Mortal Sins

Mortal Sins

A PI hired to find a killer is led to a corrupt televangelist.

A PI hired to find a killer is led to a corrupt televangelist. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


Mortal Sins torrent reviews

Carlos M (us) wrote: Kavanagh is an excellent director who cares about building a disturbing, eerie atmosphere with a superb cinematography and sound design, and the result is a terrifying movie that could have really become a classic if it weren't for its last ten minutes with such a silly, clichd twist.

Rik K (de) wrote: it's the score that really lifts this movie!!

tim w (us) wrote: was that a spoof elvis rockumentaty?is so then I upgrade to 2 stars.

shelby t (ca) wrote: Acting was absolutely horrible, camera angles were awkward, and special effects did not fit the scenes. I definitely do not recommend this movie.

Peter F (kr) wrote: It was what it was meant to be, a B-movie horrorfest, and I loved every second of it.

Juan D (jp) wrote: Okay so I disagree with the critics on this one. It's a keeper in my book - some funny stuff.

Mahesh P (br) wrote: Animations were great, story could use some work though. Instead of just having one song about Romeo's previous life, and then throwing him suddenly on the streets, Jugal could have gone into some details about that life instead of the spur of the moment thing he did. Songs were terrible except for the title song...Javed Jafferey is funny in every movie even when it's just his voice...Saif Ali Khan continues to be the best actor in bollywood. you can really feel the emotions he put into the character of Romeo, and picture his facial expressions. Kareena is average like usual.

Robert B (kr) wrote: Quills (Philip Kaufman, 2000)Philip Kaufman is a high-stakes Thoroughbred. Whereas the blue-collar nags run every week or two year-round, you see the big-name guys maybe once every three months. Kaufman, with the exception of the seventies (when he doubled his usual output), has made exactly two movies per decade since his directorial career began a half-century ago. Most of them are well worth the wait, but every once in a while he turns in something, well, less so (think Twisted here), which is one of the reasons it sometimes takes me a very long while to get round to watching a Kaufman joint. Case in point: Quills, which I have now, finally, seen fourteen years after its release. And a very good one it is, though now loaded with all of the necessary hindsight, it is perhaps quite a bit more intriguing than it would have been had I seen it in 2000.Loosely based on the last days of the life of thew Marqus de Sade, Quills gives us Sade (Shakespeare in Love's Geoffrey Rush) wheeling and dealing his way into being given writing implements and paper thanks to a progressive priest, the Abbe du Colmier (8MM's Joaquin Phoenix), who is willing to allow the Marquis a bit of what we would today call art therapy. Of course, he finds ways to get himself into increasing amounts of trouble with the asylum's upper management, largely with the help of Colmier and washerwoman Maddy LeClerc (Titanic's Kate Winslet). Ultimately, of course, there is a confrontation, and the head of the asylum (Michael Caine) starts going to greater and greater lengths to try and break Sade's will.I'm never really sure what I'm going to get from a Geoffrey Rush movie. Sometimes you get The King's Speech, other times you get Mystery Men. It should be obvious by now that Quills is much farther along the left side of that sliding scale, at least in my estimation; Joaquin Phoenix, for all his antics (and all his showing up in movies like 8MM), is a very good actor when he turns his mind to it. Winslet, of course, brightens every corner she appears in, and the trio make for a winning combination. The obvious downside to this is how clean everything is. Every time I bring up this criticism in a movie it brings to mind Fulci's Zombi 2, the medical center's disgusting griminess that lends such an air of realism to pieces of that movie. You won't find anything like that here, either in the set decoration or the depictions of the characters. The battle of wills between Sade and the good doctor at times feels like an inspirational movie rather than a fight to the death. In other words?could have been more than it is, most certainly, and without too much effort. But what we got is still well worth watching. ***

Chris V (ru) wrote: Better than the other prequels.

Chey F (ru) wrote: die ninga kids u cant defet Matt!

JD E (br) wrote: Got to give it props it was shot in Columbus.

Ram R (mx) wrote: Considering that this was shot in 1939 it was a great movie and I wish the states carried on with the train system for commuting passengers. There can't be a better way to explore this great country other than a train journey

Khaled M (us) wrote: A lot of gruesome scenes, the director wants to immerse you deeply till you can feel every breaking bone and piercing bullet.

Kayla M (au) wrote: Seriously a terrible movie. Slow-moving plot and terrible acting make this film a "must-avoid". But a single thing about it was scary, thrilling, suspenseful or otherwise. The only likeable character was Hutch, and the only enjoyable scene was the solving of the anagram. 1/10. Would neither recommend nor watch again.