Who's Singin' Over There?

Who's Singin' Over There?

On April 5, 1941, a day before Nazi attack on Yugoslavia, entourage on a country road board Krstic's bus heading for Belgrade: two Gypsies who occasionally sing about misery, an aging war veteran, a Nazi sympathizer, a dapper singer, a consumptive, and a man with a shotgun. Krstic is a world-weary cynic, out for a buck; the driver is his son, the simple, cheerful Misko. En route they pick up a more people and head towards their destiny.

  • Rating:
    4.00 out of 5
  • Length:86 minutes
  • Release:1980
  • Language:Serbo-Croatian
  • Reference:Imdb
  • Keywords:gypsy,   bus,   black comedy,  

It's April 5, 1941, somewhere in Serbia. A group of people go on a bus to Belgrade... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechers

Who's Singin' Over There? torrent reviews

Ryan N (ag) wrote: A great movie, with a great cast.

Heidi T (gb) wrote: Great movie, Jack Benny perfect ham and Carole Lombard is always great.

RJohn X (it) wrote: Aside from seeing Christopher Lee's naked buttocks, AGAIN this movie is great for the terrible devil puppet crawling back into Nastassja Kinski's womb. Aside from that Richard Widmark looks a bit tired as the wind blows around him. Which is not the only trick the devil has up his demonic sleeve - there are also people bursting into flames, psychic snake attacks, something about a ghostly lady, and a brush attack in the ear! The plot does not deviate too much from what the title promises, though, it is a bit anticlimactic. As far as devil baby movies go, this one is a great one. Hammer Wins Again!!

E M (ca) wrote: Social comm, Social comm, Social comm, Social comm, Social comm, Social comm, Social comm, Social comm, Social comm,

David M (es) wrote: An HBO-originated made for TV movie that received a deserved cinema release, this Steven Soderbergh directed film tells the story of Liberace's long affair with the much younger Scott Thorson, right up to and beyond the eventual death of the pianist. Even viewed on TV, as I did, it doesn't come off like a TV movie; Steven Sodebergh's efficient and composed direction marks this out as worth attention. However it doesn't really go to the depths worthy of the film's outstanding central performances (Michael Douglas as Liberace, Matt Damon as the lover). Liberace is pretty much as you expect the celebrity to be in this sort of story - initially attractive and engaging, then increasingly unpredictable and selfish. Scott Thorson is also as you expect the lover to be: star-struck, naive, enjoying the material benefits of his affair and eventually bitter, angry but still harbouring tender feelings. The narrative never feels quite engaging enough to grip or move; it's more of a genre piece, really - of rich prince and commoner lover lifted above his station. I was never really moved by it - fascinated, maybe; informed, potentially. However without a real interest in Liberace as an individual or artist, it didn't move above average. To say it's not a TV movie isn't a value judgement; it's a substance statement, describing the nature of the beast we're watching. What we're watching is a decent, but unspectacular glimpse into the faded glories of the over-privileged and under-loved.

Tim G (kr) wrote: I did not like field of dreams it was very overrated and began the start of a trail of bad films to star kevin Costner

Zach M (fr) wrote: This is a very messy entry in the Halloween series. A lot of problems with this film, no matter which version you watch.Paul Rudd stars in his first role. Donald Pleasence is in it as Loomis again (the last appearance due to his death) and of course Michael Myers is back.It suffered from a really bad script and it was trying to clean up some of the mess from Halloween 4 & 5.

Brandon V (ru) wrote: this movie is so goddamn cute what the fuck