In the 1920s, actor George Valentin, a bona fide matinee idol, finds himself falling in love with an ingenue named Peppy Miller. But the arrival of talking pictures sends their careers in opposite directions. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Hollywood, 1927: As silent movie star George Valentin wonders if the arrival of talking pictures will cause him to fade into oblivion, he sparks with Peppy Miller, a young dancer set for a big break.
You may also like
The Artist torrent reviews
Mirkku S (ru) wrote: The music was great and the animation looks unique and cute. Too bad the story itself was not very good.
Ramses C (es) wrote: Extraordinaria historia de amor, Benot Poelvoorde actua de manera espectacular en este film.Excelente.
Carrie T (nl) wrote: Source Code is fun and action-packed with an amazing performance from Gyllenhaal.
Marjeta M (au) wrote: Fuck this guy, seriously. Using Slovenia to show how shit your health care system is..
Michael W (it) wrote: More of the same. If you liked the first two, odds are you will like the third. All three are terribly dumb and lowbrow, but I just feel that they somehow manage to pull it off! A guilty pleasure I guess.
ClaRita C (kr) wrote: had a great time watching this hilarious movie!
Nathan M (ca) wrote: I can't think of anything more awesome than a werewolf covered with armor.
Mike M (ag) wrote: Back when this was new I thought this was one of the better inspirational Military movies made. Now that I have rewatched it again, it does suffer from a case of the 80's.As long as the movies is focused on Eastwood , it is excellent. When you give the screen to his platoon, they shamelessly ham it up while the script gets a bit silly. Mario van Peebkes is the chief offender here.Long stretches of excellence slightly mared by occasional outbursts of formulaic 80's nonsense. How this movie managed to avoid having a montage about the soilders shaping up is amazing an a credit to it's makers.
September O (fr) wrote: Flawless. Excellent.
Mike C (au) wrote: Ewwww, our favorite mass-murderer returns to go on yet another killing spree. This time, he's even more educated. This time, the movie is not so great.I suspect they were surprised at maybe the success of the first movie. Though they did leave room for a sequel, maybe it was a surprise to actually make one. Whereas the first Rampage had a lot of improvised dialogue, I think this one has a lot more script.The odd thing, I believe with Bill's message. He hijacks a tv station and is given air time for his rant so we hear it. It's not an un-true rant. I haven't verified all of what he says, but I actually have heard some of those exact stats so I'm pretty sure it was legit. But how does mass killing do anything to change it? I hated him in the first movie and really wanted to see some coppers take him down. There is less killing in this movie and more talking...a nice change but also a little spooky. Bill's character/the writers make it just good enough to maybe affect some of the nuts capable of doing something similar to this. As for me, I just watched because I liked the first movie and wanted to see him go down. And while I can agree with many of the things he says in his speech, it just makes no sense to start killing people. All the more reason to hate him and people like him who go on real shooting sprees.
Rudy M (de) wrote: I don't actually know why I watched this one. It isn't a well-known title, it didn't do well at the box office, it will eventually be one of those footnotes in Morgan Freeman's career. But I am glad that I did watch it as it is infinitely better than some of the more popular crap out there these days.Freeman plays Monte Wildhorn, a stubborn, alcoholic ex-writer who is spending his summer at a rent-free home in a place called Belle Isle. He's lost his wife (to cancer) and his will to do anything with his life anymore. Much to his initial dislike, he befriends a single mom (Virginia Madsen) and her three daughters, one of which, Finnegan (Emma Fuhrmann), takes an interest in his writing. Over the course of the summer Finnegan and her mother change his outlook on life.This is a predictable story. One that gives you an 'oh, yeah, it'll go like that'-moment sometime in the first 15 minutes. And you will be right. But in this case it doesn't matter. Freeman's slow transformation is fun to watch and even at Monte's worst moments, you'll love this character. The lead opposite Freeman is Fuhrmann, who does a much better-than-average job of portraying the young and curious girl that provokes Monte enough to start turning around.The production of the movie is solid. Thanks to Reed Morano's great cinematography, this movie breathes a consistent, strong atmosphere, which adds to the pleasure of watching as the 1 hour and 50 minutes roll by.Pros: Keeps you entertained, even though you know how it's going to end.Cons: Not spectacular, predictableVerdict: Fine
Muffin M (au) wrote: Cherry Falls is a quiet town until a serial killer begins preying on high school students. After the third teen murder, the killer's pattern emerges: the victims were all virgins. The Sheriff, concerned for the teenagers in general, but more importantly, his own daughter Jody, calls a town meeting which deteriorates into chaos. Once the students realise that to save their skins, they're going to have to lose their virginity, a meet-and-mate bash is planned. Jody, still a virgin, finds herself at the centre of the mystery and mayhem. As the student's "Pop Your Cherry" party gets going, Jody takes matters into her own hands... in more ways than one! stars Brittany Murphy, Michael Biehn, Jay Mohr, Gabriel Mann, Joe Inscoe, Natalie Ramsey, Candy Clark, Amanda Anka and Clementine Ford. directed by Geoffrey Wright.
Donald B (jp) wrote: I wanted to see a movie that was a bit different. I usually don't watch small budget indie films but i found that I enjoyed this one.