Once a Year

Once a Year

A man and a woman meet once a year in different hotel rooms. Their passionate love affair has been going on for 30 years. But this year things have happened in their lives, things that might change everything.

  • Rating:
    4.00 out of 5
  • Length:81 minutes
  • Release:2012
  • Language:Swedish
  • Reference:Imdb
  • Keywords:sex in a hotel,  

A man and a woman meet once a year in different hotel rooms. Their passionate love affair has been going on for 30 years. But this year things have happened in their lives, things that might change everything. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


Once a Year torrent reviews

Brad S (jp) wrote: An interesting premise with some decent performances, but on the whole it's uneven and I couldn't fully get behind it. Some interesting scenes though, worth a watch and I always get a laugh from Chris O'Dowd.

Jenn M (br) wrote: For a low budget sort of Indie film, this really wasn't bad.Based on a true story, this film follows two friends who go from nobodies to running a very lucrative drug business by smuggling over the Canadian border. something that happens multiple times a day, I'm sureThe acting was decent, I wasn't disappointed by bad casting or bad acting, even the dialogue was good. Would I watch this again? Probably not. I got what I needed out of it

William S (ca) wrote: Weird Japanese movie. I liked it, but it's no way my favorite Japanese fantasy film. The film's interesting and the cinematography was saturated and beautiful. It drags though because of dialog.

Joshua C (de) wrote: If you love hip-hop or don't know anything about it other than what the media displays you need to watch this film. This film could have easily been a lobby for the supremacy of b-boyin', but instead it was a realistic look at the art and a call of all in the hip-hop community (specifically rappers) to bring the elements back together.

Erin H (it) wrote: this is my favorite christmas movie ever

Brady C (nl) wrote: Kinda disappoiting, but some funny parts

The Critic (es) wrote: A surprisingly enjoyable supernatural thriller, with pretty good performances from its leads, that is let down by a weak conclusion.

Luc L (gb) wrote: Fair comedy but I expected much more.

Mike T (us) wrote: I loved it for what it was ... a very shocking and strange bizarre and somewhat clever and funny spoof of an already bizarre and strange genre, in which there was a lot of very smarmy gags and stuff that went way over my head. Linda Blair gives the viewer a blurry sense of "is it a dream or is it reality" while The Priest is very classy and he never fudges a line or misses a trick. With the supporting characters all doing great work, back in 1990, that was rare. Sometimes people who are doing this kind of work will make the movie worse or cause problems. I am very very surprised at the kind of great things people will do in order to get some work done, I just don't get it. It's just a movie and the work done here was unreal but I don't think the same way as these guys or any movie guys, they do such a good quality job and for what??? it never ends. People breaking their necks for these "great works" and you see 12 year olds buying into it now, acting like a 37 year old at 11 years old. It's downright scary. But the movie was fun to look at but people who work in movies are scary and nuts...

Liam U (nl) wrote: Not as good as I'd hoped it would be.

James H (ru) wrote: A bit too scattered, and there are some downright boring stretches. Decent cast, but it just lacks focus. A little too talky at times as well. Still, some great scenes here and there.

Ben L (de) wrote: In the past few months I have watched my first 2 silent films, and both were directed by and starred one of the all-time greats of silent cinema. That allowed me to make some snap judgments based on the singular work I've seen from each of them. While Buster Keaton impressed me tremendously with his eye for shot selection and stunt work in The General, Charlie Chaplin seems to have a much stronger eye for comedic staging and story-telling in City Lights. I was so amazed at how much I was laughing at a film with some of the classic gags I've already seen copied by countless other film-makers in the future. Clearly the imitators never proved to be quite as effective at this stuff as Chaplin, who did it first. I also loved how detailed this story was, and yet I followed it all the way through without much dialogue at all. In fact I was so interested in the story and connected to the characters that my eyes actually started to well up at the end. I'm surprised to say it, but I genuinely loved this movie. There were a few gags that got a little tedious because they dragged on a bit longer and were more repetitive than they needed to be, but in a strange way, sometimes the repetition ended up making me laugh more. I'll admit that, since it's silent, I'm less likely to watch it again in the future. However I'm absolutely delighted that I've seen City Lights, and I would highly recommend it to anyone.

Chris L (es) wrote: tried to watch this movie twice and at both times it knocked me out.

Ahmed M (br) wrote: Other than some comedy here and there, this is a really bad time travel/comedy movie, but it shouldn't be any surprise once you check the cast itself.

Bruno V (ru) wrote: This one keeped me interested till the end , a pitty the ending was a bit a disapointment !

Vesuvius V (fr) wrote: So bad. At about 60 minutes into the movie, there is one point, where you can actually see a boom mic in on the screen.