The Sand

The Sand

Just when you thought it was safe to go back in the water again, you can’t even get across the sand! BLOOD BEACH meets SPRING BREAKERS in an ace monster mash-up of smart nostalgia and up-to-the-minute visual effects. After an all-night graduation beach party, a group of hung-over students wake up under blazing sun to find their numbers somewhat depleted. An enormous alien creature has burrowed down deep and anyone foolish enough to make contact with the sand finds themselves at the mercy of a sea of flesh-eating tentacles. Will they ever be able to escape its carnivorous clutches?

After an all-night graduation beach party, a group awake to a beating sun, and a seemingly carnivorous beach that devours anything with a heartbeat that touches the sand. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechers

The Sand torrent reviews

Ioana (ag) wrote: Brilliant documentary.

Rosemarie G (ag) wrote: Hmmmm, I'm very naive. I had no idea places like this existed. An interesting movie nonetheless.

Choen L (kr) wrote: A very Mike Judge sort of show. It offers more than what the production budget allows. It is not easy to portray an average person as a relative genius, because just how are the rest of the world who are supposed to be idiots supposed to be depicted? I think this movie might have just pulled that off.

Tharanjitha B (mx) wrote: This is the best book ever

Private U (us) wrote: aww...i remember this movie!

J M (ag) wrote: It's a unique, exciting story. Fans of Hoffman and Mamet should have fun. Still, I'm split on it - I would like to see the play. Expect the Mamet overwriting, and good writing, the Franz overacting and the Hoffman good acting. The kid is terrible.

Billy M (ag) wrote: Ju Dou is reminiscent of Godfather and Oedipus Rex alike. Brilliantly written, it uses very little dialogue to tell a complicated and layered story. As the screenwriting mantra goes, Ju Dou shows, not tells, the story. The emotions seem real up until it's dark end. This film is one that has not been seen by nearly enough in the American audience.

Alden S (gb) wrote: 10 out of 10:Well acted and relatable for people with autism, Rain Man makes a classic.

Mark N (ag) wrote: Clint's comic turn is both fun and horribly dated. An orangutan sidekick was inspired and yet totally underutilized (oddly Clydes many memorable scenes are from the sequel). Likewise for a movie based around bare-knuckle boxing its rarely makes an appearance on anyone's list of best fight pictures. The OTT scenes are played a mite too slow to really have impact and I found my nostalgia outweighed the realty of a rewatching.

