A creative horror movie made up of five unique short films tied together by a similar theme.
You may also like
Cinco torrent reviews
tony l (mx) wrote: no matter what enemy or friend when they about they die they know and they will tell the truth.....
Teresa J (ag) wrote: awesome movie. i have had it for years. I LOVE VEGIE TALES!!!!!
Harry W (fr) wrote: Putting action stars Wesley Snipes and Ving Rhames together under the direction of Walter Hill, Undisputed sounded like a perfectly undemanding action film.I went into Undisputed with the wrong expectations. I had incorrectly guessed that the film would be an action movie centred on fighting of some kind, not expecting that it would turn out to be a sports film. I was willing to accept the unexpected result as I love a good boxing film, but I'm hesitant to say that Undisputed qualifies in that field.With Undisputed, Walter Hill set out to make a boxing film which had no underlying symbolism. His film was intended to be strictly "one that's actually about boxing and not a metaphor", yet the actual amount of the film which is about boxing proves to be minimal. Despite this claim, Undisputed spends way too match of the film focusing on George "Iceman" Chambers in his plight to maintain his innocence and the negotiations around his release. Though there is nothing wrong with the acting in these scenes, Walter Hill's desire to focus on boxing doesn't prove to hold up yet it also means that the dramatic depth of it all is limited, so his directorial work seems truly misguided.Considering the generic contract promised by a film which casts both Ving Rhames and especially Wesley Snipes in the leading roles, I would have expected that Undisputed would follow the roots of a guilty pleasure genre picture far more than a pretentious drama. Unfortunately, that's not the path Undisputed chooses to follow. Both Ving Rhames and Wesley Snipes are prominent stars who portray essential characters in Undisputed, but the balance between focus is far from equal. What little depth there is proves to focus on Iceman with minimal time given to Monroe "Undisputed" Hutchens. If there was an equal balance between the characterizations of these two champions going head to head then perhaps things wouldn't drag on so much and maybe Wesley Snipes would be more of an engaging screen presence, but the minimal time he gets puts him into the final fight scene and little else while Ving Rhames is left to hold everything else up. If the film made greater use of the star power it had present then maybe it could have been a stronger dramatic piece, or better yet if it actually saw fit to follow a more energetic and inspiring boxing formula with greater conflict between the main characters, training montages and actual grit that comes with the prison context of the story then it could have been the guilty pleasure audiences would have been hoping for. However, that hope remains a distant dream for those watching Undisputed.Since the entire film spends time building up to its climactic boxing match, the majority of commentary must be focused on that. Ultimately, it is far from satisfactory. It is arguably the greatest part of the film, but it is rife with technical faults. The two most major ones are the sounds and camerawork. From the beginning of Undisputed when it depicts its first boxing match, viewers are forced to confront the fact that someone thought it to be most appropriate to use the exact same sound effects again and again for when punches are landed. The same unrealistic contact blow sound effect is used with such heavy repetition that it hits viewers over the head like the many punches the characters take. There is no variation in the effect, no matter how light or heavy each punch turns out to be. And to add to it, the cinematography is less than stellar. Though the entire boxing match is captured with wide angles and plenty of long-shots, much of the cinematography films everything from behind bars. Attempting to give viewers the feeling of actually being there to witness the climactic boxing match, viewers must watch the fight as the camera pans along with metal bars in the way for too much of the fight. There are rare moments where you can see it clearly, but most of the time things are captured from the perspective of the crowd. My assumption would be that the intend of this is to add realism to the film, but considering that nobody saw fit to make the sound effects or fight choreography any more realistic I can't see why they would focus on this one element when it just gets in the way of Undisputed's action scenes. But even though Undisputed fails to truly capitalize on its cast, Ving Rhames proves a solid lead. There is no way to be certain whether or not George "Iceman" Chambers is truly a guilty criminal or not because Ving Rhames consistently keeps a line of mystey present, balancing intimidation with honesty to the point that he seems fit to be in prison yet not a criminal. He has elements of egotism to him which he uses to fuel the badass nature of the character, yet he restrains it enough not to seem like a straightforward antagonist. Despite the repetitive material in Undisputed, Ving Rhames' natural aggressive charisma and boxing skills make him a fitting lead.I wish I could say the same thing about Wesley Snipes, but the material gives him little screen time and no room to actually put any meaning into the character. In the few scenes he actually has, Wesley Snipes plays out as if he has a dead spirit. Yet rather than diverting this into the notion of being damaged by the wreckage of his past and the harsh reality of prison, he is simply stuck in repetitive melancholy which fails to put him on the same pedestal as Ving Rhames. This means that the badass actor who fought Sylvester Stallone in Demolition Man (1993) and hunted vampires in Blade (1998) has nothing to do in Undisputed aside from deliver a select few punches. And like I said, the sound effects and loose choreography limit their impact.So Undisputed desires to be a proud B-movie and boasts Ving Rhames' star power, but with a prolonged story which stretches on for too long in a short running time of 94 minutes and little use of grit, action or Wesley Snipes to sustain it, there is ultimately little satisfaction.
