Filmed during a sell-out tour in 1995, Jim Davidson and Charlie Drake's naughty, adult pantomime is a raucous version of the Cinderella story.
You may also like
Sinderella Live torrent reviews
Nathan C (de) wrote: I Think I Accidentally Saw Dirty Version of this movie.Score: 3.5/10
Tracy W (nl) wrote: Crap from beginning to end. Subpar special effects, subpar slow mo action and a sketchy Script under cut the acting and anything the director set out to do.... Or not do.
Tyson P (es) wrote: snitches get stitches!!!!
Zahid C (it) wrote: Day : Sunday. Date: 1 Feb 2009 Time: 11.15 pm With: Noone On : PC Akshay did full justice to his role but it was insensible crap. Deepika looked sexy. Its a funny movie but Chinese culture has been exploited a lot. But overall a good effort on Indian Kung Fu. lol
Jimmy H (jp) wrote: Complex and challenging but no less intriguing.
Philip L (mx) wrote: Another winner from the guy who brought us Pieces. Although this is a completely different kind of film. Slugs combines the small town invasion theme of the 50's with the over the top splatter effects of the 80's to form a film that's balls to the wall fun and gooey. Horny teens and dim witted locals are about to become lunch. Don't forget to wash the lettuce!
Jake D (nl) wrote: Wow! I can't believe most of these previous reviews because this movie is genius. Obviously the bad reviewers have never worked in the restaurant industry. Every character in this movie is sooo true to life. Of course with a lot of exaggeration, to make it entertaining. Yes, they are a little cartoony, but it's a comedy. No, its not exactly laugh out loud slap stick comedy, but if you know this world, it's psychological comedy. If you know the industry, the scenery, plot, characters, and dialogue, were so detailed and hit the nail on the head. If you didn't get it, you're probably not the demographic for this movie anyway. It's kind of cool that it played with the traditional structure and achtypes too. In the end, it was easy to follow, made sense, and was satisfying. I loved it.
Dominik N (us) wrote: silly, cheesy b-movie fun.
Debarun C (ru) wrote: Bale's Finest work till date....good movie..
Kevin F (ca) wrote: The most mainstream David Lynch ever got. He got too strange for the critics and the masses after this though I'm a giant fan of his later stuff as well. This movie embodies the great storytelling idea of turning down some random side road and spiraling into an unexpected world. Or maybe it's the story version of picking up a rock in a beautiful rose garden to see what's crawling under it. Classic "seedy underbelly" film.
Frank H (it) wrote: Amazingly filmed fight scenes.
clyde 1 (jp) wrote: Any movie that starts off with a Nietzsche Quote you know is going somewhere.
Marco F (fr) wrote: BRIDE OF THE MONSTER is an Ed Wood film. Yes- that Ed Wood. This was a film made between 2 of Wood's most infamous films- 1953's GLEN OR GLENDA, and 1959's PLAN 9 FROM OUTER SPACE. BRIDE OF THE MONSTER is every bit as spectacularly bad- if not worse- than those two films. My respect for Ed Wood will never dwindle, however- because this man, who had a deep passion for film and filmmaking had to make all his films on shoestring budgets with little to no resources or time available- and this film is no exception. The film- in true 1950's B camp- is about a mad scientist called Dr. Eric Vornoff played by the great Bela Lugosi who aims to create a race of supermen. Real original- maybe even less so in the 1950's- only a decade or so after WWII. Killer octopuses, killer crocodiles, Germans with Polish names, enforcers that look like wrestlers who walk like they took a massive crap- it's such '50's low-budget "sci-fi" garbage. It also could be seen as a movie that reflected the comparitively incredible ignorance and simplicity of those times compared to today.The film is rife with laughably bad filmmaking and awfully bad performances- even from Lugosi- but the actors were given no margin for error- because Wood almost always used the first take. This entire movie is atrociously, hilariously inept- atrociously bad production values, dreadful editing, awful sets, appallingly bad writing, abysmal directing, you name it- this film fails in every single department of filmmaking. But it does try hard- which is what makes it memorable. And this movie has a German scientist with a Hungarian accent. Hmmm. But there is one scene in this film that really left me baffled- almost at a loss for words, in fact. The scene of topic of this paragraph is the final scene. This single scene may very well be the worst action scene in movie history- definitely the worst I've seen. Even in other appallingly bad films I've seen- in every scene- you have some idea of what is going on, and some idea of the space the characters are in. Not this scene. This scene lacks even the basic fundamentals of scene setting. In this climactic scene, a bolt of lightning comes out of nowhere, striking Lugosi's house/laboratory, which blows it to smithereens. After minutes of police apparently shooting at the villainous Lugosi (but missing every shot), our main hero, the police lieutentant Dick Craig then appears and (after some extremely obvious continuity errors of some shots showing the setting clearly at night, and others showing the setting clearly being in the day) pushes a massive, perfectly spherical boulder down a grassy hill (that boulder just so happens to be sitting on a grassy hill; it sticks out like a sore thumb; and the villain is clearly not Lugosi, but a stuntman- we only see Lugosi in close up, apparently somewhere else, not seeming to be in the scene at all). The boulder then rolls over Lugosi, and apparently not affected by this extremely heavy, 6-foot high boulder (which Craig is able to push with ease), Lugosi then rolls down the hill and somehow falls into his own killer octopus pit (seen before this movie) that doesn't have water in it- and then, another lightning bolt somehow strikes the octopus out of nowhere, and it then inexplicably detonates in a thermo-nuclear explosion- not affecting any of the other characters in the scene.I felt this strange mixture of hilarity and astonishment after the scene was over- this was clearly made by someone who had no understanding or knowledge of film production- specifically film directing and editing. That one scene is the worst directed and edited scene in any feature-length film that I have seen. It weighs the film down so heavily and is so ridiculous, that it really does become clear that Wood had his head so far up his ass, that he was completely blinded by his total incompetence and his spectacularly talentless level of filmmaking ability. That one scene sums up Ed Wood and his movies perfectly: ambitious- but hilariously, epically inept. It's just downright insane.
Shannon J (ag) wrote: Really cute father/son movie. Personally I loved the graphics, i found it suspenseful and teared up at the end. This movie is full of emotion. But what I really liked was the creative plot ideas like the oxygen packs & gadgets. The wing suit was cool too. At that time I had never heard of the so... super cool.
Jed G (mx) wrote: Its plot doesn't really make much sense, but Conquest of the Planet of the Apes is a more exciting and poignant chapter in the series, with a nice dystopian feel to it not seen as prominently in the other films.
Adriano B (es) wrote: Demented and hubercheesy, full of one liners coming straight from other movies, cliches and, why not, popular proverbs. A so-bad-it's-good must see, in a certain vein; then, "You'll go in pieces!"
Robert C (fr) wrote: (TM)(TM)(TM)(TM)(TM)(TM)(TM)(TM)(TM)(TM)(TM)(TM)(TM)(TM)(TM)(TM)(TM)(TM)(TM)(TM)(TM)(TM)(TM)(TM) Love Movie!