Two young couples head into the New Guinea wilderness in an effort to find Michael Rockefeller, the heir to the Rockefeller fortune who disappeared in 1961. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Welcome to the Jungle
Two young couples head into the New Guinea wilderness in an effort to find Michael Rockefeller, the heir to the Rockefeller fortune who disappeared in 1961.
You may also like
Welcome to the Jungle torrent reviews
Amy H (es) wrote: If they can make a terrible horror movie, this is it! Dialogue was terrible, the acting was terrible and the story is just stupid! The only thing that is worth watching was the young generation had to use a paper map to find direction rather than use the internet! Oh yes, that's the most scary part of the movie, young kids lost their tech!!!
Charles F (nl) wrote: There is a sense in which a very meagre amount of effort - some of it perhaps genuine - has gone into the production of this movie. But, to be clear, this is the work of amateurs. In an ideal world it should never have reached an audience outside classroom walls. It's even hard to tell to what degree its failure owes to sheer incompetence or blatant pilfering from other movies of the same genre. Honestly, there isn't an ounce of creativity or ingenuity anywhere. I won't condescend to describe how cheap and poorly manufactured the horror is in this low-down dirty shame for a movie. I will, however, briefly mention the acting that is on the whole absolutely terrible. But wait! no so fast, Batman! There is a fantastic scene here near the end of the movie, the husband and father of the house experiences a convulsive, major nervous breakdown that deserves a CRAP award for releasing such trash into the airwaves and on countless television screens all over the world (what is it really? what's the actual number of audience members for a movie this bad? Four, maybe five, screens?). All of this transpires in various locations throughout the house but captured conveniently by the many video cameras installed in their home. Anyway, great freak out scene. Good for at least 75 breaths of air to one moon. The best part is that the man of the house does his best to adhere to the most generic gender stereotypes, while the laziest examples are probably more linked to human instinct than cultivated action, but he also clearly doesn't know how to act. At the point where the audience should be climaxing, we are treated to rapidly shifting images of the husband gyrating on the floor, throwing his arms and legs around, kicking and screaming like a regular goofball, and then we're back in business, except he's gone the next instant, barely able to stand on his own two feet. Is this just a bad case of restless leg syndrome? A human being turned into a dreidel. Spun. Yeah, definitely. This guys spun. At the same time the movie is falling apart both literally and figuratively. [Incidentally this reminds me of a trip I once took to the Sundance Film Festival which was taking place one evening high in the mountains on a makeshift stage, where we were due to attend a production of Guys and Dolls, and there was a major stormfront due to collide with the same area later that evening, only nobody really knew about it until it was too late to turn back. I was nine or ten years old at the time. I coud have taken the play or let it be standing on its own merits, preferably the later, which helps explain why I would find the events that followed such sheer delight, as huge set pieces and designs went flying off the stage while the actors on stage did their best to ignore the fact that their reality was under destruction. For one night and one night alone, it was like watching an plaster-cast construction of myself briskly dancing on the stage, light as a feather and thin as a leaf.] Well, I may as well have been in Utah at Sundance in place of watching The Amityville franchise in action in 2011 for this stupid and ridiculous Haunting every bit as flimsy and shoddy as the cardboard they used to decorate the stage that evening. This crucial unravelling... in front of the family... immensely entertaining, I swear, and I highly recommend watching it. Obviously the creators weren't trying to be funny, but this movie is so friggin' hilarious, you'll find yourself rolling on the floor with laughter (or your money back, guaranteed!).
Grady H (ag) wrote: Stupid characters stupid story, stupid looking digital sharks (although they looked better then Jaws ever did). Terrible film.
Leonora P (ru) wrote: Awsome documentary ! Sky & sand...
Des S (kr) wrote: I wasn't expecting much from this because it was a TV movie, but I wanted to watch it because it had Eric Balfour in it. It was actually better than I expected. Most of the acting was decent and the story was good.
Jordan B (fr) wrote: I can still remember quite fondly where I was and what I was doing on September 11, 2001, as I'm sure most Americans do. I still can recall being glued to the TV and watching in horror as the second tower came crashing to the ground. I had no idea that the day, in which started out normal, would become part of American history and would eventually be used to spring board many US lead military invasions. 5 years later Oliver Stone has brought us a big screen adaptation of the events that transpired that day. But is America actually ready to face such task that requires us to re-visit one of our darkest days? Those who believe that the focus of World Trade Center is the actual planes hitting will be fooled. The true story centers on John McLoughlin (Cage) and Will Jimeno (Pena), two port authority police officers. During their normal foot patrol, the first plane hits. McLoughlin, who is a Lieutenant, gathers his fellow officers and discuses their course of action for evacuating the building. McLoughlin and a few fellow officers brave the scattered fires and debris and work on getting people out of the second building. Things go from bad to extremely worse as the 2nd building collapses with McLoughlin and his group of officers still inside. They awaken with over 20 feet of wreckage above them. McLoughlin and Pena are the only survivors. Thus sets the stage for the rest of the film, can they hold out long enough till they themselves are rescued? Oliver Stone is an interesting director for this film. Many of his films in the past have had a very strong political motive. Just as "Platoon" and Born on the Fourth of July" had a anti-war zest to them, I expected the same with "World Trade Center". However, Stone's propaganda is very subtle this time around. One huge issue with this film that I just cannot seem to shake is the believability of the actors portraying McLoughlin and Pena's families. All act strangely muted instead of hysterical, depressed, and uncontrollable crying that one who expect from a person who has learned that their husband is still missing somewhere within the wreckage. Even with such great actresses as Maggie Gyllenhaal and Maria Bello, the acting is very subdued. I liked the idea of the film focusing on the idea of helping and saving lives rather than than the actual act of terrorism. In my opinion, I believe this movie needed to put on hold for at least another 5 years. At least until we are somewhat finished with all the wars we are involved with. With all of these events still fresh in our minds, I think that a film version is somewhat overkill considering that I'm quite sure everyone in the world has a memory longer than 10 minutes. World Trade Center isn't a bad movie. However, I would have waited for the creation of a different and better film to represent America's darkest day.
Mary J (es) wrote: Best movie i have watch in a wile!!!!
Mary O (mx) wrote: It's so sad!! And its a true story...
Brett F (ru) wrote: I'm surprised there are so few views on the original film of the franchise. Not as dark as the book. But still not the hyper-patronage of other films that followed it in the '80s. No clear bad-guys, everyone makes mistakes and has their own viewpoint. Far more realistic situations than the next two sequels. And only one bodycount!!!
Jonnathan V (br) wrote: UN concepto muy interesante, y un gran elenco desperdiciados een una ggenerica pelicula de accion pobremente desarrrollada
ray r (jp) wrote: Wow, what a ridiculously shite movie.
Bradley K (mx) wrote: Some moments really shine in this film thanks to the classy location shoot, interesting script and Reeves' and Seymour's chemistry. However, the horrendously saccharine score detracts from the over all feel of the film, resulting in an a made-for-TV atmosphere.