You may also like
Nothing Is Impossible torrent reviews
Amanda M (kr) wrote: In terms of action, adventure and cinematography it does step it up but the first one hit the balance so well that it's hard to step it up without leaning to one side of the scale. It's still a good time because of the bromance that is Lawney and also visually, it looks really good. But if you want something closer to the target in terms of a Sherlockian, Victorian London adventure you should check out the first
Jennifer T (ca) wrote: wtf?! katt williams really disappointed with this one. terrible, unfunny stuff.
Dan D (ca) wrote: compelling, provacative, and grisly informative, Taxi to the Dark Side is an intriguing and distrubing look into real-life events.
Gareth R (us) wrote: Magicians has plenty going for it. There's a popular comedy double act at the height of their powers; a script by the writers of a hit sitcom, featuring that very double act; and a wealth of recognisable comedy talent in the wings. It should be excellent. But it isn't. Not that Magicians is some kind of trainwreck. It's a perfectly serviceable comedy with occasional big laughs and more frequent little ones. Merely, for a variety of reasons, it never truly ignites. Apart from occasional flirtations with really black comedy, it's sort of affably harmless. It's about a magic double act (David Mitchell and Robert Webb) who, four years after a disastrous falling-out, decide to re-team for a highly publicised magic tournament. It's at this point the script makes its big mistake: they decide to compete separately. Since the whole appeal of Magicians is seeing Mitchell and Webb in a film together, it's absolutely mad to separate them for the majority of it. Their lack of interaction makes their own individual scenes largely fizzle. Despite one romantic sub-plot each to keep them busy, they're just not that dynamic by themselves - although the serious underwriting of Jessica Hynes as Mitchell's would-be love interest is partly to blame. (The script does at least poke fun at their rather thin attraction, and at some of the cliches that crop up in the course of it. Still, it might have been better just to dump the cliches altogether.) There are a few gems. Peter Capaldi is invaluable as the tournament's embittered organiser, and Darren Boyd is pitifully hilarious as Webb's over-invested agent. Also Mitchell and Webb are on good form, because of course they are: Mitchell is particularly good when supposedly "conquering" his fear of flying, and Webb, perhaps the stronger actor of the two, seems tragically torn about his career's descent into phoney clairvoyeancy. The emotional connection between the two doesn't work as well as it should, nor the story of their separation and ultimate reunion, but then that's just the result of splitting them up. Obviously they're not going to resolve a lot of conflicts or have much chemistry, being so often in different rooms. Magicians is more hit than miss, but it's undeniably disappointing given the comic pedigrees involved. It's more of a tentative step towards Hollywood than an outright invasion. Better luck next time.
Memae I (ca) wrote: powerful story with some dramatic, emotion indicing scenes. not bad at all.
Andrew M (us) wrote: Despite it being a comedy, there's something rather scary about Wag the Dog. A sort of Dr. Strangelove-esque satire mixed with a comedic behind-the-scenes look at the filmmaking process, Barry Levinson's film clearly isn't meant to be taken too seriously, but is oddly truthful in many regards. It's strangely plausible that politicians would be willing to go through such convoluted means of propaganda to secure their spot in an election (or secure someone else's loss), and in that regard, this satire is truly hard-hitting. Of course, it's a comedy first and foremost, and like Dr. Strangelove, it manages to deliver numerous memorable moments with a kind of subtlety that really strengthens them. Perhaps the film overstay its welcome as the third act devolves into bonkers territory, but it's mostly engaging and moves at a nice pace. Dustin Hoffman and Robert De Niro lead the show with charismatic and entertaining performances: any scenes where they get to interact and bounce off one another's jokes are some of the finest in the film. The likes of Anne Heche, Willie Nelson, Kirsten Dunst, and William H. Macy round out the cast, and each have memorable moments of their own. It's an underrated little film, and anyone who finds the premise interesting and enjoys this satirical sense of humor entertaining will surely get a kick out of Wag the Dog.
Jacob B (fr) wrote: Boasting beautiful hand-drawn animation, catchy musical numbers, amazing voice acting and tons of drama and humour, The Lion King is not only one of the best Disney films to date but is also the rare animated film that can be truly appreciated by all ages from both kids and adults.
Richard C (ca) wrote: What a psycho director. See this.
Joe H (de) wrote: Ugh... wow.... Well *clears throat*... This was a movie I've been interested in seeing for a couple years, now, ever since I heard the movie's main title from the score by Michael Small. Never knew what the movie was about, all I knew was it had to do with Africa. Then yesterday I found out it was produced by Andrew G. Vajna & Mario Kassar (producers of the first three "Rambo" films), and I had just posted on Facebook that I had yet to go wrong with an Andrew G. Vajna movie. Well this film brought that idea to an end. A fairly interesting movie, to be sure. It's one of those brutally realistic travel-brutal-foreign-land movies, as in lots of things that make you cringe, like physical injuries due to traveling, animals, insects, etc. And the acting was pretty good. But... I don't know... I just, for some reason, could not, for the life of me, connect with the main characters and their goal (seeking the source of the Nile). I couldn't understand their 'obsession' over it, and because of that I just couldn't really appreciate the movie or 'appreciate'/understand the friendship-conflict in the latter half of the film. [Spoilers ahead] But the thing that just completely befuddled me was the fact that, when Speke learned of his OTHER friend's betrayal in lying about Burton... Speke doesn't run to Burton and explain everything. Instead he goes on being prideful and angry with Burton (for a reason I couldn't understand), and then dies while hunting at the end of the film before any clearing up of the misunderstandings could be accomplished. And I actually couldn't tell whether shooting himself with his own gun was on PURPOSE, or an ACCIDENT. All I know is, I'm getting very tired of watching movies where the main characters commit suicide at the end (having just watched "Robin & Marian" last week). So I'm sure it probably is a good movie... I just couldn't connect with it and therefore could not appreciate it.
