Stan and Ollie are charged with delivering the deed to a valuable gold mine to the daughter of a dead prospector. However they reckon without the machinations of her evil guardian Mickey ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Way Out West
Stan and Ollie try to deliver the deed to a valuable gold mine to the daughter of a dead prospector. Unfortunately, the daughter's evil guardian is determined to have the gold mine for himself and his saloon-singer wife.
|Download||Laurel & Hardy - Way Out West  Eng+Nordic subs DVDrip||DVDRip||55||34||4 GB|
|Download||Way Out West (1937)DVDRip NLsubs[Divx]NLtoppers||DVDRip||31||34||651.57 MB|
|Download||Laurel en Hardy - Way Out West 1937 (NLsubs) TBS||Other||52||32||3.81 GB|
|Download||Laurel y Hardy en el Oeste (1956) [HDRip-ac3-XviD][Spanish]||HDTV||49||30||900.99 MB|
You may also like
Way Out West torrent reviews
Eliabeth C (ru) wrote: I really like the premise of this movie. Very interesting. But for some reason the movie left me wanting more. And ultimately disappointed. I guess it's just another case of the wrong execution of the right idea.
Ren J (nl) wrote: This movie was totally adorable, interesting and funny. Every character is very sympathetic and the actors do a good job. Please watch it.
Benjamin F (it) wrote: There never seems to be a real point to the film. It goes through the motions exactly how you would expect and that is not interesting.
Greg S (au) wrote: On the eve of the apocalypse a man checks into a Las Vegas hotel room where he converses with his alter egos, ghosts, and other mystical beings. It's hard to defend this movie against charges of pretension---the script seems like something a couple of sophomore English majors would come up with after a marathon session smoking some excellent sensi--but it is sincere, unpredictable, and there's not much else like it out there.
Carlos M (us) wrote: A metalinguistic exercise in which it is the characters who have to decide, by flipping a coin, if they want to belong in a sensitive family drama or an action thriller, and so the result is an interesting indie experiment about uncertain paths, though sometimes a bit bland.
Olaolu A (us) wrote: A dark and dank Aussie neo-noir thriller that probably won't take you to places you've never been before cinematically but still provides a solid hour-and-a-half's worth of genre thrills, provided you don't go in expecting everything to be all sunny and rosy in the end. Most film noir, by its nature, is pretty cynical and grim stuff but this one is as much a straightforward, almost Shakespearean tragedy as it is a twisty, atmospheric thriller. In someways, it is even more downbeat than another recent Australian import, 2010's Animal Kingdom, although I liked that film slightly more. Unlike this effort, that one took what could have been a garden variety crime drama in a more interesting direction and became something far more powerful as a result. On the other hand, this film is content to be your basic tale of lust, infidelity, murder and betrayal - everything that one expects from this sort of movie. It can be argued that perhaps it wears its influences on its sleeve a bit too much; in particular, I was reminded of the Coen Brother's debut Blood Simple and Sam Raimi's A Simple Plan (the fact that this involves cheating spouses brings to mind the former, while the greed and duplicity of the main characters could easily remind one of the latter). Still, it manages to infuse the material with enough freshness that it doesn't come off as a complete clone of its cinematic ancestors.For me, one aspect of the film that keeps it from reaching its full potential is a near dearth of likable or sympathetic characters. Yes, I realize that these kind of films are usually populated with all sorts of unsavory types but in order for something like this to be truly devastating, we need to be drawn to the protagonists and emotionally invested in their plight. Unfortunately, neither of the individuals in the principal pairing, Ray (David Roberts) and Carla (a sexy Claire van der Boom) succeeded in getting me in his or her corner. Putting aside their obviously devious and conniving nature, neither of these two characters demonstrates that they are very bright (she is clearly more the manipulative of the pair but he is supposed to be a construction project manager so you'd think that he'd be better at executing plans). Every time they try to scheme or plot something, it inevitably goes horribly awry because of their carelessness and their attempts to fix their problems only exacerbate the situation until it becomes too much for anyone to handle. It would be hilarious if only it didn't turn out to be so tragic. It's pretty clear that everyone in this movie is headed on a collision course with catastrophe but despite our intellectual awareness of this, it's tough to truly feel any empathy for these people even as they're descending deeper and deeper into the personal hells that they've created for themselves.Just because the characters aren't sympathetic, that doesn't mean they're not well-acted. As the cheating spouses, both David Roberts and Claire van der Boom give strong performances and allow us to sense their characters' desperation as they scheme to break free of the monotony that has defined their existences but find themselves in way over their heads in the process. Both understand how to deliver dialogue but