Rebirth of Mothra II

Rebirth of Mothra II

Mothra's twin nymphs and children from the city find a lost city, as well as a giant monster that is attracted to environmental calamities.

  • Rating:
    4.00 out of 5
  • Length:97 minutes
  • Release:1997
  • Language:Japanese
  • Reference:Imdb
  • Keywords:japan,   sequel,   monster,  

Mothra's twin nymphs and children from the city find a lost city, as well as a giant monster that is attracted to environmental calamities. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechers

Rebirth of Mothra II torrent reviews

Bev H (nl) wrote: The acting was good comma but the movie was really slow.

Kent H (mx) wrote: At times the story might get side tracked by other characters. And the ending seemed a bit rushed, and I had a difficult time believing the two men in suits were government agents because of how unprofessional they were. But I definitely enjoyed the film overall, slow paced romance with a sense of wonder...can this man go back in time?

Galvy F (fr) wrote: When we can see the difference what money can do when it buys us the best that money can buy talent & sales. When we can see the difference on and off the field to know how it looks, feels, and sounds like of seeing a team win & lose. When we see we can no longer see the team the way it was to need a drastic change when we can't compete with large budgets. When we see we can't compete with people whom like seeing money we don't have. When we can see we have been seeing baseball from various perspectives, old tested methods that worked 150 years, what the players are like on and off the field. When what others see, is what we see that keeps us down and out when we see their point of view to see it is no longer working & relavent. When we are seeing our team as another team to know we are playing their kind of baseball. When we need to destroy what others see to rebuild. When we see others are not seeing it our way when they can see what we are done and who we are to know we font see eye to eye. When we see the eyes, brains, body of the organization to know it does take 1 person to rebuild a team to see we are going no where.When we see who knows more than meets the eye to see they see eye to eye with us. When we see we can get things that others undervalue. When we see the game for everything it is to know we can rebuild with the stats we see. When we see the world as 1, when everything has a final total in the end. When see we fo need to have some math & education to see the game not for it's talent & big budgets but what we can make out of somethings with the right team seeing the game differently. When we see we have to restore more then a team but faith in a club that loses sights on big talent and see nobodies to easily lose faith in a championship. When we are bidding for more eyes and sights when we need people to see & pay.When we see we were once a promising prospect with all eyes on us to see others missed an opportunity that they couldn't see coming. When we have to see everything in order to whind it down to what we need and see whom can play for us. When we see the game in all perspectives to see we all see the game differently when we have many factors to consider. When we see we play it safe or play it hard to know we have see to it that we win big or go home when we have to see the big boss in the end and answer to him. When we see that we need to make others see to give confidence in the talent that they lack and other things we see they lack that others dont see. When we see had plenty of ups and downs in our life to lose focus and hope to no longer see the game we used to see & play. When we see we are just a sob story when we are seen as a loser. When we see people are replaceable and others are not when what others see we don't see thst have many to doubt and be angry with. When what we see is a big business that only grows bigger and bigger with what others continuely see that makes the big bucks. When we see there are more people invested in what we are seeing then others might see. When what we see is a ongoing progress that can't fail. When we see that we need a boost when tones of doubts, speculations, and alot is riding on us to perform. When what we see, some people take serious when it's their job and livlihood that others stand in our way. When we see this game is for the fans, America's past time, that grew from small crowds into what the game is now. When many players worked hard to get where they are now to see their chance at the big league come true. When we see baseball was build on chance when some fail and others succeed that we can't see coming. When others can see what makes winning, to know how we can manage with what we are given to see not everything easily we can put together can work. When what we can't see, we make sure we have the best eyes to see what we are lacking. When somethings we don't see we lack, and we still see the same results. When we need to show progress in how good this team is the way we see it. When we see negativity effects us all, in the way we perform and manage to not see it by others expectations. When we see we are in need of a boost, to only get a reality check of what we are not seeing to take somethings more serious then just a game. When we see we need a change things. When we see that we are starting to see the game more like business then clubhouse, with no hard feelings. When we don't see somethings coming that we need to uproot all the old weeds of from the ground before they grow any longer and ruin the entire longevity. When we see we need to make our team see us, when that's all this game is about seeing somethings coming to hit it right on target. When we can be seen as mean, when we show you others who are meaner to see we got it good. When we see some things are a working process when we see to it that each player we selected sees why we chose them, see what they can't see, and tinker a bit their eyes. When we see that we can't get any better to see our opportunity we can't pass up. When we can't see our team when we are superstitious. When we had enough seeing somethings when it all goes down south to know it's our fault. When what we see we font believe when we see we done the impossible and break the record. When we see we are best suited in other aspects we see ourselves in rather then what others see us for. When we see the game can and cannot be reinvented that we see there is room for more competition when we have different perspectives that challenge who sees the game better. When we see others see eye to eye with us to see we want the same thing that is worth every cent. When the game we see has so many ways of seeing it, from a money, reputation, location, romantic passion, history stand point. When the game we see all show that we wish all stats showed us one place to stay and watch grow.