Cameron J (ag) wrote: No, I am not going to reference the song by My Chemical Romance... or Dropkick Murphys, or Hit the Lights... or even Van Halen, or any song by the band Hang 'Em High. Jeez, this film's title has really been adopted by some hard rockers and punks, which makes sense, because how else to you musically approach a film starring someone as hard rock as Clint Eastwood? Apparently, you approach it with Booker T. & the M.G.'s, because this film's theme song was composed by that funky jazz cat, and I don't know if that's more a reflection on how old Booker T. is, or old this film is... or how old Clint Eastwood is. He was old enough at this time for the whole "man with no name" role to start getting old, and by no means is he a man with no name here, just your regular, named marshal who didn't wander into any old town... but will still kill for it! Yeah, Eastwood doesn't need to be nameless to be hard rock, which makes me question the casting if this is supposed to depict, as Wikipedia puts it, "the dangers of serving as a U.S. Marshal or deputy during that period [1880s]", because, seriously just try to kill Clint Eastwood, criminals. Like I said, he was getting up there back in '68, so if the Grim Reaper hasn't done it yet, then you sure can't, as opposed to Ted Post's career. After this he had "Beneath the Planet of the Apes", followed by hopeless obscurity, which is a shame, because he at least made this one respected film, which I for one would be more respectful of if it wasn't for so many issues. Something of an expository mess, this film opens right up with action and no immediate background development, while the shortcomings in gradual development throughout the body prove to be totally unjust in their distancing character depth on which the drama ought to thrive. Slowness ironically also thins down dramatic momentum which is shaken by the rushing, with directorial storytelling even doing a number on momentum through quiet spells that distance, maybe even bore, yet perhaps wouldn't so much if Ted Post wasn't handed limp material to draw upon with his directorial meditations. Of course, when aimless lapses in material don't slow down momentum, it's ironically an excess in material, which eventually leads to focal unevenness on the path to flesh out the telling of a story of only so much scale to begin with, despite an ambition to be harsher than the average, more colorful western. Perhaps the ambition would be more comfortably fulfilled if the storytellers didn't try too hard at times, overplaying overblown score work and some contrived writing to shake subtlety, often cheesily. The film is all too often overwrought with it dramatics, but I prefer that overambition, rather than the laziness to the efforts to edge up this western, which, upon falling into dated elements, falls hard, with cheesy filler set pieces, technical limitations and other awkward challenges to this drama's vision to be a western to take more seriously. In all honesty, there are times where the film is almost cheesy to the point of being embarrassing, and no matter how inspired the film is at times, moments such as those sort of tell you that this was never to be a truly rewarding drama, while little missteps throughout the final product secure the effort as very decidedly underwhelming. The film probably could have fallen into mediocrity, yet, as I said, there is inspiration here, and while it's not enough to reward, it endears pretty adequately. Dominic Frontiere firmly breaks the dry spells of quietness with a fusion of traditional and, to a certain extent, spaghetti western sensibilities that is unique, musically impressive and tonally effective, if a little cloyingly overblown at times. It's a shame that histrionics and some contrivance come into play and corrupt the integrity of this early revisionist western, whose narrative isn't especially meaty, but holds a potential for grit that was uncommon for westerns at the times, and is milked for all its worth in highlights within a script by Leonard Freeman and Mel Goldberg that, on top of delivering on some memorable lines and set pieces, has the guts to compliment dramatic depths with an audacious attention to brutal detail, though not necessarily in development. That said, no matter how underdeveloped, this portrait on man's brutality has its share of well-rounded aspects to characterization which draw memorable characters, at least when backed up by some memorable performances. A lot of the performers could have fallen flat with material that was over the heads of many in the '60s western film industry, but most everyone here is effective in his or her respective role, and that particularly goes for Clint Eastwood, whose performance is formulaic, but no less buzzingly charismatic than it usually is, partly thanks to some intense dramatic layers which reinforce the lead's engagement value. Eastwood's compelling anti-heroic protagonist further reflects the audacity of this gritty revisionist western, much like the gutsy script, but what can make or break the guts of the overall final product is, of course, the guts of the direction. Ted Post's direction either gets to be unsubtle with its dramatic overplays, or subtle to the point of dull coldness, but when it's realized, it's biting, with audacious plays with anything from score to the performers, in addition to gripping action and, of course, disturbing visuals that reflected a big turn for the Hollywood western, and still haunts today. The film could have gone a long way, but at the same time, it could have fallen seriously flat, thus, for every considerable missteps is a considerable strength, which endears enough to make a decent drama with commendable highlights, limited though they may be. When it's time for the snap, under the pressure of underdevelopment, slow and draggy spells, some cloying dramatics, and some cheesily dated aspects, this film which is already conceptually of limited consequence all but buckles, yet there is still enough reinforced to engagement value from solid scoring and acting, and often effectively gutsy writing and direction to make Ted Post's "Hang 'Em High" a fair and sometimes effective, if flimsy breakthrough for the revisionist western genre. 2.5/5 - Fair

Alexander P (de) wrote: A good film, well made, directed, acted and with a good plot but just doesnt have a real spark to it. Seems plodding along at times. Curtis and Lancaster are superb in the leads but after watching you just feel like it could have had more.

Ian F (mx) wrote: A fun romcom on the slopes. Kim goes from being a total beginner on the slopes to being a championship contender with some romance thrown in and great supporting performances. We always watch this and Hot Tub Time Machine prior to our Ski holiday.A super film especially for the girls though anyone can enjoy it.

Jack H (ag) wrote: For the most part this was a nice thriller with mediocre performances from michael douglass and sean bean. Brittany murphy also making a nice crazy performance and she does her best. But unfortunatly the movie doesnt go anywhere. It lacks suspence in the places it belongs and it causes the viewer to loose interest in any of characters and their motives. It lacks the detail required to understand where anything is going. Overall its a decent thriller to watch at home if need be

Catherine R (jp) wrote: : although younger, this is the best I have ever seen in her career. She did this role justice.