Now We've Seen It All!

Now We've Seen It All!

An advertising photographer (Francois) has agreed to sell the poetic script of one of his friends to a porn-maker without his knowledge. But Christine, Francois' fiance, doesn't want him to...

  • Rating:
    4.00 out of 5
  • Length:100 minutes
  • Release:1976
  • Language:French
  • Reference:Imdb
  • Keywords:pornographer,  

An advertising photographer (Francois) has agreed to sell the poetic script of one of his friends to a porn-maker without his knowledge. But Christine, Francois' fiance, doesn't want him to... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechers

Now We've Seen It All! torrent reviews

Dylan P (au) wrote: Louder Than Words is a poetic story about love, loss and redemption. It chronicles the life of the Fareri's, an affluent family who tragically lose their daughter in the rarest of circumstances. The film tells the story of a family that triumphs through tragedy and through all the adversity that comes with losing a child, emerges on the other end helping more than they could have ever imagined. David Duchovny plays the part of John Fareri, a grieving father that desperately wants to find a way for his daughter, Maria, to be remembered. Not only does he strive to preserve her memory, he wants to fulfill a wish she expressed in class..."for the health and well-being of the world's children".The Fareri family then takes on the difficult task of raising money for a state-of-the-art pediatric hospital. The movie chronicles each family members' plight to cope with Maria's death. This is a film that not only makes us feel good but provides a healthy reminder of how one's family can rise from the depths of sorrow and do something that can change the world.

Luke B (de) wrote: Divoff is out and our new Djinn loses his charisma, sense of humor, and imagination. You felt as though Divoff's Djinn could come up with the weirdest deaths, these ones are pretty basic. One man asks for the two women he most desires to love him. They end up just scratching him to death. It confused me. One great opportunity has a guy say "Blow me!" We all know what our previous Djinn would have done. AT least this time the protagonist is more likable, but we don't see these films for the leading lady. It's similar, run of the mill stuff, but less gory and less fun.

Lovro H (ag) wrote: Exorcist: The Beginning is a prequel set before the original movie and we follow Father Merrin on his mission in Cairo, Egypt where his job is to find an object hidden in a Catholic church buried under ground, but unearthing the church also brought back an evil that's been hiding in it. The story I thought to be quite interesting and amusing, although it becomes quite ridiculous nearing the end and it's hard to focus on everything that's going on. I really liked the atmosphere of the movie which reminded me a lot of some sort of a mixture between the Raiders of the Lost Ark & The Temple of Doom. It had a cool adventure feel to it which made the movie different from the rest of the series. But, it's not scary. Sure, there's lots of blood and gore and disturbing imagery, but it's never handled that well to be effective. The only scene that got to me was the birth of a stillborn baby covered in maggots, which was more disgusting than scary, but nevertheless disturbing. Some attempts at being disturbing were actually a bit funny. There's a scene where a guy kills himself by cutting his throat with a glass shard and that should be quite disturbing, but the way it's filmed and acted out was quite a failure and it was more awkward than anything else. The direction of the movie isn't bad at all, there are some really cool shots. The acting was great. I really liked Stellan Skarsgard's performance as Father Merrin, but the kid who played Joseph was quite bad. There are scenes where it felt like he was acting in some sort of a school play, rather than a movie. Where the movie failed once more were the special effects. The CGI looks terrible. It made scenes which should've been scary, awkward. There''s a scene where two boys get attacked by hyenas and the animation is just distracting. Also, the ending is a mess. Not only does the CGI in it look awful, but the overall big fight is a bit anticlimactic. All in all, a mediocre sequel/prequel with some interesting ideas and great acting that is brought down by its ridiculous plot, distracting CGI and the overall movie not being scary.

Tara T (us) wrote: i hate mischa barton

Tom j (nl) wrote: Just fantastic, loved the whole movie

Larry S (it) wrote: Fun but adult 80's teen comedy drama. It was fun all these years later to see Rob Lowe, Andrew McCarthy and John Cusak as teens.

Bill B (ru) wrote: Just gave this a re-watch this afternoon, and I stand by my original assessment: As with the original, it's an okay flick, though the look of the vampires owes a great deal to the Wolfman, what with the extra hair and heavy make-up.Pam Grier is radiant as always...Possibly worth a rental or a watch on cable.

Valeri I (kr) wrote: I can say only that I don't like much the movie and his ending and that is only my opinion. Otherwise it's really good made. And there's some logical things that can be shown for reasoning of the story and the last actions or middle a tions in the movie.

Byron B (kr) wrote: Hilarious! It deserved all the Oscars it got. Exceptional chemistry between Gable and Colbert. They play a down-on-his-luck reporter and a spoiled heiress. Frank Capra's picture became the first screwball comedy. Coming from poverty row studio, Columbia, both of the stars thought they were making a terrible movie. Now, it is recognized as possessing iconic dialogue and scenes that bring images of Loony Tunes to mind. Specifically, this film inspired Bugs Bunny's personality.