this film is supposed to be from Huw's perspective, so why would he know everything? But that is exactly my point, this film is muddled on what it wants to be and do. Even with Huw's own storyline of him having to walk again, seemed like it was a throwaway.The script for this film is very good and the way the characters say the well written dialogue is just great to hear. I liked Mr. Gruffydd's talk with Huw about not believing the doctors, that was nice and when Huw talked about why did the mother have babies was innocent enough, I did expect a sly response by her though. There was also a conversation with Mr. Gruffydd with that horrible person that tells that person to leave the Chapel and I wondered if one said simple and the other said civil. There is a part where Huw is the only one left at the table and goes 'ahem' and it was a great scene, he said that to get acknowledgement he hadn't left but it's not like at his age he would have known. The acting in the film is good, even though there is a distinct lack of anyone even trying to put any effort in to doing an accent, a very small number at least try but it is distracting if you think about it. I spoke about the singing and the breaking point earlier but that applies to the audience as well, the singing makes sense but it just keeps happening more often and drones on and on. I thought I heard them singing 'God Save The Queen' earlier on in the film but later on they do actually sing it, which is odd, because how was that person who got that letter found? But even the script has its odd moments, at one point the wife says she is going to do something and the husband says that he wants her to do something else and I could have sworn that he said, 'black eye it is, then', really? If that was what I think I heard it as, that is horrible. The film also seemed needlessly cruel, the aforementioned person who yells at the person to leave the chapel seemed a bit over the top and while teachers were indeed necessarily stricter back then, the way that person was behaving in particular seemed overboard. I understand these were harsh times but that's ridiculous. Putting out your hand for free money from the spending box seemed a bit rude, even if they said thank you, they should have said please as well, instead if just standing there with a smile. And good job he didn't hit the basket with the shortbread when his dad helped him up to leave the room. I don't know why the wife was out in the snow just to talk about her husband, you'd have thought she could have done that any other time, preferably indoors. And who would have actually heard Huw when he fell into the water off screen. When they say they're going to America and the father says to keep quiet, I expected the mother to say, ' you haven't heard my opinion on this', even though they were old enough to make up their own mind, you'd still expect the parents opposing opinion and try to get them to stay. It also looked like the dad sneezed when the other person came to his house to talk just to distract him, even though he had been sneezing earlier, as it seemed like he said something when he sneezed. And at the end it seemed odd to have people running in to see the injured when surely they would be running out trying to escape, I thought the film would end on a downbeat note with them going down to the mine but it ends with some hope, even if it looked like the dad was still breathing. And for a laugh, the makeup artist is called Guy Pearce.This is certainly a well made production with good cinematography and music as well as effort by its cast but it seems too much of an ambitious project to fit all of the story's content into just an 1hr and 58 minute film. The film certainly has its heart in the right place and it is good for what it is but considering how much the book explains and how much content it has, this should have been much longer or maybe split into parts? I understand that most of the time sacrifices have to be made in the translation from book to film but sometimes it hurts it too much. As it is, 'How Green Was My Valley' is an interesting project for a film, and fitting for its time, as well as made pretty quickly after the book came out. However, it has become infamous over the years for its still shocking win over 'Citizen Kane', like I already explained my review of that and like countless others have, 'Kane' was under a lot of unjust controversy at the time, which explains why it wasn't exactly the favorite to win, but it's fun to look at in retrospect. However, it does speak volumes that a film is only remembered because of what it won against, things like, obviously, 'Citizen Kane', 'Sergeant York' and 'The Maltese Falcon', as opposed to its own artistic merits, which would go on to happen many more times in the future. Overall, it isn't like it is terrible, it's just the film could have been a lot more, but I do like the tagline quite a bit though, almost makes me feel bad for not liking the whole film.

Mike S (au) wrote: Why Clint Eastwood? WHY???!??

Mikael K (mx) wrote: Gong Li and John Cusack star in Mikael Hfstrm's stylish period drama set in Shanghai during the fateful days of WWII preceding and following Pearl Harbor. "Shanghai" reaches a tone that finds a balance between the noir romanticism of the setting and the historical realism surrounding the events depicted. It's not a particularly memorable movie, but it does what it does with style and grace. This is a clearly adequate outing from Hfstrm, a director whose uneven expression hasn't really found its form yet.

James L (it) wrote: The focus around a single event gave the story a real sense of authenticity in terms of the conversations had, and the decisions made. Good amount of tension throughout, and an interest take on the relationship between Whitehall and the military.