Gilbert G (de) wrote: Whatever! I freaking LOVE this movie! I don't care if I am the only one!
Andrea C (kr) wrote: This is an incredible documentary - very powerful and stays far away from didacticism...see it!!
Moreticia (it) wrote: LOVED IT MY SISTER WAS NAME AFTER HIM
Stephen F (us) wrote: I kept watching it thinking that there would be something worth seeing, to no avail.
Aprile F (jp) wrote: Sorta disappointed that there were only two dancing performances by Astaire but even though they were few, they were amazing. Completely unoriginal plot and sometimes a little boring. But props to Paulette Goddard for keeping up with Fred..and she wasn't even a dancer.
Paul G (nl) wrote: I first saw this film when I was a child of about 14. I remeber enjoying it greatly. The story had the potential to be something really great, but unfortunately the let Gery Anderson of Thunderbirds fame create long and meandering special effects sequences which break the story up too much - its like "yes I get the fact the ship is docking, it has been for the last three minutes". Maybe this is a reflection on the very fast editing of todays films, maybe its me being too harsh. I still think the idea for the story is great though.
Chris R (es) wrote: Love it or hate it, it's an all time classic. Bound to be enjoyed by all ages for the ages.
Adam R (au) wrote: Beautifully filmed. Watching it makes me feel like I'm in Frontierland. Tommy Kirk gives a powerful performance that you will never forget. Old Yeller is an emotional coming-of-age classic that everybody should see. (First full viewing - 8/9/2008)
George F (nl) wrote: The title of this movie is the warning included in a strange advertisement that requests a partner for a time-travel journey. A reporter from a big Seattle newspaper convinces his boss that there is a story there. A story big enough for him to head to the small town and also enlist the help two interns; an nerdy Indian, and a antisocial girl (our protagonist, played by Aubrey Plaza). After the reporter fails to establish himself as a potential time-travel buddy, it is the quirky girl's turn, and sure enough, her odd ways click with our mad scientist (our second protagonist, who works at a super market). Aubrey plaza plays exactly the same character she plays in the early seasons of Parks and Recreation. For those you who haven't watched it (shame on you, please do) she is an eye-rolling, constant-sighing, late teen, who dismisses everything and everyone. A pretty endearing character (if you give her a chance). After our protagonists' initial click, he slowly begins to trust her and reveals to her fragments of his time-traveling plan. She in turn becomes engrossed with the plan (and him). Their escapades bring laughter, but for some reason the movie decides to make her fall for him, and it feels weird and forced. As the plan (and the movie) progresses, we get to laugh a lot and also wonder what's the guy's real deal; is he a harmless weirdo, or a misunderstood genius? Unfortunately, between the good scenes there is a lot of fat; apart from the forced romance, we have the subplot of the successful outside / empty inside reporter, and as a form of triteness apotheosis, the scenes where the nerdy guy must score. The bad news continue; the climax lacks bite, and the creepy plot-twist is simply ignored in order to achieve a happy ending with a (superficial) bang. You will get a fair share of laughs and a couple of heart-warming scenes, but nothing more. 6.0/10.