Johnny McQueen, leader of a clandestine Irish organization, has been hiding in the house of Kathleen and her mother, planning a hold-up that will provide his group with the funds needed to continue its activities. During the hold-up, things go sour: Johnny is wounded, cannot make it back to the hideout, and disappears in the back-alleys of Belfast. Immediately, a large-scale man-hunt is launched, and the city is tightly covered by the constabulary, whose chief is intent on capturing Johnny and the other members of the gang. Kathleen sets out in search of Johnny. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
You may also like
Odd Man Out torrent reviews
Philip B (es) wrote: My god, they should be ashamed! This is by far the worst movie I've ever seen. And I've seen a lot of crap. Drunk high school students without money could make a better movie. The story was bad, the special effects were extremely cheap, the acting was awful. It's so cheesy I'm totally stunned.If it was made in the 60s they would atleast have had an excuse. I was hoping the entire time I watched this joke that they weren't serious about the film. But sadly I think they were.This movie will surely give me nightmares, but all for the wrong reasons...
Jonathan H (fr) wrote: It was good. I thought it was kinda slow, but it was interesting. Didn't see the ending coming until right before the end, but yet I was still surprised. I think it is good for at least a one time watch.
Cameron J (br) wrote: He's just kicking butt and taking lives, so he's pretty much the last boss you want to tick off. Man, this is one seriously crazy Canadian who must be brought to justice, thus, we have to call in a major detective to take seriously... or at least a hot chick. Well, there is some reasonable casting in this film, like Kiefer Sutherland as a... Canadian, and Ethan Hawke as... um, an art dealer. Hawke is an Austinite, so I can get his being pretentious enough to be an art dealer, but it's still trippy not seeing him or Sutherland as law enforcers of some sort, and, of course, seeing Angelina Jolie doing the detective work. D. J. Caruso might just be collecting as many stars as he would like to in this cast in order to lavish in making a more high-profile crime thriller than "The Salton Sea". Well, in most every other department, he must have lazed out, because even though this film is a much, much, much bigger commercial success than "The Salton Sea", it's not as big of a critical hit, although, in all fairness, there probably weren't enough people who saw "The Salton Sea" to provide all that accurate of a consensus. I don't know how accurate the consensus on this film is, because I kind of liked it, although I have my share of reservation, kind of like the film does when it comes to, say, exposition. There's no background to the protagonists, and although gradual exposition, or at least engaging performances, are serviceable in getting you used to the characters, there's a serious shortage on some sense of humanity amidst all of the over focusing on plot progression over nuance. More often than not, the film focuses on action, action, action, not of a combative nature, but of an investigative nature, with new natural slow-downs, which is monotonous enough without all of the fat around the edges of the plotting, backed by atmospheric dry spells which are near-dulling. The film tries livening things up with fluff which ranges from lightheartedness and a hint of humor, to somewhat overwrought action sequences, and which marks inconsistencies in a largely serious tone, while sometimes proving to be cheesy in its being near-witless and trite. Much of the film is trite, or at least simply conventional, following a formulaic path that is filled with formulaic characters and set pieces, until finding itself becoming something that a mystery thriller like this shouldn't be: predictable. The film sometimes has the audacity to all but spell out where it's heading, through contrivances that extend beyond the forced fluff, and are often directed in obvious tonal hints and manufactured happenings that get to be downright improbable, and are recurrent enough to take you out of a lot of a genuine sense of tension. The film is far from as incompetent as they say, being pretty sharp in a lot of ways, but nevertheless flimsy in a number of other ways, with no much developmental depth, or dynamicity, or momentum, and a number of inconsistencies, clichs and contrivances, thus making for a fairly inconsequential thriller that doesn't cut deep enough to be memorable, let alone stand a chance of transcending underwhelmingness. The film even flirts with mediocrity on occasion, but on the whole, it held my attention just fine, with both style and substance. This murder investigation thriller is not much of anything new, and is plenty improbable, and one has to question the shortage of humanity and nuance for the sake of forward momentum that its limited enough by flimsy storytelling, but there is always something intriguing with subject matter like this, some potential for heat in a chase that, no matter how predictable, can be fun to unravel, at least with a cast worth sticking with. Ethan Hawke often stands out in his portrayal of a distinct anxiety and fear in a witness to a horrible crime that may come back to haunt him in more than just a psychological way, and Kiefer Sutherland is pretty solid for the brief time he's present, but most everyone has some charisma in this talented cast, from which a particularly lovely Angelina Jolie also stands out, with an engaging presence that convinces you of the Illeana Scott's competence more than the development and casting choice. Jolie is, in fact, miscast in her being so much of the hot, pseudo-psychic investigator, but her and most everyone else's performance is pretty endearing, bringing some substance