The wife of a wealthy industrialist finds herself caught-up in a web of intrigue & murder which was created by her own deceit. When she tries to escape the results of her actions, she too ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
The wife of a wealthy industrialist finds herself caught-up in a web of intrigue & murder which was created by her own deceit. When she tries to escape the results of her actions, she too falls victim to deception.
You may also like
Nightkill torrent reviews
Ed C (ag) wrote: Next to " Wrestling with Shadows" this is best pro wrestling documentary that I have seen. It 's pretty emotional at times, from the scenes with Mick Foley, to Terry Funk and the disturbing story of Jake Roberts, you get to see a glimpse of what pro wrestlers go through behind the scenes, it's no wonder nowadays, a lot of them drop dead like flies. This wasn't produced or censored by any wrestling company, so the truth comes out. Watch it even if you don't like wrestling. I used to watch it when I was younger and I learned a couple of things here and here. Overall its a well made documentary
Arthur P (br) wrote: Mountainous traffic-noiseless pollution-free locations is a tourist's fantasy dream come true, visually in 1080p high definition on bluray. There's more theatrical dialogue between the Federation puppet Admiral Dougherty and the face-stretched villain Ru'afo, as if there are fans out there who like fancy dialogue and less heroic action, especially very little heroics from android Data who might have stirred up fan anti-robot discrimination ;;
Zack D (fr) wrote: The perfect balance between psychological horror, and lovecraftian monsters will strike terror into your heart, wondering about the infinitely terrifying beings that exist in the universe.
Gregory C (ca) wrote: two words: snail porn. seriously though, i love shit like this. i watch "planet earth" all the time. though unlike "planet earth," which is educational, this movie is pretty much devoid of narration and the soundtrack is totally creepy. i'm slightly phobic of bugs so i watched this with a mixture of revulsion and awe.
Gina N (ca) wrote: A childhood favorite!
Anu P (ca) wrote: Matti Pellonp forever!
Jean H (es) wrote: A beautiful film carried so well by Rutger Hauer and Matthew Broderick
Sean C (de) wrote: I can never turn down a old Italian horror film. They all hold a special place in my heart. Unfortunately, some are just awful. I only heard of this movie recently because I had just seen Beyond The Door from the same director. The acting is terrible, a few of the gory death scenes made me laugh, and the guy who plays the uncle/priest was just annoying. The singing of old children's songs and how "sinister" they are got old very fast. This is nothing like the other great Italian horror filmmakers.
Aaron W (us) wrote: To quote the director of the film's final onscreen narration as he sits at a desk, regularly glancing down at the script, smoking his seventh or eight cigarette.(Drag on cigarette)There are...(wheeze)... government agencies, many responsible groups, fighting the use of chemicals in the food we eat, in the water we drink. And yet there are far too...(cough)...far too many of us who go right on taking the good way of life for granted ignoring the warnings. (Drag on cigarette) So...(cough)...let's give a little thought to making our own story... (cough, cough)...have a happy ending....(cough cough, wheeze, cough, cough, cough....smile)More poignant words were never spoken in a film in which a Christian Nam vet gets coerced into smoking some weed, eats an experimental turkey, passes out and hallucinates that he's a turkey monster that goes around killing heroin addicts.
Private U (fr) wrote: I mainly like this movie for Julie's "Three Guesses" number. Overall, it's okay, but really I watch it out of loyalty to Julie Andrews.
Bryan C (de) wrote: The film is not quite sure how it wants to depict the story and never settles on a style and Gerard Butler was an awful choice. However it is still a must see for Phantom fans who want to see the music and characters on film.
Rob W (de) wrote: I can appreciate this film for it's accomplishment at the time. It pulled off the time period it was set in and it was interesting to see Cary Grant so young in it. The story was hard to follow at times in the sense that the conflict was not really present till the very end of the 2nd act/ beginning of the 3rd act. Though having almost all of it take place in one spot also takes skill so I admire it. It gets three stars for really not being bad. It gets the other half star for being able to accomplish what it did for a film of its time and because it has Cary Grant. An okay film but if you don't enjoy Cary Grant or older films than you do not need to watch it.
