The Good Die Young

The Good Die Young

1954 British crime thriller by Lewis Gilbert, based on a novel by American novelist Richard Macaulay. Four men in post-war London, two Brits and two Americans, feel forced to turn to crime by their financial problems, and decide to rob a mail van together.

Three good men - a broken boxer, an American veteran trying to win back his mother-dominated wife, and an air force sergeant married to a faithless actress - are corrupted by Miles ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechers

The Good Die Young torrent reviews

Jared W (ru) wrote: All I ever wanted was to see a perfect movie. As I walked into the theaters, I knew this would be a great hit. I sat down with my buttered popcorn and my large soda and watched as my life was being changed. Through great animation and wonderful story plot with delightful characters, my standard for movies was raising higher and higher. By the end of this movie, I was was sobbing into my hands, praying that someday there might be a sequel to this perfect cinema masterpiece. The second I heard this movie was coming out on DVD, I sprinted (literally because my car was stolen) to the store to get this so I can own one of the most perfect things human beings have ever created. I paid with the credit card that was already $90000 in debt. I was okay with that though because what is another $10 of you never have to own anything again! Anyways, as I got home, I unwrapped the box (you can find the unboxing video of mine on youtube at HappilyNeverAfter4Life). As soon as the disc hit that DVD slot, I started crying again. I started crying because I recalled all of the hilarious events that the main characters went through. That night I watched the movie 53 times. I soon realized that there was no point in going to work ever again. I called my boss to tell him that I was quitting my job. I told him why and he just laughed. I didn't care though because I knew someone like him would never understand the complexity of such a high level movie.After that night I watched the movie at least 12 times a day. When I would wake up in the morning, my TV would automatically turn on and start playing the movie. Even before I got out of bed, I would watch the movie 3 times. After eating the limited edition Happily Never After cereal imported from Japan, I sit down and watch it another 4 times. After that, I eat my Happily Never After Mac & Cheese and watch it another 5 times, thus ending my day. I have repeated this for 2 years straight. During those 2 years, my wife and kids left because they feel that I was "wasting my life". Well, FYI, I am not wasting my life. Quite the contrary, because it is I who is truly living life. I didn't need them anyways. Also during those 2 years, I lost my house and all I own now is a TV, a DVD player, and the Happily Never After disc. I did not care though because that is all I ever needed anyways. After 2 years though, my life did start to feel empty. The only thing better than Happily Never After was released after 2 years. That thing was... THE SEQUEL! But that is a story for another day I suppose.

Suellen Z (it) wrote: i would have liked it better if there wasn't any talk about the dead mom.but great story.

Olayinka B (ag) wrote: This is a lovely movie about awkward second chances at lost love. It manages to be funny, romantic and not overly cliche. This is one of the good romances. Watch it.

Jonathan R (au) wrote: Boxing movies don't get better than this...

tia m (fr) wrote: this movie is so cute

James S (br) wrote: Okay this film is just down right corny sometimes, but kids will love the idea of a teenage Robin Hood. It's a good mvoie for your kids and adults won't to much sitting through it. The acting is good and the to FBI agents are the most hilarious in the whole film. The kids are great and most of them you can tell the their talent continued to today. It's a good story, good acting, a little short it seemed, but that's okay because they have made worse movies then this.

