Rose of Washington Square

Rose of Washington Square

A Roaring '20s singer (Alice Faye) becomes a Ziegfeld Follies star as her criminal husband (Tyrone Power) gets deeper in trouble.

New York city in the 1920s: a singer struggles to keep her boyfriend from trouble. When she makes it to Ziegfeld, he heads for five years in jail. Lots of Faye and Jolson singing. The story... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


Rose of Washington Square torrent reviews

owen b (es) wrote: this film is not propaganda garbage like some other films in the past. this is about four soldiers who are being hunted by terrorists without support. something I like about this film is that it knows how to be entertaining without action sequences and when there was an action sequence, it felt real and the lack of music made the scene great. yes, only one guy survives and that's why the film is called lone survivor. it actually took me a while to notice that. the movie is incredibly brutal but when it comes to violence, I'm not bothered by it. the acting is fantastic and it is one of the best, if not the best, performances from Mark Wahlberg.Owens grade: B+

Shawn R (kr) wrote: terrible and predictable

Jamie A (de) wrote: "This was a massive pain to sit through this snooze fest."

James B (kr) wrote: Is this movie dumb? Hell yeah! But it's still pretty entertaining! Besides the plethora of topless women, Pervert! has some quirky low-budget gags that add to its charm. If you like naked chicks, and bizarre horror, check this weirdo film out! =)

Jeremy S (fr) wrote: Perry's sometimes funny character Madea is the only bridge between anything remotely interesting and a completely contrived, boring, cookie-cutter melodrama soap. Full of cliched dialogue and moments of utter cheesiness that gets under the skin in its ability to annoy.

Quinn B (de) wrote: The lead character is boring and lifeless, and the supporting cast isn't much better. A lackluster plot, told terribly, with a bunch of 2D characters. Brolin and Terrence Howard are misused and wasted, respectively. All things considered, Reese is actually pretty good. Any movie that I can make it fully through deserves at least two stars.

Yaicha C (au) wrote: I really liked this movie mostly because of the actors. It was like pulling the casts from all of Kevin Smiths films and mixing it with Biodome. A little flippy floppy plot line but... all the same, worth a few chuckles.

Jan D (fr) wrote: One of the better "serial killer - movies" around. A various cast makes this well worth the watch. R Lee Ermey always adds sg good to a movie (also see 'Seven').

Jason S (es) wrote: Not as good as Clerk's but still a fun nerdy film.

Cassandra M (jp) wrote: Silvia (Penlope Cruz), a beautiful young Spanish woman, prepares omelettes for the workers in the underwear factory owned by Jos Luis (Jordi Molla)' family. After missing two periods, Silvia reveals to Jos that she is pregnant expecting him to react negatively. However, to Silvia's surprise and delight, Jos expresses his love for her and desire for her to go through with the pregnancy. Romantically, he picks up the ring from a soda can he finds on the ground and places it on her finger and tells her they will get married. Despite the apparent monetary worthlessness of this item, Silvia cherishes it and all that it symbolizes.Jos has a difficult time explaining to his overbearing and conniving mother that he is in love with Silvia and intends to marry her. Jos's mother, Conchita, does not approve and when her husband refuses to help her by intervening, she takes matters into her own hands. She hires Raul ( Javier Bardem), an underwear model who works for the family business to seduce Silvia, hoping this will destroy the relationship and prevent the marriage. In spite of several aggressive attempts by Raul to seduce Silvia, she remains committed to marry Jos. Ral however, becomes genuinely infatuated with Silvia while Conchita's (Stefania Sandrelli) lust for Ral leads her to offer him anything he wants if only he has sex with her. Raul's choice is a Yamaha FZR600 motorbike so, despite his apparent lack of interest in Conchita, he becomes her lover.Meanwhile, Jos's inability to come to a decision about whether to marry Silvia without his mother's approval, leads to Silvia's deciding she wants a "real man", one who has gumption. She begins to take interest in Ral. Conchita does not approve of this relationship either because she wants Ral for herself.Food as metaphor pervades this witty, sexy, stunning, film. Characters have primal lusts (hungers), which are described with meat and animal imagery. One of Silvia's suitors (Ral, played by Javier Bardem) is an aspiring bullfighter. There is a scene of nude bullfighting. At the end of the movie, the two characters vying for her affection beat each other with enormous cuts of these ham hocks.An example of the use of food imagery occurs in an erotic scene between Silvia and Jos Luis. At one point he gently pulls down her shirt and starts to suck and lick her nipples. The English subtitles are: Silvia: How come you like eating my tits? Jos Luis: I like the way they taste. S: What do they taste like? JL: I don't know. Nothing. S: Is it that they taste like ham omelette? JL: That would be asking too much: one tasting like an omelette and the other like ham. S: Jos Luis...The Spanish names of these dishes are jamn serrano and tortilla de patatas.You don't have to be Spanish to get this movie but it surely helps.It's a bit sad to see so many reviews which so totally miss the point, and none of them from Spain. One negative reviewer even thought the film was set in Mexico which goes to show how much attention he was paying.This film is a satire on various aspects of Spanish culture and character, primarily machismo and sexual hypocrisy, but taking in culinary preferences, attitudes to animals and those surreal brandy adverts in the shape of bulls that any visitor to Spain will be familiar with. Bigas Luna chucks it all in the stew and turns the heat up to maximum.And why are so many people upset by the trucks? The film is set next to one of those long dusty highways that are so common in Spain. Of course there are trucks. Take my tip, go to Spain, rent a car, drive between nearly any two big cities, stay in a motel at the side of the road, try and sleep - you will get the idea.

