Take Off Your Clothes and Live
Several attractive girls travel, by various means (plane, vintage car, hitch-hiking), to a nudist camp in the South of France.
You may also like
Take Off Your Clothes and Live torrent reviews
Bindu C (au) wrote: Drishyam (??????) is a 2013 family drama-thriller Malayalam film written and directed by Jeethu Jospeh starring Mohanlal and Meena in the lead roles. The film starts with a tag line that "Visuals can be deceiving" and it actually lives up to it. George Kutty (wonderfully essayed by Mohanlal) is an orphan and 4th class dropout who is running a local Cable TV network. He is a big movie buff who watches movies in a much focused manner and many of his decisions are influenced by the same. The movie portrays good family moments where George Kutty tries to be stingy (he has his own justifications for the same) and his wife Rani (Meena) occasionally demands of shopping, enjoying movie in a theater and food in a restaurant.George Kutty, Rani and their two kids Anju (Ansiba Hassan) and Anu (Esther) together form a beautiful family picture until an unprecedented event hits them. The audience gets completely absorbed in the twist of events that begin to unfold from the end of the first half. The second half is more like a thriller and is about how the family, despite the vengeful villainy of a corrupt cop Sahadevan (Kalabhavan Shajon), stands its ground even as the law takes its course. The psychological cat-and-mouse game that ensues between George Kutty and the lady IPS officer Geetha Prabhakaran (Asha Sarath) has several moments that thriller buffs will dig into with delight. What is appreciable however is the adversary's acceptance of defeat, and the eventual respect that the two develop for each other. Prabhakaran (Siddique), husband of Geeta Prabhakaran also plays a vital role who seems to have non-biased approach. The movie doesn't try to justify what is right and wrong. It showcases the journey of a head of the family who protects his family by all means.Sujith Vaasudev was successful in capturing the visual beauty of Rajakkad-Idukki. Music scored by Anil Johnson and Vinu Thomas was good. The editor's table was safe with Ayoob Khan. Overall, the movie Drishyam has been packaged well.
Octavian (br) wrote: Documentary covering the failures of the American war on drugs. Kind of dispassionate. Sidelines the racial implications of the war. Actually states that the war on drugs equalizes poor people, regardless of race, ignoring the fact that poverty and incarceration both affect blacks and minorities ...what, 4x more? than whites. Don't pretend not to see that. Barely divulges any new data, and focuses largely on crack.
Cory Kelleys gurlfriend RIP Billy Bryan (de) wrote: dracula is very awsome
Louis L (au) wrote: no! movies do not work like that! this isnt the way it is!
Sean L (au) wrote: A Tim Burton-produced Roald Dahl adaptation that does its best to capitalize on the success of The Nightmare Before Christmas via eccentric stop-motion animation. The love that seeped from every pore of Nightmare isn't here, however, and no amount of curious character design can account for that. It doesn't help that the Dahl story itself has been altered to suit a more typical film structure, stripping away much of the free-wheeling zaniness that made the book so unpredictable and entertaining. That can't have been for a lack of time, as the film is already dreadfully short: barely more than an hour, with some serious padding at both ends. The awkward blend of animation and live-action doesn't work especially well, either. Despite one great casting decision (AbFab's Joanna Lumley as the bone-thin, witchy Aunt Spiker), the flesh-and-blood scenes feel under-produced and B-grade, a sharp contrast to the more lush, professional efforts on the other side of the coin. At a glance, the quirky stylings that typify Burton's work seem a great match for Dahl's oddball stories. As a promo slick or movie poster, it's thumbs up all the way, but too much is missing to consider the whole effort as much more than a well-intentioned miss.
Simon W (br) wrote: This is actually alright. It's just like Tank Girl - but lacking that extra bit of budget and pizzaz to bump it up and make it cult worthy.
Arseniy V (es) wrote: Mostly your typical overblown bullshit, but pornier. Much pornier.
Hunter D (gb) wrote: Legend has it that Reynolds and Clint Eastwood were both told by an acting teacher that they would never make it as actors. Of course, both became big stars. Everyone knows that Eastwood became huge thanks to spaghetti westerns, not many know that Reynolds also starred in one, that one being Sergio Corbucci's NAVAJO JOE. Reynolds plays the titular lead, a vengeful indian who stealthily hunts down and kills wicked bounty hunters who wantonly slay indian tribes and sell their scalps for a dollar a head. The casting of a white man in a lead that should go to a Native American is annoying one the part of the filmmakers, especially given the political nature of the majority of Corbucci's films. These films often featured American leads, but the casting of Reynolds is dubious at best (he is supposedly part Cherokee, but so am I, and I'm white as snow). Still, Joe isn't your typical spaghetti western anti-hero, as he doesn't shoot it out with his enemies after a long build-up and an Ennio Morricone crescendo, but rather opts to stalk and slash the bad guys. The film's biggest contribution to pop culture is its iconic score by Morricone, which many will immediately recognize as having being liberally used in Quentin Tarantino's KILL BILL films. NAVAJO JOE is no classic of the genre, and Corbucci has made much better films, but it entertains pretty well, I'd only recommend it to die-hard fans of either spaghetti westerns, or Burt Reynolds (you're out there, I can smell you). I read that Burt Reynolds supposedly said that this was the worst movie he ever made, which makes me wonder how many of his own movies Reynolds has actually seen. Maybe he just doesn't like looking at himself sans-'stache.
Mohamed A (jp) wrote: This is my best ever life changing film. This is about you looking at the truth in the eye and still wonder if it's a "FACT".
Gage W (ru) wrote: I Rilly like Snake's
Art R (ag) wrote: Movie just wasn't funny at all.
Jason G (kr) wrote: I know... I know... Only 2 stars for a film with Bobby DeNiro and Robbie Duvall at (arguably) the height of their careers???? Well, to be fair, both these guys are at the top of their game in TRUE CONFESSIONS. Each man shows up on screen and acts his little heart out. They are each completely invested in their respective roles and they definitely put on an actor's clinic.... but ask yourself this: Why haven't you ever heard of this film? The problem is that there isn't enough development in the story to keep your interest. The cast is brilliant with vetrans like Charles Durning and Burgess Meredith adding considerable wattage to the production... The sets are as authentic as you can get for 1940's America (short of filming in actual, 1940's America)... and coupled with these already, deceivingly strong elements, the basic plotline actually reads like something that could easily capture your attention for a scant 2 hrs. Right? But TRUE CONFESSIONS is the absolute, diametrical opposite of this. TRUE CONFESSIONS is a "negative" gestalt, given flesh on the screen. It is simply not, in any way, the sum of all of it's parts. It is far, far less. Hollywood has taken the best ingredients at it's disposal, thrown it all into a pot, raised everyone's expectations............. and burnt the offering. Despite the potential for great character driven conflict amongst characters, the story doesn't stress the complexities of these relationships deeply enough. As a viewer, you are simply given an unchallenging, straightforward path to follow from start to finish that unfortunately, requires very little effort on your part. TRUE CONFESSIONS is shot in true, "film noir" style... and it tries to deliver with genre-typical, slow burn storytelling... but the problem is that the slow-burn pacing in this piece isn't just slow, it's positively glacial. It then further punishes it's faithful, long-suffering audience with the ultimate insult - - an unsatisfying ending. I watched this for DeNiro and Duvall... but unlike other films they've been in, I'll not likely watch TRUE CONFESSIONS ever again.
Luciano G (ru) wrote: I expected it to be stupid and I thought there'd be some humor to its stupidity...... I guess I got what I expected, not much more...... wouldn't watch it again, don't recommend it to anyone to watch for any reason.....