Harry W (au) wrote: Based on the Stephen King story of the same name, Cujo sounded like an entertaining horror feature.Even though Cujo is based on a Stephen King text, when you take away that name it only retains the premise of a generic horror film with none of his brilliance. Of course that is a safe assumption to make when considering the fact that the text has been transferred to a film medium, but it really pinpoints the distinction of a Stephen King text by revealing how the story fails to function in a format which cannot be read. While the original Cujo narrative played out as a series of vignettes in Castle Rock, Maine, it also had a much more grim sentiment than the film will ultimately allow it to have. By stripping it down to the most simplistic parts of its story, the narrative trajectory in Cujo ultimately lacks for ambition.The story in Cujo is incredibly formulaic. A small group of one-dimensional characters in a small country town are attacked by a rabid dog. With a premise that simple, the film demands a focus on horror virtues to compensate for its narrative shortcomings. But even though the film derives itself from a writer who is known for being borderline psychotic with his violence from time to time, the film feels incredibly tame. The majority of the horror in the film is constituted by a dog halfheartedly pretending to attack a car while a one-dimensional mother and son scream and whine inside. There are occasional moments where the bangs and crashes elicit a response from audiences, but most of the time there is honestly no feeling of an impending threat in the film. I mean, the titular dog himself is an adorable St. Bernard whose appearance is altered by slight colour changes. His behaviour is playful which the director attempts to pass off as rabid with the addition of some minor sound editing. The ambition to use footage of an actual dog rather than animatronics or visual effects certainly gives the film a sense of realism, but the titular Cujo does not appear intimidating all that often. The ordeal is therefore unconvincing, and since protagonist Donna Trenton is a one-dimensional archetype there is no sense in developing any care for the character. What we're essentially left with is a film where an obviously non-threatening dog is playing with a car while a woman nobody cares about sits inside it and screams. This is the full extent of what happens in Cujo, and it stretches on for 91 overly long minutes in which there are really no thrills. There is no dramatic buildup and no impressive climax with the film ultimately remaining dramatically monotonous throughout its entirety. Perhaps the standard for what was scary was far lower back in 1983, but the film also came out the same year as Christine (1983) which was another Stephen King adaptation. Through a greater focus on characters and atmosphere building, a film about a killer car became far more frightening than one about a rabid dog. It should really be the other way around as audiences are more likely to be attacked by an angry dog than an angry car in the real world, but Lewis Teague is ultimately too much of an amateur director to really elicit any really powerful dramatic effect out of Cujo. The entire story unfolds as a slate of blank imagery with no heart to it and little sense of actual technique in the production process, as well as the fact that the violent content is minimized so that there is little blood or gore to the film. The setting for the film is convincing enough, but rather than working to establish a sense that the characters are trapped in a location distant from anyone who might be able to help, it just makes the scale of the film seem too small to be convincing. The fact that the film centers around so few characters means that the scale is exceedingly small and the threat is even lesser. Cujo is ultimately a very forgettable film which comes without scares or originality, and if it weren't inspired by a Stephen King story then its recognition would be as minimal as it ultimately deserves. Cujo lacks the sophisticated screenplay to be a strong Stephen King adaptation, the thrilling atmosphere to function as a genuinely good horror film and even the violence or nudity that make up a 1980's guilty pleasure.The only part of Cujo which really seems all that believable is the leading performance from Dee Wallace. Donna Trenton is a generic stock character who has nothing interesting happening in her story which means that she is as dull as the drama around her until she is under threat from the titular Cujo. But once the film gets to this point, audiences begin to understand why the actress has earned the legacy of a scream queen. Donna Trenton becomes trapped in a terrifying situation which Dee Wallace embraces the full terrror of. Without trying to reach beyond the capabilities of the character, Dee Wallace puts all her talents into capturing the heavyset fear of her character which she manages to do with no problem. By stripping away any pretense of character and simply embracing her emotional core, Dee Wallace manages to capture the archetype of her role without trying to contribute anything more or less than the role needs. She may not end up bringing the most interesting character to the film, but there is no doubt that she brings the most realistic dramatic element to Cujo with her sheer expressions of fear and motherly chemistry with Danny Pintauro. Audiences may not be convincingly scared by the attempts at horror in Cujo, but Dee Wallace has no trouble convincing us that she is.Dee Wallace delivers a convincingly frightened leading performance, but Cujo ultimately disregards the grim sadism of its source material in favour of a generic animal attack story which stretches lifeless imagery and characters into a dull feature-length experience bereft of thrills.

Josh G (ca) wrote: A classy Bond movie and stylish cold war thriller. One of my favorite movies and the gold standard of James Bond.

Eric M (us) wrote: An off-beat heist flick featuring a rich lead performance from Walter Matthau, wonderfully cast against type as a hard-nosed bank robber, "Charley Varrick" is a forgotten gem of '70s crime cinema. A strong supporting cast, including Joe Don Baker as a mob enforcer and "Dirty Harry" stars Andrew Robinson and John Vernon, add to the enjoyment as well. Tarantino fans will notice at least one line of dialogue was cribbed by the director for "Pulp Fiction". Well worth seeking out, though the Universal DVD is a disgrace. Here's hoping the Criterion Collection will add it to their roster of underrated crime flicks like "The Friends of Eddie Coyle" and "The Hit" someday soon.

Frances H (de) wrote: If one walks away from this film with nothing else but an appreciation of how wonderful and fragile are our everyday lives, sitting down together for a meal, tucking children into bed, helping each other with chores--the things we sometimes feel are rather hum-drum and even boring. But when we are faced with losing it, the everyday hum-drum becomes what we long for more than anything else on earth, and we would do anything to have it back. I think these two men will never forget this ultimate truth. An exceptional and heart touching movie--the movies doing what they do at their best.