to a thriller that mostly thrives on style, even that of a musical nature. Now, there is a lot of conventions and some contrivances to this film's score, but only so much can be done to hold back a gifted classical mind like Philip Glass, who turns in some tasteful and intense pieces which prove to be almost as aesthetically solid as truly stunning highlights in Amir Mokri's bleak, sparingly lit cinematography, which graces the thriller with an effective and immersive visual style that does not mark a peak in style. Highlights in D. J. Caruso's directorial style include simulations of Agent Scott's deeply intense observations for clues which immerse you into the environment, but there's always some sort of flash in Caruso's utilization of creative filming and Anne V. Coates' snappy editing, particularly in the context of some forced, but solid action sequences. Caruso is better at livening things up than Jon Bokenkamp's uneven script, but what can make or break this thriller is the effectiveness of the storytelling, and even though there are pacing issues that hold Caruso's grip back, audacious, if somewhat overly disturbing imagery, and some moments of piercing thoughtfulness to storytelling, lead to genuine tension that is recurrent enough to make the plot reasonably effective. Storytelling in writing and direction is plenty messy, enough so to hold the final product quite a ways back, for all of the strengths, but there is enough entertainment value deriving from style, and engagement value deriving from heights in storytelling and acting, to make the final product fair, if flimsy. Overall, there's not much developmental depth to place humanity in the wake of all of the repetitious focus on eventfulness which still finds time to reach slow spots, forcibly broken up by jarring and trite fluff that is almost as contrived as lapses in probability which make the clichd narrative even more predictable, thus, there is a lot to challenge one's investment, and is itself challenged by an intriguing story that is carried by solid performances, score work and cinematography, and by often stylish and effective direction, enough so to make D. J. Caruso's "Taking Lives" an adequately effective thriller, in spite of its messiness. 2.5/5 - Fair
Hunter D (ru) wrote: At first glance, MY LIFE WITHOUT ME seems like another fetishization of "finding oneself" at the expense of others, however this movie is smarter and more complex than, say, Ryan Murphy's loathsome manifesto of selfishness that is EAT PRAY LOVE, as it asks tough dramatic questions with the actions of Sarah Polley's terminally ill lead, making for a beautiful experience, even if you disagree with what she does. Ryan Murphy is a "filmmaker" whose work spreads its way from television to cinema like a malignant cancer, preaching the gospel of selfishness and new-age PC values that continues the degradation of film culture. MY LIFE WITHOUT ME approaches questions posed by Murphy years later with more layers and more maturity than culture-acid like EAT PRAY LOVE, as it is about a woman who looks to "find herself" but for reasons few can fathom, even if her way of going about it indeed morally questionable. The lead character is indeed selfish, but it doesn't mean she isn't interesting or worth discussing, unlike the lead of EAT PRAY LOVE, who is hardly even worth mentioning.
Will B (ru) wrote: A huge step down from the first two... different actors... bought nothing new to the role... sadly this is a let down... trying to get the will to watch the fourth after seeing this as i wont be xpecting more :S
Julia L (it) wrote: The best thing about this film was Matt Dillon's attractiveness. Otherwise the plot was extremely strange and it didn't sit well with me. I definitely won't be remembering this one.
Joey Q (jp) wrote: Somewhere between the bad acting, horribly fake tattoos and shit plot Kevin Bacon realizes his career is now in cheesy B films that go straight to dvd.
AudreyKim H (jp) wrote: Ok...I have to admit, I like Esther Williams. Why? Although she's no Katharine Hepburn, she actually can act and her movies are always good for lighthearted entertainment, like this one. In addition, stars Peter Lawford, Ricardo Montalban (who shares sensual water ballet scenes with Williams and equally sensual dance scenes with Cyd Charisse), Jimmy Durante, and Cyd Charisse join in for the fun, along with great music from Xavier Cugat. Who could ask for anything more?
Simon H (gb) wrote: Freaks is simply a film that would never get made today. Controversial at the time which is understandable considering 90% of the cast are made of actors with physical deformities. The film does prove to be an eye opener but surprisingly is written in a way to portray the individuals in a positive light. The unfortunate individuals are often seen happy and comes across as quite nice people. You do find yourself watching with a smile as you really begin to fall for such lovable folk. The two "normal" characters in the film are portrayed as the villains and you really do begin to hate them as the film goes on.The ending does seem to create a different opinion however. Some viewers like the ending that is in place, however I felt it gave a mixed message to the characters we were enjoying. It will be down to personal opinion, but for me that ending stopped Freaks from becoming perfect in my eyes.Whether you like the ending or not, Freaks still gives a strong message now as much as it did back then. Watching it really makes you realise the views some people have on those different to them.
Krystal B (gb) wrote: Lol this the best one...
Andrea M (mx) wrote: I found the beginning to be slow but once the movie gets going it gets going in a real fun way. Enjoyed this more than I thought I would. Watched because all my favorite critics were excited about John Wick 2 and now I see why.