Stephen D (ca) wrote: When you go out to dinner, and you can choose anything between a Michelin star restaurant or take-out, you nonetheless realize there's value in each choice, wherever your choice happens to land. I've read a lot of the reviews on Bloodsport, and I think many people are expecting Michelin star food at a road-side food truck. Each movie has it's own niche. Not all movies are good, and not all movies are good at what they do. Bloodsport is one of those movies which must be given context before you see it, and most importantly before you critique it.If you're expecting a Bogart, Brando, or DeNiro performance, with a Lucas, Spielberg, Cameron, or Kubrick vision, then you're already set up for disappointment. If you think Van Damme is going to deliver an Oscar, then honestly, you really have no business being a critic that's actually being paid to write. Just like everything else in life, context is often the whole enchilada.This movie is a debut film for a martial-artist, turned actor, not the other way around. Van Damme, despite his critics, was actually a well-accomplished martial-artist, that happened to be good looking, and also possessed some charisma. Another point that I think really gets lost in the fold, is that if you have zero appreciation for martial-arts, the mental and physical training, the spirituality of the art, and the metaphysical properties of the art when practiced at the highest level, then this film will simply fall on your deaf ears and blind eyes.There is something sincere and authentic about this film that resonates with me each time I watch it. I feel this movie knows it's not just about the fighting, but also the mental and spiritual side of martial-arts. If it feels a bit Hollywood, that's because it is. This is not a training video on martial-arts, it's a big-screen movie, so it has to be entertaining to all, and not just the martial-arts enthusiasts. To me, the acting is irrelevant. Bloodsport does it's absolute best in trying to capture the essence of world-class martial-arts in the competitive arena. Statistically, the fighting scenes comprise a fairly small section of the film, although the scenes are memorable. The film is really about a guy honoring his shidoshi (trainer and mentor) while he (the shidoshi) is on his death bed. The significance does not lie simply in someone going to fight full-contact to honor someone. The significance rather, is contained in the fact that Dux was not Japanese, yet became a master of something inherently sacred to the Japanese culture. The film really is about transcendence across cultural boundaries. Van Damme may be awkward in many things, but the seriousness never wavers when the martial-arts are concerned. There is an intense focus going on, that captivates the audience, unless of course, you're still waiting for foi gras on that street taco.This film is all about contrasts, yet bridging that gap in the end. The foil for that whole concept, aside from Dux, is the guide Mr. Luu (the guide into Kowloon City). The guy is Chinese, through and through, yet he speaks english with correct colloquialisms, and is very in tune with Western culture; and that is what makes his character so memorable. He's a hodgepodge of cultures that identifies with many. However, despite Dux's clear mastery of martial-arts, given his "Dim Mak" rendition and his fighting prowess, he never oversteps with hubris. That is a critical point for the films' significance (much like Luu's). Dux masters an art from the East, but still remains humble in that mastery. That is why this film carries significance, and is in fact a quality film. Bloodsport knows what it is, and never tries to pretend it's something else. Van Damme is unapologetic, because he stays within the realm he knows, which is why the training, fighting, and meditation scenes are always so serious and sincere. There is a clear reverence for martial-arts throughout the film. Ironically enough, a western film taking on an eastern art, purposefully makes fun of those whom think martial-arts is all about the flash of knowing how to beat someone up (with the Jackson character). Jackson is a "beer monster" (to reference another review), that is crude and untamed. Although Jackson is a tough opponent in the arena because of his size and the twinkle of crazy in his eyes, he ultimately loses because of his lack of humility and honor for the martial-arts. He could easily have beaten Chong Li, and probably fought Dux for the title, but-for his premature celebration when fighting Chong Li. Thus, the movie reinforces it's original stance of a reverence for all the elements of martial-arts, and not just the fighting aspect. It is this idea that makes Bloodsport