Ari S (au) wrote: The 3rd installation of Indiana Jones is arguably the best of the bunch. The addition of Sean Connery playing Henry Jones Sr. was perfect casting! The story line and pursuit of the Holy Grail is nothing short of amazing. The banter between father and son on this holy adventure makes the film more interesting and over the top entertaining. Spielberg brings it home with this one and so much fun all around.
Bruce B (ru) wrote: A 1980 Slasher movie that has Drive-In written all over it. 5 young people take a camper into the mountains of California only to stumble upon a man running thru the woods claiming his buddy has been murdered. Does this turn them back, nope, even after park ranger George Kennedy tells them not to go up on the mountain, but one of the young people hold a deed to the property and he is going. So begins a want to be Jason running around the mountain killing people. Some beautiful scenes of 2 beautiful women of the 1980 era, Jamie Rose who we see topless shots of while in the lake and a got more beautiful as she grew older Deborah Benson. Its not the best slasher movie, might have been top notch in 1980 but I can only give it a 3 star rating today.
Shawn W (fr) wrote: amazing piece of art!
Matthew G (ag) wrote: Sword of the Beast tells the tale of fugitive samurai Gennosuke (Mikijiro Hira). Fleeing from his pursuers after he slays his clan counselor, he meets Gundayu (Takeshi Kato), a penniless farmer, who reveals his get-rich-quick scheme to poach gold from the shogun's mountain. Gennosuke is intrigued and decides to join Gundayu, but the two find they're not the only ones after the gold. A pack of bandits is already hot on the trail; meanwhile, master swordsman Jurata Yamane (Go Kato) and his attractive wife Taka (Shima Iwashita) are holed up in a shack, where they've been panning a mountain stream for some time and have accumulated a formidable sum of gold. Inevitably, this is all a recipe for bloodshed and, as the blades flash, we learn more about Gennosuke and how he was betrayed by his clan. Actually the plot is quite convoluted for a film with such a short runtime. Sword of the Beast is my first Hideo Gosha film and, after all the hype I've heard, I must confess myself disappointed, especially considering Sword of the Beast is his most well-known film outside Japan. It hardly seemed original either. The pursuits, the gold, the clans-isn't that a pretty good description of Akira Kurosawa's 1958 masterpiece The Hidden Fortress? Well, unfortunately, Sword of the Beast couldn't hold half a candle to the likes of The Hidden Fortress. I had a number of problems with this film. Firstly, the sword fights could be missed if you so much as blink at the wrong moment, which doesn't make for very good entertainment. Aren't samurai films supposed to have a little more action than this? The abrupt ending also harms this film, though I can't deny feeling a small amount of relief because I was finding the whole experience more than tedious. Unfortunately, Sword of the Beast didn't satisfy my appetite for a good jidaigeki, but I haven't given up on Hideo Gosha. Sword of the Beast was a competent enough film for a sophomoric effort and there's certainly the potential here for something much better. Let's just hope I enjoy Goyokin (1969), Onimasa (1982), or The Geisha (1983) more than I enjoyed this one.
Alan Z (mx) wrote: A wonderful family film full of tenderness, beauty and inspiration. It is hard not to cry if you give up to feelings too easily, specially if you see "Lassie Come Home". It isn't only for children, it is for those young of heart who expect life to be wonderful. A movie is good when happens to be heart-pounding and touching like this one. Simply wonderful!
Alexander K (nl) wrote: A heart-pounding modern-day Western.
Laura J (jp) wrote: Awesome! Role model for fathers!
Tommie G (it) wrote: Ignorant illuminati shit
Jeff D (ru) wrote: Pretty average by Chuck Jones' standards.
Borhan K (kr) wrote: Single Mum's Club is a Tyler Perry movie with class and heart. This is a fun movie that tells us the trials and tribulations of single mum's parenting and how their kids actions at school brings these beautiful strong women together.I found this movie to be very good and empowering to women and to teach men how to really treat their women in their lives and not treat them as ownership but to treat them as a honour and privilege to have special women in their lives.The best thing about this Tyler Perry movie is that it crosses the colur bonds and culture divide and teaches us we are all the same we all face the same issues in life and need family friends to support us no matter what our colour background and financial status is,The movie is PG and maybe suitable for the older kids 14 and above.