Two men want to escape from East Germany (under Communist rule) but they will only go if they can take their families with them. Based on a true story.
You may also like
Night Crossing torrent reviews
Greg W (au) wrote: all styar cast is the fuel that makes this period comedy go let's see percom sounds good
Jesse O (ag) wrote: I never knew that Donnie Yen and Jackie Chan had ever appeared in the same movie together. Maybe they worked in the same movie when Donnie Yen was starting out, like Jackie Chan worked on some Bruce Lee films when he was just starting out in the kung fu film business. But as far as both being high-profile martial artists, this might have been their first interaction with each other. And it's shame that their fight scene doesn't really go on that long, since it was really good for how long it did last. And another thing, Donnie Yen's english is excellent. So much better than Jackie Chan's or Jet Li's, so it's kind of surprising that, again, he never really made the successful transition to the western market that Jet Li and Jackie Chan made. I will say that while I like Donnie Yen, a lot, I don't think he was as charismatic as Jackie Chan. Or even Jet Li. So he probably would've been stuck playing secondary roles, instead of lead ones. But that's about it on that end, this movie really is more of the same as Shanghai Noon. It's the same basic concept of the odd couple doing silly things that found Jackie a lot of success on the Rush Hour franchise and, as mentioned, Shanghai Noon. I don't wanna say it's the same movie, like Ride Along 2 was, because I felt that this was still better and more inspired than Ride Along 2, but the fact of the matter is that it isn't ever as fun as the first flick ended up being, a flick that I liked far more than what Jackie is most known for, at least in the U.S, and that's Rush Hour 1, 2 and 3. Though, to be fair, I haven't seen the first two RH movies in quite a while, so I'd need to revisit those films in order to be able to compare them. I do remember Rush Hour 3 kinda sucking, so I don't think I'd ever need, or want, to watch that flick again. But, really, Shanghai Knights ends up suffering from what this type of sequel usually suffers from. It repeats the same jokes as before with not nearly the same effect as in the first one. Some of them still work and I still think Jackie's team's fight choreography remains strong. Jackie has always liked involving props or objects in his fights and this one is no different. It's not even about the fighting at points, it's just about how can Jackie tie up different people in different ways or how he can beat them up with actually using his fists or feet. Either that or paying tribute to Singin' in the Rain with a sequence where the fight looks more like a dance, easily the highlight of the film. But there's also this weirdly audience-pandering segments, where they show like Jack the Ripper being murdered by Chon's sister. Or they have Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, when he was a detective, at least how this film tells it, as a character that helps out Chon and Roy in their quest. Or how Roy allows Arthur to use the Sherlock Holmes name for his new detective novel. Or Charlie Chaplin being the little street urchin that they come across several times. It's sort of like how Assassin's Creed, in a convoluted fashion, introduces real life people into their games. It's sort of like a 'oh, look at that' type thing. It doesn't really serve any purpose other than to make you think 'that's cool' and not cause it actually makes sense within the context of the film. There's also lines about how Roy invested in the Zeppelin and how he wouldn't invest in cars, because that's never gonna catch on. Again, those are just designed to get a reaction. It's an easy way to get a reaction, so I just found these to be really lazy attempts to pander to the audience instead of writing actual jokes. That really did end up hurting the movie quite a bit, which, while average, was somewhat fun thanks to Jackie's and Owen's chemistry. But this pandering really took a lot out of the movie. And, while I found the film to be well-paced, it also feels like it shouldn't have been as long as it was. We've already established the characters, just hit the ground running and have the film be over in 90-95 minutes, tops. That's really not the biggest complaint, which I have already mentioned, but it is worth mentioning. I guess I don't really have much else to say, if you liked Shanghai Noon, but weren't in love with it, then this won't really blow your mind. If you loved the first film, and want more of the same, then this is what the doctor ordered. Jackie and Owen are still fun together, but the movie is nothing more than average.
Greg S (it) wrote: :A series of linked stories following the owners of a dress that always seems to bring bad luck to its wearer. Well-written, gloomy, quirky; but despite the linking device and several recurring characters, the stories lack a unifying thematic thread, beyond pessimism.
Adriana V (nl) wrote: By far my favorite movie--it's good, silly fun. Beware, though, because it is a true children's film and requires suspension of disbelief! Most people think it's stupid, but I love it.
Kim D (br) wrote: It has been debated whether or not the makers of Final Destination ripped off this obscure eighties flick. The similarities are obvious: A) A character avoids death by horrible plane crash. B) Death never leaves the job unfinished. C) Death is a real jerk. In terms of style, the two films are quite separate creatures, though. Final Destination is much more pyrotechnical and elaborate in its violence. Sole Survivor, however, establishes and eerie atmosphere and builds suspense more elegantly. Moreover, it manages its jump scares much better than its successor. Clever editing, tightly framed compositions, and a stand out performance by Anita Skinner elevate this unjustly forgotten horror film beyond its meagre budget, and fans of the genre would do well to check it out.
Paul D (ag) wrote: Solid enough navy war movie, with a convincing performance of a captain with conviction from Jeff Chandler.
Jason C (es) wrote: First of all the comedy part of this movie is non existent. I laughed not one time, not even close to a laugh. The cultural points seemed stereotypical and offensive to every race with how they made the points and who they used to make those points. I don't know what the critics saw to score it so high but it is a mediocre acted and executed movie.
Ben R (br) wrote: This movie brings back such great early 90's cable tv memories. If you're a wrestling fan or a sci-fi cheesy movie fan...you could do alot worse than this.