Three Little Pigskins

Three Little Pigskins

The stooges are mistaken by a gangster for the "Three Horsemen of Boulder Dam", famous football players. Hired to play for his team, they blow the big game and get it in the end. Lucille Ball has a nice part as a gun moll.

The stooges are mistaken by a gangster for the "Three Horsemen of Boulder Dam", famous football players. Hired to play for his team, they blow the big game and get it in the end. Lucille ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


Three Little Pigskins torrent reviews

Jamie B (nl) wrote: Doesn't quite live up to the hype (and I have a bone to pick with the ending...), but it is a decent-enough horror movie.

EQ R (gb) wrote: If you took the ending of "Role Models" and threw in a subplot about a demon, then you would get this film. While this film had some stale moments and is fair share of problems, it's actually pretty entertaining and funny. The majority of the film is about as "B movie" as you can get but that doesn't mean that there isn't fun to be had. Look for Peter Dinklage in an amazing parody of his "Game Of Thrones"character. C+

Matt W (ru) wrote: The movie was boring until Martin Kove came in around 60% of the movie. His sense of 'class' and 'dignity' brought a whole new presence never seen before on the celluloid. I'm pretty sure he got pain in Philly Blunt cigars, but then again he should be happy he got that.

Christine D (it) wrote: Very good movie. The events leading up to what made him into the monster he became. It portrays a better understanding and misguided child who lost everything all at once.

Mathew K (mx) wrote: This movie is a god damn classic now, future generations will come to realize how underrated this masterpiece is. Jack Black and Kyle Gas are an amazing duo. The songs are hilarious and the characters are gnarly.

Joachim H (ca) wrote: Ultimate dark comedy, amazing plot, amazing cast, amazing direction. Beyond your imagination. Super fun!!!

Megan G (it) wrote: This film is perfect and before the 'phenomenon' 50 shades of grey came along and pretty much pinched and ripped off this film, please someone say I'm not the only one who has noticed! (Also ripped off another film '9 and a half weeks')Both films have a main character, male with strange sexual antics and both have Grey as part of their name :')This film is clever, sexy and greatly shot! And performances were outstanding

House M (kr) wrote: As usual with Gaspar Noe the cruel dark side of life is filmed in a raw and heavy way. The narrative inside the mind of the main character that tends to annihilation relates to the spectator in a very unusual and though familiar way. We hear the voice that speak in us all the time but in a character. This feeling makes it very uncomfortable. Must be seen if you like to be disturbed by films

Kevin G (gb) wrote: You've gotta love the insane and completely absurd moments of this. In many ways you get the feeling it's unintentionally so, but this film is kind of filled with laughs. The dated 70's score and the gratuitous and sleazy sex scenes make this a gem of a cinematic experience born from the very annals of entertainment that created exploitation movies and the adult film industry. There's also just a load of politically incorrect things that make it that much more fun and whether it knew how outrageous it was or not, it really is pretty funny. I think the penis-memorabilia collecting, magician guy was likely the best character in this, he just epitomizes the oddball nature of the film and is the center of most of the best humor. This really is skeezy, dated schlock at it's best and that's why I stress you watch it on a genuinely used VHS cassette tape, preferably one distributed during the 90's or late 80's.

