Voyage Of The Unicorn

Voyage Of The Unicorn

One day the Aislings find themselves magically transported to a ship called the Unicorn. Here, they discover that they've been chosen to fulfill an incredible quest! They undergo an incredible journey of discovery in strange lands with enchanted creatures, but find their voyage is really one of the spirit, as they each learn faith and the power of love.

The movie follows a professor, grieving for his dead wife, and his two daughters who are unwillingly swept up into a parallel universe of fairy court, marauding trolls, and a prophecy where they must save a mystical Faerie world from destruction by a horde of evil trolls. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechers

Voyage Of The Unicorn torrent reviews

Amy H (es) wrote: Beautiful film, and background, but is it a good film? Not really! I think it showed a couple who have problems but yet unwilling to talk about it, instead just hide from it.

Sanjay T (it) wrote: Funny adventure and crime!

Alex H (fr) wrote: Booooring! Terrible acting, a horrible script and worthless directing!

Ben R (br) wrote: The stunt he performed with his car and the crane was impossible, unrealistic and completely destroyed the movie. Was ok up until then.

Molly R (ag) wrote: This was billed as a comedy, but I only found once scene funny.

Emory P (jp) wrote: cool animation and fun to make fun

Paul Z (us) wrote: Shining Through is a 1992 romantic thriller with a WWII espionage edge that attracts our ceaseless interest in that time in history. It tries even harder nevertheless to appeal to an even wider audience by adopting the tone and style of Mervyn LeRoy movies, that swift, superficially efficient gib shot festival approach and capricious indulgence in the flashback and dream sequence formats. Indeed, the movie is told in flashbacks, to no necessary end, with an aged, awkwardly demure Melanie Griffith recalling her story for a BBC interviewer. This would have worked better if Griffith had found a way to add mileage on her speaking voice, which stays in her common asthmatic, good-little-girl pattern. It was said in this film's era of release that with the disintegration of the Soviet Union, Hollywood would have to double back to the Nazi generation for their villains. Thankfully, they cooked up some smarter Nazis for subsequent films. Maybe Susan Isaacs' initial material stands a better chance of preventing certain elements from straying too far into the clouds.But since it is what it is, we have Michael Douglas, playing a Colonel in the OSS, covering as a lawyer. Purposeful, sophisticated. Melanie Griffith's character reacts to him as if he is humorless. Nonetheless, quiet or loud, he always seems powerful and determined. And Griffith, all things considered, empowers her character with a noble bearing.The subject matter offers a great mine of fascination, intensity and entertainment, not to mention suspense. The Resistance during WWII had a profound effect on its partisans. There are many films, before this one and after, that more portray the sensory, tangled reality of the experience and less trivialize it in romanticized escapism. Nonetheless, can one fault a film for having been entertained by it?

Paul Z (ag) wrote: Like Bird, Eastwood presents a compelling characterization of an artist as a confounding and mythicized person, drawing us in with questions of obsession and egotism as his interpretation of the legendary John Huston upends his collaborators' boundaries of good sense to gratify his pride and machismo.

Tit M (it) wrote: un putain de role pour une balasko impeccablele film est une paradoxe sur l amour la beaute c est subtil c est ambigu c est du blier quoi

Shawn W (gb) wrote: A film with a good cast that just tries too much. 1960's set film about a woman who is dealing with the fact that the man who raped her is released and looking for her. Rather than focus on that storyline, we also get a white civil rights activist trying to further the cause and a pair of girls on a double date. Stuff like this led to Cannon Films downfall. Should have stuck to their bread and butter - Bronson and Norris in action films.

Gavin S (de) wrote: This is raised to a 4-star movie because of the gorgeous cinematography and score (courtesy of John Barry). As a romance goes, it's fairly modern (for a 30yr old movie) with both leads being equal in importance, and neither one outshining the other. Redford is great here, and Streep is her usual bang on self as well, slowly warming up over the course of the nearly 3 hour run-time. It can seem mildly slow in places, but if you just give it time to unfold it is actually worth the investment. I said to my wife at the end, "Boy now I really feel like going to visit Africa." Sidney Pollack does a great job of weaving together the scenery, the romance, the story, the characters, all into a coherent and enjoyable story that avoids most of the the traps of many romances. This film walked away with 7 Oscars in 1986 (Best Picture, Director, Cinematography, Adapted Screenplay, Score, Sound, Art-Direction/Set) and I don't feel like it robbed any other more deserving films (major nominees that year included: Color Purple, Witness, Ran (Kurosawa), Prizzi's Honor, Kiss of the Spider Woman). It didn't win acting awards, that's fine, because they were strong performances, but not award calibre. A very good film, and one of the few epic romances that stands up well 30yrs later.

J K (ru) wrote: Is the visitor bisexual? Call it morbid curiosity.

ren (ag) wrote: One of my favorite movies of all time

Ari S (mx) wrote: Fucking exciting, but also incredible brutal...

Laura L (de) wrote: I caught this last night on Showtime and I actually rather liked it. There are some tender moments and some laugh out loud funny moments. Garret Dillahunt has terrific timing with unexpected lines.

Joseph C (es) wrote: Cronenberg's early to mid-eighties work is consistently arresting. They are certainly horrific, but Cronenberg was able to take the forms of horror and give them a certain philosophical relevance. This piece was a lot of fun, I think. I wonder if Cronenberg, in many of these films, was trying to cinematically map our body in a postmodern culture? They flow as if he had read Lyotard or Jameson. Cronenberg and Lynch both seem narrativize and imagine profoundly traumatic psychic events -- the former's genius is, I think, in his constantly morphing bodies. They have a plasticity which, while both haunting and grotesque, in a literal sense "give body" to concepts otherwise unimaginable, eg, the way the television set becomes organic while James Woods' character's body becomes more hardware, even being able to accept VHS tapes into a slit in his stomach.