where they truly shine is in their non-verbal acting. There are several scenes where the looks on their faces tell us everything we need to know. As Claire's husband Smithy, a tow truck driver who is a low-level crook on the side, and Ray's wife, Martha, both Anthony Hanes and Lucy Bell are solid but they don't threaten to take the spotlight away from the leads. Also worth mentioning is Joel Edgerton who, in addition to co-writing the screenplay with Matthew Dabner, has a significant onscreen role as Billy, the thug-for-hire whom Ray uses to help cover his and Carla's tracks and who unwittingly -and quite literally - sparks the first major tragedy of the film. In recent years, the actor has seen his profile rise on both sides of the ocean with superlative performances in films such as the aforementioned Animal Kingdom and 2011's Warrior where he played Tom Hardy's older brother. Personally, I didn't find Edgerton to be quite the standout here that he was in either of those two more recent films, but he still does a solid job in a somewhat cliched role. As Billy, he is suitably shady and menacing, which is really all that is needed of him. I would say that in this case, Edgerton's efforts as a writer are more noteworthy than his acting (although he clearly didn't write the most interesting character for himself to play). Again, there is nothing particularly original about the plot line but it is still well-written and Edgerton and Dabner refreshingly don't feel the need to infuse this with Hollywood cliches. Instead, they allow things to unfold the way they likely would if this were to happen in real life. I'd say that they deserve credit for not pulling any punches in steering the story to it's natural, albeit grim, conclusion. Perhaps the manner in which the movie elects to wrap things up isn't all that surprising considering everything that leads up to it, but it still packs a punch (although the lack of emotional investment with the main characters doesn't allow this blow to be as strong as it could have been). Also, in a departure from most noir thrillers, the comic relief is very limited here; in fact, I honestly can't recall anything here that could remotely be construed as even a little funny (except perhaps for a small subplot involving the canine companions of the two lovers). The potential is there for a deliciously dark Murphy's Law - type comedy but the script takes it's characters and their circumstances very seriously - perhaps too seriously. Sitting in the director's chair is Nash Edgerton, Joel's older brother (the fact that this film is the product of sibling filmmakers further strengthens the connection to Blood Simple); the elder Edgerton definitely does justice to his younger brother's script. The pacing is tight with more than enough tension and suspense to keep most viewers riveted and the proceedings are suffused with atmosphere although perhaps it's not as overwhelming here as it is in other similar efforts. In the final analysis, this film may not offer anything that's truly new and groundbreaking, but it executes it's stock elements with enough aplomb to be worth viewing for fans of noir thrillers that hit all the expected bases but don't feel the need to cheat viewers with a cop-out ending.
Jeff S (nl) wrote: This just wasn't the film for me; for the most part, I found it rather dull and drawn out. Where was the spice, I ask you? Petey Greene was supposed to be a rebel, a revolutionary, and he came across as more of a pussycat in this film. Also, 2 hours was just way too much time to spend on this work; the material should and could have been portrayed in a much shorter duration.
Cynthia S (ca) wrote: Superb! The history of the English Royals has never ceased to amaze me. The people that were closest to them, and were supposed to be there to support and protect them, were nothing but opportunists. This is the story of how they used two poor young people to get their way. Jane Grey and Guilford Dudley were forced into a marriage, and then used to obtain the throne of England. It was never their choice, and it was totally against their wishes. They were nothing but pawns. Unfortunately, when all went wrong in a very short time, they paid for it with their lives. This has to be one of the most tragic stories that came out of that era, and this movie really did a wonderful job telling it..even if they embellished a little with the romance stuff. If that was true or not, I dont know. But it made me enjoy it even more.
Linda D (br) wrote: One of my favorite movies of all time. Best line: "I'm not an actor, I'm a movie star!"
C S (nl) wrote: I have to admit it. I've always loved this film.
Gregg D (ca) wrote: Very Funny, from what I can recall. Have not seen in a long time.
Morgan F (jp) wrote: While not the scariest movie out there, this film was brilliantly executed as far as it's cinematography. The paralleling of past and present was amazingly done, and the ending gives me chills every time. I absolutely love this movie, I could watch it over and over.
Andrew L (nl) wrote: crap film which is a re-make of another equally crap film.
Crissy A (au) wrote: I can't believe I wasted my money on this movie. I'm surprised people genuinely liked this movie and found it funny. I don't think I actually laughed once throughout the entirety of the film. It's not even one of those 'it's so bad it's good' type of movies. It's just blatantly terrible.