You may also like
London Bridge torrent reviews
Adrianna A (es) wrote: I WAS HOPING THE I WOULD FINALLY GET TO WATCH A MOVIE THAT DIDNT' MAKE ME FUCKING SUICIDAL. BUT HOLY MOLY WAS I WRONG. THIS PIECE OF SHIT MOVIE IS PROBABLY THE WORST THING TO EVER PENETRATE MY UNFORTUNATE EYEBALLS. I WOULD RATHER HAVE KILLER BEES INJECTED DIRECTLY INTO MY ANUS OVER AND OVER AGAIN FOR ALL OF ETERNITY THAN WATCH THIS PIECE OF SHIT MADE-FOR-TV-GOUGE-MY-EYEBALLS-OUT-IN-HORROR PILE OF ELEPHANT FECES EVER AGAIN
Gaurav A (jp) wrote: Great movie. Entertaining and loved the girl from Delhi.
George G (ru) wrote: gets increasingly disgusting very weird but I still enjoyed it because its so bad its hilarious.
Doug G (ru) wrote: This film starts slowly, but ultimately it succeeds in presenting some real issues related to lifestyle and values. Those who came of age during the era of the "counterculture" will find much food for thought in the lives and fortunes of the extended family of pot-growing hippies portrayed here. The plot is predictable, but the characters ring authentic and the setting is spectacular. Worth a look.
Stephen C (au) wrote: Exciting British political movie which packs a dramatic punch and never fails to engage your interest when dealing with its subject matter. Gabriel Byrne is excellent as a journalist who begins to uncover a sinister political plot involving a disgraced minister ,the KGB and a Norfolk airforce base. What helps the film is the supporting cast including Denholm Elliott as a boozy hack who uncovers the mystery and Greta Sacci as an able helper to Byrnes cause. The director David Drury also gives you a feel for a pre computer press office with a smoky atmosphere and boozy lunches in the corridors of power. The plot does get a little tangled in places ,but iguess that was the general idea of the film ,it also predates the brilliant Edge of Darkness TV series in dealing with shady political dealings. A finely polished gem and well worth a second glance
Thee Chad S (ca) wrote: Another cult classic off the list. Weird. Lots of grunting, oddly misplaced nudity and shaved lions with glued on teeth to depict saber toothed tigers. Fun way to kill some treadmill running. Enjoy on Netflix Instant.
David C (ru) wrote: "Excalibur" is a cautionary case of overreaching. I refer to the film itself, not to the story it tries to tell. It seems to be an attempt to radically condense the whole Arthurian cycle, as transmitted by the 15th-century knight Sir Thomas Malory, into a single film, but that very long, overstuffed, barely-linear, beautiful mess of a text defies adaptation. By the standards of modern taste its dialogue is too baldly moralistic, its action too repetitive and predictable. It is nevertheless an enduring work because the basic theme of the tale-our desire to create a perfect society despite our irrepressible personal imperfections-and the romance and magic of the setting are still appealing. "Excalibur" understands the source text on more than a surface level, and clearly tries to engage with it in an artful way, but it is undone by a lack of conceptual grounding and an execution that is as poor as it is audacious.In trying, haltingly, to center the story on the famous sword, the movie preferences an inanimate object, no more than a McGuffin really, over the human characters. The first act provides characterizations of Uther, Arthur, Lancelot, and others only by proxy, through the tenor of their shouting about the sword and the way they behold it as it glows in an oversaturated green aura. The acting is far below the standards that some of the stars, including Gabriel Byrne, Liam Neeson, and Patrick Stewart, would later set for themselves, which suggests that their spastic line deliveries are intentional. Nicol Williamson as Merlin is the worst offender, even more comically absurd than John Cleese's "Tim" in Monty Python's comparatively sophisticated riff on the legend. The technique of overacting can work to create a sense of heightened reality, but in this case it comes off as a silly affectation. Only Helen Mirren, as Arthur's malevolent sister, turns in a controlled performance of a quality generally recognized as good. As the movie progresses, its focus remains more or less on the sword, which is shoehorned into the romances between Lancelot and Guinevere and Guinevere and Arthur in a way that owes little to the medieval texts. Its trumped-up significance overshadows their scenes without adding to them; by devoting vague words to the subject of Excalibur, opportunities are missed to delve more deeply into the socioreligious significance of Arthur's kingdom and the inner worlds of the people who populate it.The sword, however, has no bearing on the Holy Grail portion of the film, which therefore feels tangential and ultimately irrelevant despite being the most creatively-staged episode in the production. Here the script engages with the ancient legend of the impotent king whose land is barren. The reference and some of the imagery used to underline is is appreciated, but it is little more than a reference, neither scrutinized for its significance nor linked to the rest of the loose script. The macabre trippiness of this part of the Malory text is on vivid display through dream sequences and a grotesque hanging tree. Here if nowhere else in the movie, the special effects that are superimposed in bright, artificial colors on top of washed out sets and landscapes seem appropriate instead of unnecessary and frankly shoddy."Excalibur" is a film for Arthur aficionados who are willing to look past its awkwardness, excesses, and digressions to appreciate its good intentions and kernels of good ideas.
Beth C (us) wrote: Weird movie. But like the stars in it.
Mark L (kr) wrote: Culturally interesting as an early 'teen movie'.
Eric H (ru) wrote: Masterful. One of the most interesting and terrifying films ever. So atmospheric, Alien will stay with you for years.
Tim R (it) wrote: A vampire flick with George Clooney guarantees a great time!
Brian V (de) wrote: Awful. While full of amazing stunts, it couldn't detract from a boring story, an unconvincing villain, and no chemistry between Bond and any of the "Bond Girls" selected for the film. Its difficult to even remember what the film was about when over.