Sarah K (us) wrote: [b]24 Nights (2000)[/b]

Jeremy P (de) wrote: A low budget action movie with it's fair share of bad actors, but with what they had to work with the director still put together a surprisingly good story. Some interestingly stylish action scenes. Mortensen and Ishibashi (loved him in Audition) were great. And I always love it when Robert Forster pops into a movie.

Sandra P (fr) wrote: chronique d un certain moment dans l existence... on "s obsede" nous memes "sur" qqun... mais en fait...

Tony P (es) wrote: Clint Eastwood stars in one of his most famous roles as San Francisco Homicide Inspector Harry Callahan known amongst the police fraternity as Dirty Harry for his quite antihero but ultimately successful methods.The film from 1971 is lavishly shot in the city of San Francisco by director Don Siegel. The film also boasts a soundtrack composed by Lalo Schifrin better known for composing the TV theme for Mission Impossible.The plot concerns a mad man serial killer called Scorpio who terrorises the city with ransom demands and ever more elaborate murders.The city mayor not wanting more bloodbaths seems intent on meeting the killers increasing financial demands whilst Callahan believes he needs stopping using his more direct methods shall we say that fly against the 'left wing' civil liberties of the American constitution.Eastwood directs some scenes himself in a sign of what direction (pardon the pun) his later film career will take perhaps.I was amused with the 1971 environment. For example Scorpio at first demands the 'massive' sum of $100,000!The cars look massive almost as bushy as Eastwoods hairstyle.I sometimes wonder if a more right wing method of law enforcement would lower the crime rate (minus blowing people's heads off of course!)That reminds me. The film is best known for one of Callahans phrases that he uses twice in this film.The "Do you feel lucky, punk" speech. Actually Callahan is armed with a .44 Magnum firearm. The most powerful hangun in the world at the time.It apparently could blow your head clean off. If faced with its barrel pointing at you, you've got to ask yourself one question surely. It fires six bullets. In all the excitement of a 1970s shooutout. You wonder if five or six shots have been fired. 'Do I feel lucky? Well, do you punk?'

Chip S (de) wrote: Arnie's first movie in 1969, so bad you have to watch it!

William W (ru) wrote: I have really enjoyed Randolph Scott's presence in films at both both bookends of his career, having previously seen him in the pre-Code 'Hot Saturday' (1932) and his last film, Sam Peckinpah's first great film, 'Ride the High Country' (1962), as well as a few in between ('Pittsburgh', 'Virginia City' and 'My Favorite Wife' most readily come to mind), so I thought it was high time to visit some of his most influential films, the Western collaborations with Budd Boetticher.Scott has a really unique presence in these films. So far, I have seen three of the seven they made together, and he doesn't romance, he seems a tortured, troubled soul, even in the almost comedic, 'Buchanan Rides Alone'. This was another excellent script by Burt Kennedy, finely scored and photographed. It was clear that this was a well-run filmic organization, that really knew what in tarnations they were doing. Rare is the film that is short but sweet. I consider this a 'Goldilocks and the Three Bears' kind of movie, in that it's not too long, not too short, but just right. Though not quite as good as its predecessor, 'Ride Lonesome', I still didn't have the heart to give it a lower rating.I know the Western genre as a whole tends to get short shrift these days, but when you see the great ones, it makes you really glad somebody made them--and that Boetticher and Scott made a lot more than simply seven together.