An anorexic young woman escapes from a psychiatric clinic and meets a young man who wants to help. She is caught and returned to her parents, who are soon beheaded by a garrotting stranger making the rounds about town, apparently striking only when it rains. The orphaned young woman and her new lover launch their own investigation and are endangered when a link is discovered with the victims and a particular operation performed years before.
- Category:Action, Horror, Mystery, Thriller
- Stars:Brad Dourif, Asia Argento, Piper Laurie, James Russo, Christopher Rydell,
- Country:Italy, USA
- Director:Dario Argento,
The movie follows two mixed-up young lovers as they try to hunt down a decapitator called Head Hunter by the media and are endangered when a link is discovered with the victims and a particular operation performed years before. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Trauma torrent reviews
(ca) wrote: It was really good. But it got a lot better by the last 30 minutes
(us) wrote: Great idea for a mockumentary, but it could have done a lot more. It could have been funnier if it wanted to be in the vein of "A Mighty Wind" or "Best in Show". It also could have been more serious and gone the route of "World War Z" or "Breathers: A Zombie's Lament". What ends up being is not all that funny, lacked any interesting social commentary, and didn't have a strong storyline or characters.
(gb) wrote: OH MY GOD INTERNATIONAL ESPIONAGE!*Takes a deep breath*.I thank God because He made me objective and analytical in my film appreciation.Let's.... dissect this mutant of a film.Hartley is courageous. When there is a very risky project at hand, if you take it, you either win a lot or lose a lot. There are hardly gray areas in those cases. What Hartley wanted to achieve was a twist so unexpected that even close followers or Henry Fool fans would be surprised in the same way that Miike fans were not ready for something like Visitor Q or Happiness of the Katakuris. What if most of, if not everything that Henry Fool claimed to have done in the past movie turned out to be true? This plot unfolds.Watching Fay Grim is like witnessing an imaginary, fictional "what-if" alternate reality in which the characters that were so much profoundly dissected and analyzed from their most hidden and rotten layers of personality take whole new, unrelated and implausible roles. The result is the cheapest excuse available: an international espionage drivel.The reason that puts so many fans off is precisely such cheap turn of events. I don't. For once, I struggled, but succeeded at adapting an open mentality while repeating to myself: "This is a director taking risky chances with unexpected twists. Don't give up. You like that. You missed watching something like this."But then the movie kept progressing, and not only was I completely uninterested at the plot elements and horrified with the poorly done technical qualities during the "action" scenes, but also I couldn't relate to the characters I had known beforehand so intimately. I felt betrayed and mocked. It didn't even achieve to be a quality action film or a smart comedic spoof. No. It was a pretentious and shallow plot-twist show.So, I have a final question for Hal Hartley, if I may: What was the inconvenience of making Fay Grim as an independent film, completely unrelated with the characters? What were the aspects, either artistic or creative, that forced Fay Grim to become a poorly done and embarrassingly humorous vehicle of parody improvisations that forced its plot connections with the past film through ridiculous premises? This is not a sequel to Henry Fool. It's fucking Twilight Zone. It's a dream. It's a dream that Henry had in the previous film while being drunk and passing out in an outtake. Yes. That's gotta be it.That's gotta be it, dammit!41/100
(de) wrote: A bit slow at times and a bit long too, but it's still an somewhat interesting and well-made film
(br) wrote: A French-language movie about the trial and execution of Georges Danton by the Committee for Public Safety (1794). A really scary movie in a lot of ways. My only criticism is that it lets Danton and Desmoulins off the hook, not entirely but more than Robespierre. Perhaps it is so well known that Danton and Co. set up the bloody Tribunals and was possibly THE primary force in giving the CPS dictatorial powers only 9 months earlier. So maybe for a French audience, spelling it out clearly would have been too "on the nose". But other things, such as that Danton predicted, the Committee's leader Robespierre would be executed eventually largely *because* he had executed Danton *was* clearly spelled out. And they had Danton correctly predict how long it would take (3 months), which I doubt is historical. Still scary movie. If you're interested in this period and these people after seeing the movie, I recommend the book "The Gods Are Thirsty".
(ca) wrote: great movie, be sure to see the sequel, Tragic Hero.
(ru) wrote: after I had rented that movie I was afraid of watching it because I expected a bad b-movie - I love vampires. surprisingly Dracula captured me immediately! because it is only "based on" Bram Stoker's Dracula I didn't have any problems with the fact that there are characters missing or added. the whole movie was pure fun. Marc Warren as Dracula was sexy for me, even the wizened-greenish-before-I-drank-blood-Dracula succeeded in transferring a sex-appeal (later: black hair and blond breast hairs - unbelievably great). Sophia Myles who I know from the vampire series Moonlight was great, too, and looks very sexy in vintage dresses. luckily there is no disgusting splatter. the actors are very good, Van Helsing is just sweet. There is a pinch of erotic and some shocking moments. one time I even screamed although I never do that when I watch a movie alone. very often I got goose bumps (sometimes erotic, sometimes horror, sometimes because of monumentality). a very impressive movie! ps: in my family I am infamous for the fact that I like movies which nobody else likes. They just touch me.
(br) wrote: "me no understand how you live in box." a little long although short for kurosawa. a good, slow-paced film to improve russian as well!
(it) wrote: Not a lot of action pretty dull
(ag) wrote: Charlie Chaplin's Modern Times is one of the best satire movies. The movie manages to say everything even without a single dialogue. A movie worth watching.
(ag) wrote: They Were Expendable is a decent war film, but I have my reservations. I liked the action scenes against the Japanese, but I would like to have seen a whole lot more in terms of action. I found that the storyline itself lacked depth at times and was on the verge of boring. This sadly made the film a little overlong. However, John Wayne and Robert Montgomery were pretty good, along with the supporting cast. It is an alright war film. If I were to compare to 1953's Best Picture winner, From Here to Eternity, which was the assault on Pearl Harbor, I liked From Here to Eternity much, much better. This film could have been better.