Two old friends and small-time crooks embark on a crime spree, but take an unexpected detour that could lead them down the road to redemption.
You may also like
Route 132 torrent reviews
Nilesh J (ag) wrote: The movie is occasionally gripping but generally slow. As it rolls towards the big climax moment, inconsistencies accumulate. To a degree, the end is predictable even with the twist.
coco c (nl) wrote: Didn't make any sense, as a born-again would never consider suicide. Also, the fact that police only intervenes when it was too late. If they did then, why not earlier?I am sick of the many movies where adultery is condoned. The argument for adultery given in this movie is that "being kind to someone is not the same as being in love". Is that enough, really?
Jamyne A (gb) wrote: For a Straight-to-DVD movie it's not the worst thing you could see but when compared to it's predecessor it lacks originality, has bad acting (Except for a select few), and doesn't have a "WarGames" feel to it other than the cameo of "Johsua" who was killed. Good for "Mediocre Straight-to-DVD Movie Night with the guys/girls/friends."
Frances H (au) wrote: Really cute zom com that takes the ides in Shaun of the Dead's ending andand adds touches of Pleasantville; and Lassie.
Robert S (br) wrote: Impressive. Not quite a documentary, as it's very one sided, but presents the facts successfully to create an interesting, infuriating picture of what happened to Bill Clinton.
Julio B (it) wrote: A smooth film with a pacing that mirrors the protagonist's change of life pace. Stander goes from cop to bank robber and the pacing picks up without losing it once Stander decides to start robbing banks. I'm most likely going to forget about this movie when I think of movies that can last, but I will always check it out if I see it on television while flipping channels. A suave film.
Kevin C (de) wrote: Going into this I thought it was an actual documentary, not a mockumentary. After a while I figured it out, but that did not stop me from enjoying this quite a bit.
Amber H (br) wrote: oh my god. it had the most teary-eyed boy I've ever seen in my entire life. I liked it, though, it made me cry, like, five times.
Leo L (kr) wrote: the first half of this is very entertaining. but then Flemming disappears, and there's no one to look at. no De Niro - no funbut of course, that's not the only reason. after the first hour the movie descends into something so ridiculous it's not even funny
Adam B (ca) wrote: A New York mayor is involved in a scandal about a fireman who was killed in an accident, and his sibling decides to go about tagging his name on everything. Notv exactly a responsible act by the brother, but he does it anyway, for his brother's memory. A pretty good movie, if not at times a little contrived.
Randy P (kr) wrote: More erotic then brutal then the first one, but the kills are very disappointing and the acting isn't as good as the first.Stick with the first unless you feel it is necessary to watch this along with the entire series. I found this boring.
Tim S (ru) wrote: Around the time that the world discovered Alfred Hitchcock, Hollywood was a buzz with suspense thrillers in the same vein. Some were rather original, others could be seen as straight out-and-out copycats. I'd like to think that Midnight Lace falls somewhere in between. Released the same year as Hitchcock's original Psycho, this intriguing mystery thriller explored some of Hitchcock's past themes and plot-devices, making comparisons very strongly to Rear Window and Vertigo. Although it does seem a lot like a copycat, it makes little difference because this film stands very much on its own feet. Doris Day stars, surprisingly, as the troubled lead who is just on the edge of a nervous breakdown due to all of the threats being made by an unseen antagonist. Rex Harrison and Myrna Loy make up part of the supporting cast and give the lead the strength that she needs. Although at times she can be accused of over-acting in this film, I thought her performance was quite strong and overlooked. To go what her character is going through in the movie, she should go a bit over the edge. It only sustains the plot more rather than pull the rug out from underneath it. The look of the film is very much Hitchcock. I'm sure director David Miller had his particular style foremost in mind during production. Lots of shadows, over key-lighting actors and the occasional slanted angle, along with the patented Hitchcock camera panning and zooming. It doesn't take a total genius to figure it out, but I think it gives the film its style and charm and I can't find fault in that at all. The score is a pretty much late 50's/early 60's score. Melodic and lush with lots of string work, although it can be very menacing and dark during the more suspenseful scenes. It's pretty much a dated score, but not one that has lost any of it's charm. The plotline of the movie is very intricate. I bought into the conclusion early in advance so I wasn't too surprised by the outcome. I don't want to say that I had it all figured out early on, but the thought had crossed my mind early on, but it was much darker than I had imagined, so kudos to the filmmakers for a very clever twist ending. One of the few problems with the film is how dated it is not only musically, but due to its on-screen content. It's almost like Breakfast At Tiffany's as a thriller, which is leads me to something else that I guess I should mention. The young lead of the film seems to be a very pampered and upscale sort of woman, which audiences I'm sure at the time (and even today) couldn't relate to. Let's face it, most of the people who actually go out to see movies are hard-working stiffs or waitresses with a night off, so seeing a rather rich person being put through all this torment could be difficult to relate to on an esoteric level. The film's few problems are very few, but this was a very tight, not to mention, taught thriller. I can't hold any grudges against a film that took lessons from the master because filmmakers are still doing it to this day, so to write it off for that reason just seems wrong. I enjoyed the film and it kept me guessing till the end. It was also very well shot, atmospheric and creepy at some points. I wouldn't actually mind seeing this play at a film festival. It would be a good screener for fans of the genre, or even film fans in general. Bottom line: a really good mystery thriller, even if it is a little dated.
Kris H (it) wrote: For all that it lacks in film worthiness, it entirely makes up for with a howling cat, thunder and billowing fire throughout the entire feature.