When minor-league hockey player Derek Thompson -- who has a penchant for knocking out his opponents' teeth every time he plays -- disillusions a fan, he is sentenced to a stint for one week as a bona fide, tutu-clad, real-life tooth fairy. Soon, Derek is inspired to rekindle his youthful dreams.
- Category:Action, Comedy, Family, Fantasy
- Stars:Dwayne Johnson, Stephen Merchant, Seth MacFarlane, Ashley Judd, Julie Andrews,
- Country:USA, Canada
- Director:Michael Lembeck,
Tooth Fairy follows star hockey player Derek Thompson as he is temporarily transformed into a full-fledged tooth fairy for a week as penalty for discouraging a young fan. But as Derek slowly adapts to his new position, he begins to rediscover his own forgotten dreams. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Tooth Fairy torrent reviews
(kr) wrote: A "road trip film" combined with a "coming of age film"..adds up to a tender and sensitive story about three lives that intercept one another and provide a backdrop for a wonderful story.
(de) wrote: I've seen some bad horror and this ranks up with some of the worst. Bloody Disgusting has no happy medium, they have good horror or shitty horror. it gets an extra star from me coz the effects were convincing but the acting, story and actions that happen are just horrid.
(jp) wrote: Judd's character totally unbelievable. Bad casting. Morgan Freeman made this watchable through.
(ag) wrote: One of Don Cheadle's best. Great movie, about arguably, the best baller ever. The film holds no punches and is decidedly realistic rather than melodramatic. I give props to all involved.
(de) wrote: THE BEST MOVIE EVER ABOUT THE BEST BASKETBALL PLAYER EVER!!! IT'S A GREAT STORY AND A MUST SEE FOR ANY BASKETBALL FAN.
(mx) wrote: Kevin Spacey has directed exactly two films, this is the first, and the only one you need to watch. William Fichtner is about the most underrated actor working today, and he's brilliant in this film. Also, Viggo Mortensen made this film before he was Aragorn, or a born again rock star, so he's also very very good.
(nl) wrote: One of my new favorite movies. I liked the shorter version, but the 4 1/2 hour version is a masterpiece. Not many movies could be more interesting when two hours are added to the runtime, but this one definitely is. It's almost an unreviewable movie, it really just washes over you. It's more an experience than a traditional film. I love it so much.
(kr) wrote: I know people who swear by this film. Finally watched it after all these years. Was ok. Will give this one another chance down the line. I have always like John Carpenter.
(es) wrote: I watched this film, which turned out to be more or less a cheesy soft porn that happens to be one of Emmanuelle Bart's first movies. But it was also lested first in what Hulu Plus refers to as their Criterion Collection. I can't find any documentation outside Hulu that indicates that this is a Criterion release. I will admit that despite its silly plot and mostly marginal acting, it is a beautifully photographed piece. This is my first (and probably last) David Hamilton film. I guess now at least I can say I've seen one.
(nl) wrote: Whilst not entirely factual, of course, this superb film remains faithful to an extraordinary story of courage; not only that of the British soldiers who brilliantly defended at Rorke's Drift and of whom eleven were awarded the Victoria Cross, but of the Zulu warriors who faced death 'with honour'. The film fills one's eyes with magnificent colour spread over a rather bleak landscape and so has that 'epic' feel without any sense of self-importance and so true to Stanley Baker's own character. It's Michael Caine's introduction to film where, though himself a Cockney, plays Lieutenant Gonville Bromhead ; an officer with a definite military pedigree. The film strikes one in a way that one might have read of it through the telling of Kipling or G.A. Henty where the events are presented as mythology to underscore the 'greatness of the British Empire and her heroes'. A brilliant keeper.
(gb) wrote: Ang Lee manages to convey the connection of these two men without the easy relationship milestones like marriage, kids, buying a house etc. The film focuses on what's most important to these men and does so with such class that the story is just as real and heart wrenching as any other I've seen.
(de) wrote: The one consistent theme in all of John Huston's work is perpetual loss -- how it affects, and defines, people. There may not be a more cogent example of this than in his "comeback" film, Fat City, an observant and understated study of desperation and marginalization. It's a shame that Stacy Keach's film career never materialized (though he's had a good run in TV) because he is sensational here. If nothing else, this underrated film is worth seeking out for Conrad Hall's cinematography alone. He has done nothing but brilliant work in his career, but Fat City may be his finest hour.
(nl) wrote: I was so excited when this came out to see Indy on the big screen again and find out what happened to him in the years in between. The first half of the movie I would give 5 stars. I loved the nostalgia. The 2nd half of the movie, however, was horrible. The giant ants. Shia swinging on the vines with monkeys made it unbearable at times to watch. Watch the first hour then turn it off.
(gb) wrote: A very fun and exciting film that makes you just accept that some plot holes are there, but when the dialogue is this good, the actors are great, and when the set up to the thrilling conclusion comes, you don't care about any convinces the director and writers took with the plot
(kr) wrote: Even stellar acting could not save the minutes spent watching (or making) this screenplay, which essentially exposes the wormwood of 'semi-'autobiographical 'creative-'writing, and the guilt-(white)washing embellishments that stem from a cowardly need to draw the (undeserved) sympathy of readers/viewers. Not a fault of the cast or cinematographers though, who executed their parts with flair, but the director's twist(y/ed) attempt to criticise/expose(?!) this movie's own art form comes off as disingenuous rather than ingenious.