Shelf Life

Shelf Life

Martin Remaro while in hot pursuit of evil is hit by a car. Ben and Julie the occupants of the car are convinced to flee the scene of the accident and take him home. Instead they take him to there place. Through a turn of events they come to discover that Martin is a very troubled man. Wanting him out of their home they agree to collect the drugs needed to help heal his wounds. Through the people they come into contact with while purchasing the drugs they come to understand that he is a very sick man that needs help and that they are in danger.

  • Rating:
    4.00 out of 5
  • Length:90 minutes
  • Release:2004
  • Language:English
  • Reference:Imdb
  • Keywords:decapitation,   vampire,  

Martin job is to hunt and destroy human like parasites who feast on mankind. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


Shelf Life torrent reviews

Kevin D (es) wrote: The Crusades began in the late 11th Century as the Christian Armies of Europe, responding to Pope Ubran II`s cries to go to war on behalf of all Christendom, against the Muslim armies in the Holy Land near Jerusalem. These battles lasted over two hundred years, and are considered some of the bloodiest of the Middle Ages.Ridley Scott Delivers a truly epic historical drama about a blacksmith Balian (Orlando Bloom) turned crusader, and how even a man from simple beginnings can change the world. The brutality of the times is duly delivered throughout the film, and well acted throughout with a fairly dynamic cast of supporting actors. Most notably Liam Neeson as the Knight Godfrey, Edward Norton as the masked King Baldwin, and David Thewlis, the unnamed monk who supports Balian throughout his battles. What he really achieves, and to my surprise is a lack of bias towards both the Christian and Muslim sides of this battle. Both sides retained their own ideologies, but never once does Scott make one side seem to be without principle or merit. Despite what people may feel currently, when I look back on this film, I think it fairly portrays the honour and cruelty of religious ideology on both sides.One of the best achievements of this movie is the lack, or at least reduced use of CGI throughout the film. Every Battle looks realistic, and avoids the pitfalls of subsequent movies like 'Lord of the Rings,' and 'Troy' (of which Bloom also stars). Ever face on the battle field is a different one, and it looks exactly like it should. 1500 dressed in armor, and each with their own weapon, fighting it out for their respective King and Religion. The towers that were used in the siege of Jerusalem were really built using technology from that period of time, and it certainly adds a sense of realism to the movie.Of course it's not without a few minor flaws. I'm usually thrown off by the use of the British accent during historical dramas. I understand the necessity of it, as it connect the viewer to the period, but considering the majority of the Knights during the crusades were of mixed decent (French and Germanic mostly), it can seem a bit out of place (especially when using names like Raynald de Chatillion and such). It's a bit like using an American accent to read Shakespeare. It throws the whole thing off. Additionally, there are several differences between the theatrical version, and the director's cut (being 194 minutes) is noted by the Director as being the 'definitive cut,' so it's recommended to avoid the shorter 2 hour version as it misses an entire act.Undoubtedly one of the most detailed and well portrayed epic films of it's time, Kingdom of Heaven is a beautiful rendition of a brutal time.4/5

Shaunna Luvs Steve (ag) wrote: your so dumb we had to burn down the school to get you out of 3rd grade

Bret L (fr) wrote: Emma ThompsonBilly Bob Thornton - "He'd rather be dad than president... Give me a f***in break!"

Alice S (kr) wrote: Classic Robin Williams at his manically schticky and emotionally naked best.

Regina D (fr) wrote: This is my favorite movie of all time! I love watching Gregory Hines dance among all the other tap dancers in the movie!!

Kasey C (ru) wrote: Where the Buffalo Roam. The idea behind making this movie was "let's hire Bill Murray and let him do whatever he wants." Entertaining. Stupid as hell. Funny, but not good by any means. Just dumb. However it was easy to watch and Peter Boyle is THE MAN. Anyone besides Bill Murray as the lead and it's a 3, but with him it's at least a 4.5/10.

Greg N (kr) wrote: You know you have a real winner on your hands when Rock Hudson's character "Tiger" tells one of the main characters his master plan, "We'll divide effective control of the high school. I'll be principal and you'll be the vice-principal." Yeah, it's real genius we're dealing with here. You almost wish the movie had stuck to the insane killer who was pinning notes to the dead female victims' butts. Did I just write that? Oh yeah I did cause that's in this mess. To think that's the good part too. Well that and the sexy 60s gal flesh on display. Too bad it's old, wrinkled, and probably in the ground at this point. As one criterion collection essayist once said, "May Pretty Maids All in Row be on his tomb stone."

Steve S (kr) wrote: ***Due to the recent RT changes that have basically ruined my past reviews, I am mostly only giving a rating rather than a full review.***

jay n (de) wrote: Terribly patchy film is of interest more for it's cast than any of the overheated melodramatics that it contains. It's feels very surface and rushed, things are thrown at the audience without ample explanation and are stated rather than felt. Gene Tierney's character in particular is quite vaguely drawn, why is she so insecure when she and Leo Genn seem to have a happy marriage? She is however the right actress for the part since her serene beauty almost always had that underlying hysterical edge to it. Glynis Johns although prominently billed really only has two scenes.

Barney o (nl) wrote: WHAT I LIKED: 'The Chamber of Secrets' steps things up a notch after the first film because the script and overall story make for a more mysterious adventure as the stakes are actually a meaningful part of the plot. This means false tension no longer has to be forced through the acting chops of a trio of kids - though having said that it is rewarding to see them begin to grow in ability. In the end though, the strength of this movie is mostly down to that script, as whilst some of the discussions are slightly too on the nose, it does make room for more characterisation and real-world significance than it's predecessor.WHAT I DIDN'T LIKE: What really is the point of all the tangents we're taken on? Sure some have payoffs, but most really do not. This feels especially annoying in the lengthly set-up where we're constantly shown things with no relevence at all, and it honestly means they could have cut half an hour from the film without damaging it at all. I get they do this in the books, but here we have the added benefit of SEEING what a great world this is, without being given hours to simply explore it.VERDICT: This is a great story, but sadly it gets distracted by cats, spiders, plants and magic dust just a few too many times. Lose that, and I'll be engaged from start to finish

Aaron C (ru) wrote: Even the worst critic could watch these movies over and over.