such a good movie, for what it's trying to be.The true value and merit of this film is exacerbated by juxtaposing the rest of Van Damme's career. Van Damme tries to become more of an actor, and less of a martial-artist. For obvious reasons, his career deviates from the core theme of Bloodsport. Despite his staggering commercial success, Van Damme's career is probably more on par with the overall critic's rating of Bloodsport. I applaud Van Damme for his overall success, however, the rest of his movies, outside of Kickboxer (just the first one), were mostly laughable. Bloodsport however, is an exception. It's not a coincidence Van Damme's best work was his earliest. The people who don't like this film probably think martial-arts is all about the fighting. If it was all about the fighting, Bloodsport would be an action film, and not a martial-arts film. I don't blame them for that, but why bother watching/reviewing a martial-arts film, if you have such a superficial grasp on the topic? One does not have to rationalize everything about this movie to appreciate it, they simply need to calibrate their expectations to what the movie set out to do. Unlike many other action films, Bloodsport really emphasizes and reemphasizes the complete scope of martial-arts, and not just the glamorized fight scenes. This is what sets Bloodsport apart from most, and why this film has such a divide between the critics score and the audience score. Bloodsport is not just a guilty indulgence such as Roadhouse. There is substance here, you just need to know where it's placed, and not where the low-hanging fruit is typically found.
Pamela H (jp) wrote: This movie has a lot of suspense, mystery and a little morality. It speaks on the attitueds of LA PD in the early years. Really well casted, too!
Kenny N (de) wrote: Turn your brain COMPLETELY off before viewing, and you might just have a good time with some of the sillier moments. If you're looking for a SERIOUS study of abuse and the lengths people will go to escape it, you've come to the wrong place.
Jason G (br) wrote: This one's a bit strange...It's a somewhat "typical" late 80's horror flick with a requisite amount of garish, bloody violence and an almost ridiculous amount of (again... 80's prerequsite) tits and ass.The story is interesting enough... taking the classic tale of Jekyll and Hyde and melding it with the true life events of the "Jack the Ripper" murders. The premise being that the murders were committed by our respectable "Doctor by day" Jekyll, in his nightly tirades as Hyde.Anthony Perkins makes the whole thing actually quite watchable. He succeeds with both roles quite well and looks like he had more fun than he'd had in years playing the evil, sexually and violently disturbed Hyde.I've always felt that Perkins is a far better actor than a lot of people give him credit for and he's far, far better than this film deserves. EDGE OF SANITY suffers in a lot of areas but for my part... It's biggest failings are in the painfully obvious visual dichotomy set up by the costume and set designers. Dr. Jeckyl parades about by day in a fairly authentic Victorian period England. The costumes and settings are convincing. Ladies in gowns... Gentlemen in fitted suits and hats and walking sticks of the era. The interiors are all actually quite well appointed in dark, rich woods and time-appropriate decor and the exteriors are all horse and buggy on cobblestoned streets.And then night falls....Suddenly, everybody's decked out in neon and spandex with strange, modern hairstyles (for the 80's anyway)... One prostitute can actually be seen wearing a Madonna-style "BOY" belt-buckle."Victorian era" by day.... "Flock of Seagulls" video by night.... Certainly the costume and set department are not the only ones to blame... Director Gerard Kikoine must be held accountable as well.EDGE OF SANITY loses points for these inconsistensies in particular. The film is filled with too many anachronisms to be ignored and it's quite jarring because of it. Maybe Kikoine was trying for a particular "vision" and purposely combined these two "eras".... but for me....blending the two styles fails rather spectacularily and detracts from the overall.The cinematography is notable... (believe it or not!) EDGE OF SANITY might surprise you with it's interesting framing and nicely composed shots..... Director of Photography, Tony Spratling has flashes of brilliance in the film that lends it just enough of a "polished" and "finished" look to almost raise it above the standard of your common, late 80's slasher movie, but ultimately, (and unfortunately).... that's really all EDGE OF SANITY ends up being.So close to being... better.... (But not a total waste of time either...)