Stop at Nothing: The Lance Armstrong Story

Stop at Nothing: The Lance Armstrong Story

A portrait of the man behind the greatest fraud in sporting history. Lance Armstrong enriched himself by cheating his fans, his sport and the truth. But the former friends whose lives and careers he destroyed would finally bring him down.

You think you know this story? You don't. From the producers of Academy Award winning film, ONE DAY IN SEPTEMBER, and BAFTA Award winning Director Alex Holmes, this documentary is an ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechers

Stop at Nothing: The Lance Armstrong Story torrent reviews

brett l (us) wrote: Tough to finish this one. Unoriginal plot and unimpressive action scenes.

Saoirse M (mx) wrote: Great acting and storyline but I hate cliffhangers in movies and sad endings where the guy got hustled out of getting the girl.

John R P (ru) wrote: It's a good movie for those who like Lacrosse or those who wish to get a feel for the sport. Let's face it, movies depicting the sport are rare. I wanted to see it because I played intercollegiate Lacrosse and knew I could appreciate the movie if it did a fair job of conveying the rigors of playing the sport; it does, sufficiently so but no more. I was not thrilled by the drama or core story as I doubt any moviegoer would. The cast did however do a good job of performing the 'game play' scenes. The toughness of the game may have been downplayed a little to the eyes of the erudite; the opposite will be perceived by those who have not played or seen several matches. The endless practice required to perform at the level depicted in the movie did not get enough coverage; I suppose the lessons and moral values the movie tries to impart had to take precedence. Unless you have an interest of some kind in Lacrosse, you might want to take note of the movie, otherwise if you want sport related drama of any kind, there are so many more better movies to pick from, I wouldn't know where to start.

Joshua L (fr) wrote: Holy Shit! There's a part with these 2 kids on a fucking minefield! I'll never forget it. That's all I'm gonna say.

Shane H (ru) wrote: very well crafted psychological thriller mystery.

Bill T (ru) wrote: Badly acted, and not going anywhere for awhile, Patricia Arquette plays a dumb American tourist in Burma who gets sidetracked into, well, staying for awhile, and gets involved river-deep with the fight against the Burmese government. Frances McDormand and Spalding Gray show up in the first 10 minutes to try to whoosh Arquette out of there, but nuh-uh, pretty soon, Arquette and a whole pile of badly acting Asian actors are soon chewing scenery as they try to escape Burma, (and we, try to escape this movie). The final trek out is fairly gripping, but the rest, fuggadaboutit.

ShinyHappyPurple (au) wrote: *shakes head in disbelief* How do they come up with crap like this?

Jack P (it) wrote: ok so this was the third in the series and by far wasnt the best it had a weak storyline and very few laughs only really watched this as I was a fan of the first two.

Justin E (nl) wrote: if you plan to watch "blood-sucking freaks" because you enjoyed other entries in the troma filmography (toxic avenger, class of nuke 'em high, etc.), you may be in for an unpleasant surprise. originally released as "the incredible torture show", this film courted controversy even in a toned down r-rated cut. lingering scenes of female degradation and torture coupled with cheap, sickening effects and a deranged sense of humour. definitely an endurance test for the uninitiated. while it does contain some chuckle inducing moments, don't go in thinking "blood-sucking freaks" will be the usual troma laugh riot. you've been warned...

Daniel C (nl) wrote: Godard being a dick, but at least it's pretty.

D Ryan L (ru) wrote: Ozu is one of the more interesting directors to address the issues of urbanization and modernization. This film looks at young women in postwar Japan who want to break the cycle of miai and the traditions that try to call them back to it.Ozu has an amazing sense of the urban landscape and the contrast between the modern and the traditional. This film has the added bonus of color, a feature which Ozu uses effectively in the 1950s Japanese home and as well as at the office. His obsession with the ways in which modern people work and the buildings that facilitate this work leads to shots that set the scenes for his films in ways that other directors neglect. In other words, Ozu understands that a simple shot of men washing windows on a skyscraper, a row of green chairs framed in suits, or a home decorated with a printed cotton table cloth and a bakelite radio provide us with an understanding of the setting that is difficult to achieve through simple dialogue.I often see Ozu's films as remarkably feminist in their critiques of a paternalistic society where married women are servants to their husbands, but I wonder if this is my interpretation from a half of a century down the road. At any rate, they clearly examine gender in a critical and insightful way.

Kelly M (mx) wrote: I grew up watching this movie, and I absolutely love it.

Jamin M (ca) wrote: This is one the worst superhero movies that I've ever seen. I love the character Catwoman. She's a really enjoyable, fun character. However, I don't think she has enough to her to have her own movie. She fits better in supporting roles. I don't even know where to start. First off, Catwoman's name in this movie is Patience Phillips, not Selina Kyle. Okay, how the heck do you make a movie based on Catwoman and not have her real name? There was no point in changing it. Second, the story is just ridiculous. Catwoman actually has cat-like abilities in this movie. Really? That's what you went with? That's like making a Batman movie and giving him bat powers, and not only that, but she acts like a cat, too. She eats several cans of tuna, hates rain, hisses at dogs, rubs her face with catnip, and purs while having sex with her police officer boyfriend. Seriously?! Did children right this script? There's also some stupid villainous plan involving makeup. Really? Makeup? Patience herself isn't really that interesting, nor are any of the characters. The villain is bland. The action is forgettable. Also, Catwoman is more of an antihero than a superhero. Antihero films can work, such as Deadpool, but this one just doesn't work. The editing in this movie is also bad. There's one scene where a guy is talking and the scene keeps cutting to itself. As for the acting, Halle Barry does try and her performance is fine, but nothing noteworthy. As for the others...ehhhh. I just don't think a Catwoman movie should've even been attempted. It's a neat idea, but she doesn't really have a backstory, so trying to make a movie about her seems very difficult. It was attempted, and it failed miserably. In my opinion, Catwoman is a stupid and ridiculous superhero movie that should not have been attempted.