You may also like
My Big Father torrent reviews
Francisco L (mx) wrote: Worst than the first... Disappointing and very predictable screenplay but of course with a good cast and great graphics. Not original the part with the taxi remember us Harry Potter on the train (Harry Potter 3), when the ship comes to the top of the water remember us Harry Potter 4 like other parts of this film that finish being a little boring too.
Jason S (us) wrote: Horrible pacing is the major downfall of this home invasion thriller. Was hoping for more a Strangers/Funny Games type of thriller and that's not what I got.
Thomas D (mx) wrote: A marvelous film whose ambitions in no way overshadow its charms.
oniverse m (us) wrote: it's a very unique modern fable.
Shane M (fr) wrote: An example that proves that making a good sequel doesn't involve using the star character, or altering him in any way. Funny and heartfelt, but the story is pretty messed up. Not a film worth watching if you purchase or rent it. But a reasonable film.
Rachel N (es) wrote: When you wish for a movie that is very different (like a story within a story) and has multiple moments breaking the 4th wall, then Stranger Than Fiction is the movie for you. Starring Will Ferrell as Harold Crick, Emma Thompson as Karen Eiffel, Maggie Gyllenhaal as Ana Pascal, Dustin Hoffman as Professor Jules Hilbert, and Queen Latifah as Karen's secretary, Penny Escher. The screenplay for the 2006 movie was written by Zach Helm and directed by Marc Forster. The story follows Harold Crick, an IRS auditor who suddenly finds himself as the subject of a narrative only he can hear; a narrative that begins to affect his entire life, from his work, to his love-interest, to his death. The movie was nominated for 15 different awards and won three different ones, including Best Original Screenplay (Zach Helm) twice. The movie was well deserving of these awards since the acting and the visuals were so well done. In this movie, it tells the story of Harold Crick, an IRS agent living his life by his wristwatch. On a particular Wednesday, things begin to change for Harold and his watch. He is assigned to evaluate the tax-delinquent baker, Ana Pascal. On that same day, he begins to hear the voice of a woman narrating his life, and he is unable to communicate with her. Harold's watch stops working and he resets it using the time given by a bystander; the voice narrates, "little did he know that this simple, seemingly innocuous act would result in his imminent death". Worried by this prediction, he consults a psychiatrist, then an expert in literature named Jules Hilbert. When Jules recognizes aspects of literature in Harold's story, he encourages Harold to identify the author, first by determining if the work is a comedy or tragedy. Karen, our pessimistic author, struggles from writer's block and is researching ways to kill her character, Harold, to complete her next book. When Karen learns that Harold experiences everything she writes, she is horrified by the thought that her books may have killed real people. Once the two meet, she tells Harold she wrote a draft of his death, but has not typed it up yet.Cinematography is an element that is used in a lot of movies, and there are a few moments in this film that use this element. In the beginning of the movie when we first meet Harold, the camera angle is in an unusual spot. The camera's view is inside of his mouth. The movie at that point was going on about Harold's habits while he brushed his teeth. Another example of this is when Karen Eiffel is going over the different ways she could kill Harold Crick. First, she imagines herself falling off a building and secondly, she imagines herself driving a car over a bridge into the river below. This element gives the art of cinematography a new artistic level. Music is always used in movies, but during this movie, the music added emotion and elements of character development or personality. When Harold first walks into Ana Pascal's bakery, there is punk music in the background, The music refers to Ana's rebellious personality. The background music gave emotion to the scene that was happening. For example, when the soft piano music plays as Harold meets Karen after reading her draft, or when the rock music plays in the background as Harold realizes that he could break the habits he created at the beginning. The whole movie was very well done and I enjoyed it very much. The film's quality is 100% worth watching. I would recommend that anyone interested in looking for literature in movies, or likes different movie stories. This is a really good movie to watch. If I was to rate this movie on different scales, it would be a four and a half star movie and reaches a liking scale of my own with an 88 out of 100.
Gabriel M (ca) wrote: spectacular performances, good proposals from the Director, moving stories. quite simply good
Frances H (au) wrote: Sorry, didn't see much point to this film. Some of the cinematography was beautiful, but otherwise, what started as a nice love story turned into a story about a hypocrite who had made plenty of mistakes himself not being able to forgive a confused younger girl for one she made.
Hampton N (us) wrote: I need to see it again...it's about nothing, and yet it's about so much! Hmm...
Pia K (de) wrote: Ehk paras Sandra Bullockin leffa, jonka oon nhnyt. Niinkin vaikeasta aiheesta kuin alkoholiriippuvuus on onnistuttu saamaan hauska elokuva. (Suom. 28 piv)
Bill G (nl) wrote: You know, I've seen episodes of the ill-conceived 1980s sitcom "Life With Lucy" that were better than this tripe. But let's put that in context: The only reason "Life With Lucy" wasn't the worst television show ever made was because of the existence of "Small Wonder." Lucy in 1974's "Mame" is kind of like dried squid in a 15-day-old salad: putrid. I've seen corpses with more joie de vivre. And as if having an arthritic Lucy wasn't bad enough, the producers thought they'd throw in Bea Arthur, too? Jesus Christ. Immediately after watching these two in the same film I had to watch "Going Ape!" to cleanse the palate. "Mame" does offer a fine performance from the inimitable yet often misunderstood Kirby Furlong, so I'll give the movie a half-star for that. Overall, I wouldn't describe this movie as a train wreck. No. It's more like the Exxon Valdez of musicals, with Lucy as the drunken Captain Joseph Hazelwood steering the whole thing on a one-way path straight to hell.
Dylan H (jp) wrote: Ok - I stumbled on this move from a magazine article, but if you take it for what it is (an early 70's skin flick) it's perfect. Don't try to find a plot or anything - there is none - and it's a little boring, but the subtle jokes are hilarious!
super c (kr) wrote: The movie was an original attempt to give a first person view for a more involved perspective of a journalist falling into a nightmare of filming an occult in the woods. But the movie itself was very low budget, slow and boring with D to C grade acting at best. The plot was just slow and no memorable lines or good in between dialogue all of the scenes in-between the action were awful filler with little importance to the progression of the story. I give it two stars, one star for trying to be original, and one star for .... I honestly cant think of a reason to give it another star. I have to give it one star. This movie wasnt good wondering what they will run into is the only reason i watched it through but the climax of the story was very weak
Iain B (gb) wrote: Good idea not really followed through
Russ B (br) wrote: 1/21/2017: A pretty decent flick. Not as good as the first two, but still interesting with good action.