Jonathan Frid portrays a horror novelist who has a recurring nightmare about three figures out of his book who terrorize him and his family and friends during a
weekend of fun. Then the dream becomes reality and it never ends... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Jonathan Frid portrays a horror novelist who has a recurring nightmare about three figures out of his book who terrorize him and his family and friends during a weekend of fun. Then the dream becomes reality and it never ends.
You may also like
Seizure torrent reviews
Luciano G (it) wrote: Some poor dialogs at times, some scenes also seem a bit "cheap" here and there, but all in all an entertaining movie...
Ruthie R (au) wrote: Not so great but has some pleasant deaths.
Lanky Man P (nl) wrote: At least Robert Englund stars in it.
Noname (es) wrote: Kevin Costner in a comedy drama or as i usually says instead ,, lighthearted drama. There are few scenes that made me smile so thats a good thing atleast. The story was rather decent i thought and it follows a slacker / lazy man Bud Johnson played by Kevin ending up to be the one with the last important vote in a tied election, a vote that will select the next president. We have a few more famous actors like Dennis Hopper as one of the elected and Kelsey Grammer (Frasier) aswell. The biggest performance tho came from the young girl playing Bud's daughter. Anyway a pretty solid flick altho Costner have made a bunch better flicks over this one but i found some good value in this flick in the end.
DJ T (au) wrote: Nowhere near as interesting as Super Size Me, but creates a sense of danger and urgency. One cant help but wonder if this was a joke or a real-life satire on the state of the world.
Brittany R (kr) wrote: Keep your word or change your mind? Fall in love or push people away? Come to terms or just go crazy? If you were drafted and had 30 days to report, what would you do? It's an interesting premise and the movie wasn't bad. I could've done without Chris Klein, but Elijah was fabulous as always (even though i found his mirror scene near the end a little hard to believe). I would've liked one of the characters drafted to be a girl since that's something that would be historically accurate if the draft were reinstated. It's decent enough, just didn't live up to the potential it had.
Addison P (jp) wrote: Its pretty dang funny, not that amazing but good.
Konrad A (jp) wrote: This was a ok movie I like how Jack black works in a school and his big dream is to have a band. And he asks the kids to join him and help him out and he does not have the kids focus in school that's what I find is funny that it has to be all about him.
Professor S (mx) wrote: Although, perhaps too obvious a subject for a documentary, Fred Leuchter is still an interesting one. Anyone would think to make a documentary film about a man who engineers the machines which carry out sentences of capital punishment, but that doesn't mean they would know how to execute it. The first act is all rather mundane, but here that's a good thing. Instead of a politicized condemnation or exaltation of the death penalty, Morris opts for an intriguing and low key character study. Perhaps the number of cups of coffee someone drinks in a day, or the amount of cigarettes they smoke, may not seem like the most intimate or even remotely interesting aspects of someone's life, but they really are quite effective in defining the character. Through the use of reenactments, love them or hate them, these trivialities work to flesh out the character in exactly the way Morris wants him to be. This manipulation, which is nearly impossible to avoid in any medium of storytelling, becomes much more obvious in the second and third acts. When Mr. Leuchter begins to question the authenticity of what we have been told about the Holocaust it becomes much more clear what Morris is trying to do. Surreptitiously introducing those who present their support for Mr. Leuchter as, "Historical Revisionists", and those who disagree with him plainly as historians, is a rather conniving way to discredit someone. I applaud the film for treating this character, that many people vehemently oppose, sympathetically, although the cynic in me might confuse this sympathy with pity. And I appreciate its attempts to avoid emotion filled rhetoric. However I can not fully endorse anything which supports, even in such a subdued manner, such a dangerous way of thinking. Fred Leuchter, at least as he is presented to us in the film, does not seem to be anti-semitic, he has not decided that there were no gas chambers at Auschwitz to spite those murdered during the Holocaust. He has come to this conclusion as a result of his own research. We must not as a society assault the search for truth with emotional lobbying and bitter ad hominem attacks simply because it doesn't conform with what is considered morally acceptable at the time. That there almost certainly were gas chambers at Auschwitz is irrelevant, social acceptability must not be a requisite of truth. That being said, Mr. Death is still a well told story, just one that may have been consumed by something bigger than itself.
Julietta D (br) wrote: It's an incredible documentary about the life of the gypsies from India to Spain. Highly recommended. I have seen this film many times. One of my favorites.
Timothy H (kr) wrote: Okay I love a good, campy B horror flick like anyone else but this was bad even for my tastes.
Donald W (kr) wrote: This first episode of the original TV show Battlestar Galactica was a classic example of bad 1970's TV. I first saw it on the Sunday night when it was first shown in the TV room of Stout Hall at Oklahoma State University. I got there late and missed the first 15 minutes and then in the middle of the show Jimmy Carter interrupted the show for an hour to show the signing of the Camp David Accords. I have an MCA Laser Disc of the version shown in movie theaters outside the U.S. When you watch it you see how bad the acting was for most of the supporting cast. The whole thing was a big rip-off of previous movies. Obvious was the rip-off of Star Wars. George Lucas even sued them over it. John Dykstra produced the show and did the special effects and had also done the special effects for Star Wars. They ripped off the book Chariot of the Gods. They ripped off The Ten Commandments. They ripped off Bonanza and Wagon Train. They ripped off Star Trek. Those are the just the ones I saw. I heard they ripped off The Book of Morman. There was an obvious theme in the story that was critical of Jimmy Carter's policies of negotiating with the Soviet Union. That's probably why he interrupted it. That and the fact that he knew there were going to be high ratings for the show. There are some good parts to the movie. Dirk Benedict's Starbuck character was fun and Laurette Spang was hot. But I like to call the characters after their Bonanza inspiration. Pa Adama, Hossbuck, Little Apollo and Sheriff Teigh. There was actually only about 15 minutes of special effects and they kept using them over and over again. They used Tektronix Vector Scopes for the displays used on the spacecraft. The Cylon voices were cool but they were clumsy copies of the Star Wars Storm Troopers. They were also a rip-off of the robot in the movie The Day the Earth Stood Still. On the Laser Disc version I have the Cylons lop Baltar's head off. On the TV show they let him live so they can have a human bad guy. Since there was a lot of political pressure to clean up TV they used a lot of stupid fake curse words. The new reinvention of the show shown on the Sci-Fi network is 1000 times better than the 1978 version. So if you see the old version on TV or rent a DVD prepare to laugh your ass off. It's really so bad it's good.
Thomas B (br) wrote: It's kind of interesting at first, But starts to get a little drawn out. Plus, rock hudson rapes a woman in this film for no particular reason. Then the woman he rapes seems to trust him and becomes allies with him after he rapes her! Go figure...
Rip V (de) wrote: Some things about Chaplin and his "Gold Rush" are the ability to conceive nostalgia and to express human feelings without saying a word; things that, along with the well synchronized story tracking, turned this film into a transcendental classic.
John B (it) wrote: A four hanky tearjerker...well if you are overly sensitive and weep when little children lose their balls down sewer drains. Make no mistake that Bette Davis is great. She always is but the viewer feels too manipulated.
John Eric D (mx) wrote: Charlize Theron is being a messy, dark and being so crazy. A woman chasing this ex bf on her old town which made her depression cause shes crazy in love with this guy Buddy Slade. Charlize is amazing in it. She is so awesome on her comeback performance, she is just being natural and wild at the same time on this very complicated role of a woman. Though the film is not being funny, but it tells a story of the dark side of a martyr woman that somebody could relate off. Amazing screenplay, amazing performances, and another "must see" Reitman film for young adults like us.