Edith N (mx) wrote: Crueler Than I Think It Realizes There is a difference between "laughing at" and "laughing with," as your parents doubtless told you when you were young. (I had a friend whose mother told her they were laughing with her, and she just hadn't started laughing yet. Yes, she was a deeply scarred individual. Also not very bright.) Better comedies laugh with. At least usually. It isn't mockery. It isn't at anyone's expense. The people don't necessarily know that they're funny; indeed, most comedies work better when the characters aren't aware they're in one. However, the story still realizes that a good comedy is (usually) more than just a bunch of jokes strung together. It is important to care about the characters and what's happening to them. Certainly if you're going to be putting together an intelligent comedy. Even the ZAZ team knows that, and the reason modern parody movies fail, aside from the fact that they aren't funny, is that they don't. Alas, this movie fails on that point as well. Renato Baldi (Ugo Tognazzi) owns the eponymous nightclub, one of those drag cabaret shows where the straights come to gawk at the freaks, though of course the film never thinks about it that way. Its star attraction and Renato's lover is Albin Mougeotte (Michel Serrault), or Zaza Napoli, as he is known on stage. Twenty years earlier, Renato had a son, Laurent (Rmi Laurent), with Simone Deblon (Claire Maurier), an actual woman. And now, Laurent has come home to announce that he's getting married. To a girl. Andrea Charrier (Luisa Maneri). Well, that's fine--Renato had always hoped Laurent would marry a girl, though he wishes it had taken a few more years. Only Andrea has a father, Simon (Michel Galabru), who is a member of a morality group whose leader has just died in the arms of an underage black prostitute. So Simon and Louise (Carmen Scarpitta) go to St. Tropez to meet their daughter's fianc and his family. In [i]The Birdcage[/i], the remake, Nathan Lane's Albert Goldman is a tiresome drama queen a lot of the time, but he is also gentle, loving, and giving. When he feels rejected by Robin Williams as Armand Goldman, his feelings are hurt, not his sense of pride or his dignity. He understands why everyone is so worried about him, but he wishes they had the strength to overcome it and stand by him. It is the fact that they don't which drives his actions. Whereas Albin is acting out of jealousy and, it seems, selfishness. He comes across as thinking of Laurent as a toy, not a son. When he calls himself pathetic, it does not come across as Albert's aura of genuine despair. He wants everyone to come and assure him that he isn't. A discussion of [i]Mame[/i] which I read once said that the difference between Lucille Ball's performance in it and Rosalind Russell's performance in [i]Auntie Mame[/i] was that Russell loved everyone while Ball wanted everyone to love her. This may be the problem here. In both movies, however, there is the implicit agreement that the gay people are freaks who must hide their shame from the straight people. Laurent is only acceptable if he can present a normal home life--in this version, he isn't even allowed to be an only child, though that may have been as much a lie born of a string of them. In order to be rehabilitated, Renato must become a minor diplomat, a cultural attach, because a nightclub owner is unseemly. (Oh, it can be argued that it's the gay part, but it seems likely that many nightclubs are owned by people just in it for the money!) Further, there is never any real implication that Renato might be interested in the family of the girl to marry his son. It is he who must pass inspection, with the humour coming from the fact that the father is in the morality business. While it's true that people who make a big fuss about morality generally have a pretty narrow-minded view of it, the implications are still there. It's probably unfair to compare these two movies so directly. After all, they were separated by nearly twenty years, and a lot changed in that time. However, originals and remakes always invite comparison, and in comparison, I think the original fails. Perhaps the difference can be summed up by the crucifix. In the remake, one of the gay people brought in to help redecorate before the in-laws-to-be get there brings it in and is told not to add. In this version, Albin himself brings it in and leaves it there, hanging over the proceedings. In the remake, someone uses the old "somebody needs the wood" line on it, which is camp gay enough. In this version, though, it feels as though the person who needs the wood is Albin--so he can nail himself up there instead. No, these people have no right to force their moral values onto Renato and Albin, who after all have raised a fine boy. However, Albin isn't making things any easier on Laurent with his attitude. Maybe that's why Laurent vanishes for the second half.

Andy C (fr) wrote: A homoerotic romp through San Francisco, who would have ever guessed?

Batesow T (es) wrote: Wow I was fine by going to watch it and then just wow that sucked

Tyler P (mx) wrote: Un excellent western. Trs beau et avec de superbes paysages boliviens.

Sam R (au) wrote: It started off so well with an introduction to a dystopian S.Africa. But then dipped into some brainless Bad Boys style movie with a questionable storyline.

Wave C (au) wrote: weak script but loaded with action and spy thrilled

Andrew R (es) wrote: Really dark and depressing character study. The film is acting marvellously and the characters come off as realistic. One of the best films showcasing the after effects and horrors of war on the average citizen.

Barry H (ca) wrote: I actually thought this movie was quite funny but it does start to get a bit much towards the end. Probably would have been better if it was shorter.