You may also like
Youth Sketch torrent reviews
Emmanuel F (de) wrote: Pretty good fantastical period piece.
Declan M (nl) wrote: The hunger games gives us a fairly strong opening with a gritty aesthetic and compelling acting. It does however suffer from poor CGI at moments such as the costume fire and the 'mutts'.
Megg C (ru) wrote: I loved Kay with a horse it was awesome
Amanda H (au) wrote: The acting is good here, but really, it's more of a character study than a movie. Nothing ties together, there's really no resolution, and the stories are unrelated to each other with the exception of the fact that they take place in the same hotel room. If you just want to see some good acting, this is fine, but if you need more than that, skip this one.
Maneesh D (ag) wrote: Not bad movie, better than i thought. First hour was good but got silly at the end. Akshay Kumar was solid. Govinda had nothing to do.
Justin T (de) wrote: An instant favorite.
Hardy H (it) wrote: I watched the two together (although i did intentionally wait one day), so it's not totally fair to pick this one over the Sunrise. Obviously this one has the benefit to build on the last film and thus a little more emotional, but i found the urgency in this one is what makes it better . Throughout the movie i worry that its gonna end soon, where in before sunrise it does drag a little from time to time. The scene in a car is perhaps just a bit too rushy, but fortunately it settles down for a nice finish.It was great to see one great quality maintained from the first film: although obviously Paris is like a character in itself , it doesn't take away from the focus: the lead couple and their exchanges. It properly portraits the feeling of couple being in their own little bubble/world, suspended from reality in each other's company. And also, i think the ending is definite, and it's satisfying enough for me. This is my favourite romantic movie of all time. In some way i wish i waited 9 years for this surprise, considering how much i enjoyed the sequel after just one day of wait.
Laura R (ca) wrote: Dead sexy. Kinda creepy, too.
Jameson W (ag) wrote: Fantastically acted. Loved it until the film decided it wanted to be a revenge story. Still a really good film though.
Craig T (ru) wrote: Uninteresting material generally mishandled by three directors who should have known better.
Anthony L (es) wrote: Ginger & Fred is a typically playful satire from Fellini targeting Television of the 'Light entertainment' variety. It's funny though, the exaggerations are pretty much bang on the money these days but as clever as the lampooning is, it's the performances and the on screen relationship between the ever wonderful Marcello Mastroianni and Giulietta Masina that really make this film the diamond that it is. Very Italian, very Fellini, very funny and very lovely. Highly recommended.
Corbin S (gb) wrote: Easily one of the funniest movies I've ever seen, the laughs never stop.
Crae B (ru) wrote: Dad: 91For sentimental reasonsWatched it repeatedly in high schoolMichael Keaton's first filmI still repeat lines thirty years later -"You like music kid?"
Daniel P (ag) wrote: I saw 20 minutes from the middle of this on TV probably five years ago and thought "looks pretty good." I think they were the best 20 minutes of the movie. Overall, this one comes off like your average community theatre play, and it appears to have a lot of lines that would have worked better on stage. The problem (well, a problem, there are a quite a few) is that this was shot as though it were on stage, in a lot of long shots in front of cheap scenery. The acting is so-so, but the dialogue is brutal - fast-forward the first 15 minutes or more, you won't miss anything - and the plot clunks along. And yet, strangely, the story does gets its hooks in you. You can't stop watching. You need to know how it ends. Unfortunately, this is just mediocre or worse on so many levels that the interesting premise can't save it.
Emma C (ca) wrote: fantastic film, no more needed,
Jim B (ag) wrote: Just watched this film and was disappointed. (potential spoilers... of an 18 year old film ahead) The whole film is building to a double disaster, a small meteor that'll cause a tsunami killing lots of people, followed by a massive meteor that'll kill everyone! (apart from a select few who'll need to live underground for 2 years?!) So you wait the whole slow slow film for the disaster and the first rock hits, and then out of the blue they figure a way to avert the second. So loads of people who accepted their soggy fate from the first need not have died, because they didn't bother to get to safety because they'd figured they'd die anyway. So what's the message? "You know how we said you'd definitely die from the second rock, so avoiding the first is just prolonging the inevitable, well, don't listen to us, we don't know what we're talking about, ah well, our little whoopsie only needlessly caused the death of millions, our bad!" The ending is so rushed, I was shocked when it ended. Which considering how slow the film is, it's unforgivable. It's like they blew the budget for the last few minutes, so they have to pad out the preceding 2 hours with tedious melodrama. But it's about the characters some might say, well the film gives the viewer absolutely no reason to have any emotion invested in those characters. Yes they have families and lives, who doesn't? There's so little characterisation and they're all so forgettable and largely unlikeable that I was happy when most died and a bit miffed some survived. If that's what the director was going for, then job done! (just to note, this director was never given a big budget movie again). Another aspect that makes the film feel rushed seems down to editing, note Frodo from Lord of the Rings and his annoying girlfriend riding away from a tsunami on a dirt bike (yes you read that right), cut to the next scene, they're on foot?! I asked my kids "when did they get off the bike?" the reply being "they were on it, then suddenly they weren't?". Worse still it looks like they had a nasty crash, totally missing from the film?! Oh, and having barely been able to outrun the 200mph tsunami on a bike, they somehow manage on foot?! Also Dougray Scott pops up near the end, as if he's a major character that's been featured throughout the movie and has a relationship with the intensely dislikeable Tea Leoni, but he wasn't in the rest of the movie? Cutting room floor perhaps? This feels like a 3hr movie edited down to 2, but they chopped out the wrong hour. Disaster movies have been done much better before and since this film, so check out those instead. When a film makes the guff Michael Bay spews out look OK, you know it's bad!