Two men in 1930s Mississippi become friends after being sentenced to life in prison together for a crime they did not commit.

Life is a 1999 American comedy film revolves around 2 criminals, Ray Gibson and Claude Banks. After being sentenced and serving 65 years in prison, they all realizes the value of life. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


Life torrent reviews

Josh P (ag) wrote: Very heartfelt and inspirational.

Dale S (it) wrote: Good movie for young teens.

Phillie E (nl) wrote: Fun, nostaglic and informative, this is a must see for a Star Wars toy enthusiast, or any fan of pop culture.

Leonard D (nl) wrote: A truly terrifying action thriller! Peter Stormare is brilliant as Lucifer, probably the best performance in this title! The scene where Mammon swallows Angela always makes me jump in fear! The only thing that is flawed in this film is Shia Lebouf, always being the obnoxious sidekick, but thankfully, he wasn't in the way that much. Keanu Reeves isn't the best actor, but he gives a good performance. A great horror thriller you can't miss!

Oliver N (gb) wrote: Absolutely appalling!

borderlinefilms (au) wrote: tripping over ourselvesWhile there's no cinematic equivalent to the Mona Lisa, I submit a list of the top ten American movies of the last 50 years in no particular order:The Godfather, Apocalypse Now, Raging Bull, Pulp Fiction, Blade Runner, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Mullholland Drive, Tree of Life, Boyhood, Short Cuts.Whaaaaaa... Short Cuts? Is it even Altman's best work? Well, everything unique and original in the other movies on this list was done before... by Altman. (Is there anything the man hasn't tried?) And everything Altman achieved in his career can be summed up in Short Cuts.Five of the entries on my list are genre intact: gangster, war, bio, sci-fi, adventure. Lynch is a genre of his own (a master of hook and subvert), Pulp Fiction is pomo-noir with a swagger, Tree of Life, an audacious and transcendent poem, Boyhood, literally an epic achievement of dedication and commitment. Short Cuts doesn't seem to fit in as it is merely an observation of lives and love. But what observations! What lives! What heartbreaking affection. All underscored with a resonating heartbeat patching into so many paths, teetering on the brink of disaster and threatening to explode, which it does, in the form of a climactic planetary stroke. Nothing brings people together quite like a natural disaster. An earthquake, tremoring just enough to inform us of our place in history on the cosmic map. Enough to bring us down to earth, reboot our egos, and put multiple perspectives in perspective. Enough to appreciate the simple state of being. A larger-than-life baroque master is at the helm, warbling out contrapuntal narratives and swirling themes orchestrated to perfection. Multiple story-lines wavering under one very singular umbrella. And under Altman's protective cover the talent runs free and easy, playful and experimental, ironic and sincere. The key characters in one story become walk-throughs in another, paradoxically tethered and disconnected from the self, from family, community, and life. Boundaries are crossed and souls get lost. We're all the same if only by not knowing what our needs are or why we're even here. With nothing to say except everything is exceptional, infinite and empty. And life is short. Shorts Cuts of scenes stories words actions desire love loss lies lust faith wonder and devotion. Heck, I'd see it again only to watch Tom Waits and Lily Tomlin shack up.Some movies claim to be infinitely entertaining, some maintain they can be viewed repeatedly without losing their initial charm, some insist they never age, I know only one that can lay claim to all such conceits. Short Cuts is like falling in love. It delivers quietly, wonderfully, naturally, tenderly, simply and deeply.

Ronald S (us) wrote: the edinburgh milkman and notorious american tax dodger in workmanlike adaptation of a Michael Crichton thriller.

Justin B (mx) wrote: It's far better than the abysmal Curly Sue which Hughes put out the same year; mostly thanks to Ed O'neil as the titular character. It means well but it's hard to ignore the mix of recycled Hughes plots and the gimmicky, post-Home Alone attempt at slapstick.

Taba H (br) wrote: Kasvospasmaaja jatkaa jenkkininjan roolissa, onneksi myos Steve James tekee paluun vielakin pumpatumpana roid rage kinkkuna. Stoori pitkalti sama kuin ekassa osassa, paha huumelordi tekee tuhmuuksia ja pitaa jengin aisoissa ninja-armeijallaan, jota johtaa muita isompaan haarniskaan pukeutunut big dick ninja, joka levyttaa joukkueellisen omiaan ihan vain naytos mielessa pahiksen kavereille leffan loppua kohden. Flaidikset selvasti ekaa heikompia, koreografiat ovat viimeistelemattomia ja mukaan on poimittu selkeasti epaonnistuneita otoksia, paajabat tyytyvat lahinna fleksailemaan ja huutamaan one linereita, hauskana huomiona paajaba tuntuu ottavan reilusti enemman pataan kuin pumpattu kersanttifrendinsa, ko. jabat ovat muutenkin kumman laheisia ja hiplaavat toistensa hartioita vahan valia, lisaksi vaikuttaa silta, etta Jamesin hahmosta tehty ikaan kuin tunteiden ilmaisun tulkki paajaballe, jolla on edelliseen verratuna ainakin kolme kertaa vahemman repliikkeja...

Paul P (it) wrote: The relationship that develops between Hoskins and Cathy Tyson feels legit and its very entertaining. The performances across the board are very good, Clarke Peters and Michael Caine are great at playing true slime here. Some moments of the story aren't as engaging as others so it drags in spots. But this fairytale story told with a modern day grittiness to it works due to the performances of Bob Hoskins and Cathy Tyson.

Michael R (gb) wrote: Charles Bronson / Lee Marvin Goodness....

Brian T (ag) wrote: A kind of saga of Siberian life under two regimes (pre-Soviet and Soviet), this film beautifully and painfully portrays the cultural, religious, environmental, and societal changes caused both by governmental change and, much more so, by economic change (pre-industrial to industrial). What is more, the film intricately displays the interconnectedness of all these facets of life: the Old Russian villagers are wary of a region of forest known for centuries as "the Devil's mane", and it is later discovered by Communist Russians that there is oil there (although, even under the new regime, it is hard to get to and deleterious once discovered. As a whole, the film offers ambiguous judgment as to whether this change was beneficial or detrimental; it certainly seems detrimental throughout most of the film, but the ending kind of throws one off; the appartchik who pushed the drilling of oil in the region is not scorned but welcomed by the dead ancestry of the village, and the film ends by showing scenes of the industrialization of Siberia in a rather celebratory way. Personally, of course, the old ways seem much more preferable (although the film is fair to show the social unfairness of the Old Regime), and perhaps it is the intention of the film to let the viewer judge while its job is simply to portray.It most certainly could have done without the synthesized music, however. I may have given it five stars, otherwise.And you'll have to set aside a good 4.5 hours to see it.

Scott R (ru) wrote: I'm a sucker for dachshunds.

Jenna I (nl) wrote: Blatant drug usage mixed with a sympathetic view of it's addicts makes for an interesting '55 film. I love young Sinatra in films where he plays a kind of weak guy- he's so much more believable as the weak drug slave than as a man-about-town type of rolls he takes later on. An interesting film with some interesting characters, though it never really lives up to the stylized opening/title.

Ton Q (kr) wrote: Invictus manages to flow through (some of) Mandela's life and an important rugby game to South Africa, but never feels like it focuses on either one, managing to make an enjoyable, but light, film on an important event and an important person.

Kelly K (fr) wrote: This was something else. It was unique and intense. Rooney Mara is so very talented. I was truly impressed by her character. She is intimidating and brilliant yet so very vulnerable. The plot twists in this film definitely keep you on the edge of your seat. If you won't be too uncomfortable, this film is definitely worth seeing.