Riding the Bullet

Riding the Bullet

Set in 1969, Alan Parker (Jackson) is a young artist, studying at the University of Maine. He becomes obsessed with death, and believing he is losing his girlfriend, Jessica (Christensen), he tries to commit suicide on his birthday but his friends manage to stop him, and he recovers. He receives news that his mother is dying and decides to hitchhike, in an attempt to reach his dying mom.

When a man finds out his mother is dying and tries to hitchike his way to the hospital, he is picked up by a stranger with a deadly secret. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


Riding the Bullet torrent reviews

Suanna R (nl) wrote: I read the book and really liked it.

Shalabh M (it) wrote: Bheja Fry 2 does suffer from the 'Sequel Syndrome'...but has it's moments of rollicking laughter too :)

Kim B (ca) wrote: Great family movie with some really good performances including Matt Damon and the cute little girl. Is it predictable yes but also heartfelt and a bit in depth for a kids movie. Good soundtrack I want to go see this zoo!

Pammy D (nl) wrote: Oh Lordy once again with the Redford vision there is much to praise and yet so often the feeling of no substance because there is nothing new or shocking about the disillusionment of ideals Very solid acting by the cast. And there is some beautiful cinematography and lighting.

Jenny P (us) wrote: Disgusting and disturbing enough to make me create an account and tell you all not to add to the revenue and to tell you it's disgusting and disturbing... strong BS in this movie that anyone with half a heart would want to skip. Only adding half a star because that's the minimum, though it deserves less.

Samantha L (jp) wrote: It was cute. Annie annoyed me in the beginning because she was so bratty...but in general her acting wasn't great. Lea Thompson's character was so uptight. She was hypocritical and didn't let Annie enjoy the same things she did when she was kid like boat riding. My favorite characters were between Kristen Renton and Paul Dooley. Dooley was definitely a better actor though. Good movie to pass the time with. But nothing I would spend money renting.

Private U (ag) wrote: Great movie. The shot composites, acting, and just the shear idea of a movie such as this is very well done.

Bill B (ag) wrote: This was a fairly successful little low budget film, and I go ta few laughs out of it. Creative deaths, etc., and it does pay off the comparison to John Waters and Heathers on the DVD cover, so that's something.Rental!

brendan n (ca) wrote: honest and confronting drama about police corruption. this film is shocking and just so much better then alot of the hollywood crime dramas. its good to see this film finally gaining the recognition it deserves since underbelly came to the screen. this is so much better then underbelly and gives one hell of a story that at times seems very unbelievable. the actors are in top form and the violence is at times very confronting. do not miss this film

Barry T (ag) wrote: This is a hash cold retelling of the Ian Mcewan book. A striling performance from Gainsbourg but the rest of the youngsters suffer slightly. Shot in unsual grainy colurs - a tough slog but but byt the end rewarding

Red L (au) wrote: We all know the background to Tarzan. I liked the visual aspects of the movie (great apes), but didn't like the Scottish noble life as much.

Stephanie M (gb) wrote: Deranged Matthew kills whomever he likes, and takes their stuff... maybe their home, or their car, all with his omnipotent hooked hand in tow. Eventually, he meets a pro redhead and manages to enslave her in one of his second-hand homes, only to end up...

Nathaniel M (br) wrote: Kubrick's tendency to be obvious with his use of farce to illustrate his point. What sets Kubrick apart is how terrifying this can be. A more human set of characters than what we see in later Kubrick films, more accessible.

Samantha S (ag) wrote: Paul Newman was WONDERFUL. What a terrific film.

MEC r (fr) wrote: I did not really like this movie.

Tim R (jp) wrote: Peter Sellers most heart breaking performance of his brilliant career. As funny sad politically savy film today, as it was 40 years ago. Chauncy Gardener liked to watch and so did I. Unforgettable...

Will W (mx) wrote: John Boorman's version of the King Arthur legend is an enjoyable epic. I like the big scope of the film (which opted to include everything from Arthur's childhood and the sword in the stone, to the knights of the round table, to the rivalry between Merlin and the enchantress Morgana, to the quest for the holy grail, and more). I think the film can take itself too seriously at times, and some of the overwrought performances make the movie drag. Nicol Williamson played an interesting Merlin who had a goofy sense of humor, and later, a dark side. If you have just a casual interest in the Arthur legend , this movie might be boring. If you like sword and sorcery movies, this one is well done.

Meredith W (ru) wrote: There is no chemistry between the actors. The storyline is very predictable and lacks depth (you know immediately what will happen and how it will end). The movie is saved by Vanessa Redgrave as the woman who wrote the letter decades ago. She's classy, confidant, and doesn't look like she's acting. One positive note - the scenes and landscapes of Italy are beautiful.