Jack P (jp) wrote: Right movie, wrong cover art.

Kurt A (es) wrote: Definitely worthwhile.

bill s (gb) wrote: I love this character but this film is light on substance and long on pretense.

Private U (au) wrote: Obviously, my first "real" contact with the French movie. I saw this movie in the small movie theatre near Waseda Univ., the interior was an amazing old "tatami" style... never seen it before or after. the miss-matching of the Rohmer world & the theatre was evident, but at the same time, I felt the nostalgic decadence which envelop the Waseda area.

Max L (jp) wrote: "The work which is most likely to become our most durable monument, and to convey some knowledge of us to the most remote posterity, is a work of bare utility; not a shrine, not a fortress, not a palace, but a bridge." and I am completely captivated by this description, by this documentary, and by this bridge.

Christopher B (es) wrote: Great to see all these stars together, wonderful cinematography & locations... but a mediocre script which editing had no chance of saving. Ustinov might have made an adequate Poirot had he not come to the character so late in life. As it stands, he was a poor choice to portray the Belgian detective whom Mrs. Christie had so perfectly described in books.

Jenna I (br) wrote: Remember the good old days of traveling rock n roll bandits, metal-playing gun slingers, stripper chautauquas and wise ol' coots that live in mountains and teach you about being zen with nature? ZACHARIAH REMEMBERS.Honestly, this was better than I expected. Country Joe and the Fish cameos are always welcome, the music in this movie in general is pretty killer and the film itself is actually way more coherent than I anticipated.Then there's its script, co-written by Firesign Theater... well, somewhere in here is a flat out hilarious screenplay that was unfortunately smothered by bad acting/timing and possibly a director who was too high to notice he was missing the jokes. Like, dude gets a mail order gun, shoots a guy and decides "I can't go home" despite the fact that nobody's looking for him/cares. That in itself is a hilarious concept, but unfortunately it's funnier to write out than to watch. There's a buncha amusing shit, from one lines to chase scenes that don't go anywhere, crazy out of place 60s western outfits, silly sets, and that freaking fiddle player who - had he not been Doug Kershaw and instead cast as a comedian - could have been on par with Monty Python's Brave Sir Robin. Alas! Lost potential. It's THERE, you just gotta kinda autotune the comedy in your head if you really want some laughs.The second half of the film focuses more heavily on messages of peace and being one with nature (though still includes some amusing dialogue had it only been delivered better). "Do you ever look for your bullets after they've left your gun?" is a great line that sort of sums up the point of the entire silly thing; the folly of man, the importance of finding inner peace vs engaging in competition which will lead you nowhere. It's based on Siddhartha and very much in the same vein as Holy Mountain in that respect, though this came out two years earlier!This was a fun watch though, I'd recommend it if you're in the mood.

Leo L (jp) wrote: The wooden acting killed it for me. This is unbearable.

Arslan K (ca) wrote: Was little too short and had some pacing issues but other then that it's a fantastic way to tell the story of the detective and the batman.

Mike C (au) wrote: Sad that most involved with this film have a contractually silenced issue with the final cut