The Butcher, the Chef, and the Swordsman

The Butcher, the Chef, and the Swordsman

A tale of revenge, honor and greed follows a group of misfits that gets involved with a kitchen cleaver made from the top five swords of the martial arts world in this wild and brash action comedy.

A tale of revenge, honor and greed follows a group of misfits that gets involved with a kitchen cleaver made from the top five swords of the martial arts world in this wild and brash action comedy. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


The Butcher, the Chef, and the Swordsman torrent reviews

Gaurav S (de) wrote: A great documentary on the glory days of West Indies cricket... Although there was a scarcity of video footage of that time, but still the interviews with the greats like Viv Richards, Michael Holding, Collin Croft keep the momentum going..Must watch for cricket fans !

Kade C (ca) wrote: A cleverly written take on time travel, and a fantastic science fiction flick. Great performances mixed with tension and action makes Looper one of the more intriguing films I've seen in quite a while. My only slight problem with the film is that the ending seems to happen rather fast considering how the rest of the movie was panning out until that point. Other than that Looper is a must-watch movie.

Lisa R (fr) wrote: I love this film. It shows what good writing can do (can you tell I like good scripts?). I so wish more Australian film was as good as this. If they were we would have an absolutely thriving film industry. This is a fantastic film. The performances are all outstanding from the stellar cast including Anthony LaPaglia, Kerry Armstrong, Barbara Hershey, Geoffrey Rush, Vince Colosimo and the always excellent and criminally underused Rachael Blake (has anyone ever had a sexier voice?). The story is intriguing from the start to finish. It's an intricate character study wrapped up in a mystery. It's beautifully realised and feels incredibly authentic, telling a very adult and intelligent story about the complexities of long term commitment, love and relationships. It's just pure quality.Winner of best picture, best director, best actress, best actor, best supporting actress, best supporting actor and best adapted screenplay at the AFI awards."It's so easy to go out and find somebody, what's hard is NOT to." Great line and perfectly delivered by Kerry Armstrong.

Joyce J (mx) wrote: just as funny as the first one

Kami L (br) wrote: Since "erotic thriller" came to fashion after Basic Instinct, it's no wonder they tried to repeat the formula with Sharon. What happend was, that SS had the honours of playing lead role in the best (Basic) and worst (Sliver) "90's erotic thriller".. just within a year.That kind of sums it up. Sliver is pretty much a wanna be-"Basic" lacking everything that made the latter work. While Basic was solid, hitchcockish police investigation story boosted with sex scenes, "Sliver" doesn't really even have a real story or interesting characters. I'm no dramaturgial expert, but isn't it kind of hard to develop something that doesn't exist?And while "Basic" relyed on charisma of Michael Douglas, "Sliver" tries to rely on Sharon. Big mistake. Sharons hot, but no Merryl Streep. And William Baldwin is certainly no M. Douglas. What's incomprehensible to me is that we have a actor like Tom Berenger on board, but he's given such a minor, shitty role. He could have bailed out this goddamn Titanic! Also script is moronic. The "sexy" scenes and one liners are embarrassing and.. Yeah. I could go on and on. All I can say about this "genre" is, that you should rather boost functional movie with sex, than boost sex with random crap. Ironically the "reality tv"-concept itself was not half bad. Quite ahead of it's time actually. Someone could have scraped together a decent movie out of this.

Joel A (br) wrote: A film that has received a lot of praise over the year's and I can see's a terrific film. A great down to earth story with real, honest damaged characters.Both Caine & Walters worked magic with one another and gave one of their most talented performances in their career.This film show's that teaching is an extraordinary opportunity to connect with people and help one another, this film really portrays this. In the end being in each other's life they helped and freed each other.A must see film if you want to teach, this film has a lot of great life lessons...a true classic

Shaun B (kr) wrote: Larry Buchanan is one of the worst directors to have ever been given access to a camera let alone production costs (which clearly never add up to more than $500). The acting is atrocious, but that is to be expected in such low caliber Z-grade monster movies such as this. The plot is inane and too much talking rather than showing makes for a boring, but typical throwaway trash movie. But it's the directing in this that takes this one into a special sort of badness. It took me three separate viewings over the course of four (maybe five?) days to finish an 80 minute POS. I watched this so you don't have to, and I beg of not watch this filth. If you HAVE to quench whatever sick desires you have, it'd be best to fast forward to the final 15 minutes and you'll see all you need to see (including one of the most pathetic monsters ever conceived).

Michael S (it) wrote: Geraldine Page was a hit on stage in Tennessee Williams Sweet Bird of Youth, but on film her performance in this Tennessee Williams-film is far superior - and so is the film. With the exception of her Oscar-winning performance in A TRIP TO BOUNTIFUL this is the best thing she has ever done and she as well as veteran actress Una Merkel received Oscar-nomination for their poignant and poetic acting in this film version of very underrated Tennesse Wiiliams play.

Martin T (ca) wrote: Slightly better than Pyaasa. Most of the songs are filler, but there's a couple of pretty good ones. Dutt's ego is showing again, and the self-pity is laid on incredibly thick. There's some really masterful stuff going on with camera movement and lighting. It's just a shame it isn't more consistent. The moments of brilliance are superb, but ultimately they're overshadowed by the rest of it, which is mostly dull, corny and/or predictable. And the comedy is very broad and stupid.

Adrian Z (gb) wrote: H.G. Wells had a strong hand in the production, being the writer and consultant on this rather fascinating work of speculation, based on his fictional essay. The story spans nearly a century, beginning with a prescient, visually and aurally stunning rendition of the start of WWII, a war which lasts for several decades and leads to a post-apocalyptic, pandemic ravaged wasteland where several warlords fight for their piece of land. Humanity is eventually led away from its war stupor by a rising technocracy, and the film ends with a utopic society that is finally shooting for the stars, even if part of its population expresses dissent. History would prove resource depletion and the "bomb" to be the unimaginable events that really stop much of the film being an accurate prediction of the future, and yet, rather ironically, humankind has been able to achieve more peace and progress than anticipated by Wells - thankfully we haven't had to contend with a global pandemic that wipes out half of the population, as is represented in the film, although it always remains a possibility. Thought provoking stuff, as good SF often is, but as a film, not without some problems. The film basically comes across as pompous anti-war propaganda, being completely unsubtle about its motivations. Also, it's episodic nature and preocupation with ideas rather than characters detaches viewers the film's characters, making it somewhat unengaging. There are a few extensive, visually impressive, montages set to Arthur Bliss's rousing music, which would be a good thing, except they end up giving the film a newsreel propaganda feel. What Things To Come does with success, though, is provide a visual and thematic template for future works of sci-fi. It may well be one of the earlier depictions of a post-apocalyptic world depicted on the silver screen.

Breanna C (us) wrote: Kind of hard to understand at first. Wasn't the best movie.