Cine Holliúdy

Cine Holliúdy

The massive arrival of television in the country side of Brazil, in the '70s, puts in jeopardy the small movie theaters businesses. Francisgleydisson is the owner of Cine Holliudy, and he ...

The massive arrival of television in the country side of Brazil, in the '70s, puts in jeopardy the small movie theaters businesses. Francisgleydisson is the owner of Cine Holliudy, and he ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


Cine Holliúdy torrent reviews

Joseph A S (ru) wrote: The Devil Inside (2012) is the one horror movie to avoid! Not only is this the #1 Worst Horror "Found Footage" Documentary of all time, it's definitely the movie to feel very piss-off after seeing the entire movie about exorcism that tries to become the next version of "The Exorcist", done in a pseudo-The Last Exorcism style. Basically a documentary about a young daughter, Isabella Rossi seeking the truth about her mother, Maria who confesses that she was the demon that killed 2 priests and a nun back in 1989. With the help of two young exorcists, they tried to find a cure for her mother to release the demon that possesses her with science and religion and go face to face with the forming of the most powerful demons that ever occurred. Make no mistake, this is a bad film! So bad that I totally walked out of this piece of shit after 35 minutes. It has a lousy story from it's premise, bad acting all around from the entire cast, poorly done "found footage" documentary that tries to be realistic and was simply a total rip-off of "The Exorcist". The film is so bad, it even has (as the audience and critics had stated) the worst endings in movie history! Like if they really were selling something for the audience in the same vein as "Paranormal Activity". It's no surprise that the same writers and director, William Brent Bell & Matthew Peterman would stooped this low after their previous mess with "Stay Alive" (2006) with Frankie Muniz. It obvious that this stinker should have went straight to video where it belongs. After all, they are B-Movie, Direct-to-video level hacks that made bad movies! It Stinks!

Raphael G (au) wrote: a little too much like an afternoon movie at times, thanks to its soundtrack, but its a good story, and i like the two main characters!

Aaron P (nl) wrote: A humble, and poignant look at the mindset of a teenager.

Mark A (kr) wrote: Straightforward and a tad too simplistic, Harsh Times is ultimately saved by magnetic performances from Christian Bale and Freddy Rodriguez

Ola G (ag) wrote: Ernest "Stick" Stickley (Burt Reynolds), a former car thief, has just been released from prison. He meets up with an old friend, Rainy (Jose Perez), whose "quick stop" near the Florida Everglades before they go home is an illegal drug deal that goes sour. With his friend dead, Stick needs to hide out for a while to elude the killers who must eliminate him as a witness. While lying low, Stick finds himself in the right place at the right time when he helps a wealthy eccentric named Barry (George Segal) get into his locked car. Hired as a driver, he has a comfortable home with a stable job and tries to make up for lost time with Katie, his teen-age daughter. He also finds a new flame in Kyle (Candice Bergen), a financial consultant who acts as a business adviser for Barry, who must decide what of Stick can be salvaged. Before he can move on, however, Stick confronts drug dealer Chucky (Charles Durning) to demand the money owed to his murdered friend. Chucky refuses and sends albino hit-man Moke (Dar Robinson) after the ex-con. Stick can't get on with his new life without cleaning up old business first. He becomes the target of Moke as well as the cartel that employs Chucky, led by the voodoo-obsessed Nestor (Cstulo Guerra). A three-way confrontation on a high-rise balcony ends in Chucky's and Moke's deaths. Stick must then rely on his quick wit and fists to deal with his final enemy, Nestor, who has kidnapped Stick's daughter...Burt Reynolds "Stick" is somewhat uneven in the storyline. I reckon due to the fact that the movie was originally set for release in August 1984 but Universal Pictures demanded that director Burt Reynolds shoot additional action scenes--at a further cost of $3 million--and cut down the film's humor to make it more commercially viable. I reckon Reynolds was aiming for a character driven piece with Elmore Leonards screenplay and book while UP wanted something more simple and easy for the box office. The first half has this intense 80s atmosphere pushing Sticks revenge for Rainy, while the other half becomes everything on a plate. Thriller, action, love you name it. The editing and direction from director Reynolds couldve been better, then again we dont know how Reynolds original cut did look like. Burt Reynolds is ok, but not on top due to his apparent injury from the "City Heat" production, Segal is a pain in the ass, the lovely Candice Bergen ends up as a backdrop, Charles Durning is over the top James Bond villain like while I personally think that the late and great stuntman Dar Robinson is excellent as Moke. The ending is a bit ridiculous and not that good. I reckon "Stick" has its moments. The incredible stunt where "Moke" falls to his death from a very high balcony while shooting at Stick, had Dar Robinson rigged to his own invention, a complex wire rig that "deccelerated" his fall, and made the use of an airbag unnecessary is not something you forget. Great scene. But, its not "Sharkys Machine" and you keep on wondering how good it couldve been. Trivia: "I wanted to make that movie as soon as I read the book," said Reynolds. "I respected Leonard's work. I felt I knew that Florida way of life, having been raised in the state. And I was that guy!" Reynolds recalled "I turned in my cut of the picture and truly thought I had made a good film. Word got back to me quickly that the people in the Black Tower [Universal's head office] wanted a few changes." The studio pulled the movie from its release schedule and asked Reynolds to reshoot the second half of the film. A new writer was brought in along with a subplot involving his character reuniting with his daughter post-prison. Reynolds says his agent advised him to go along with the changes: I gave up on the film. I didn't fight them. I let them get the best of me...Leonard saw the film the day he was interviewed for a Newsweek cover and told them he hated it. After his comment, every critic attacked the film and he wouldn't talk to me. When I reshot the film, I was just going through the motions. I'm not proud of what I did, but I take responsibility for my actions. All I can say--and this is not in way of a defense--is if you liked the first part of 'Stick,' that's what I was trying to achieve throughout. "It's very very theatrical," complained Leonard of the film. "I do everything in my power to make my writing not look like writing, and when it appears on screen you see these actors acting all over the place." "Stick" received negative reviews from critics. Despite opening at No. 1 in its first weekend, the film was a box office flop, grossing just $8.5 million when compared to its $22 million budget. Leonard later said Reynolds "just didn't do it right at all..." "I didn't recognise my screenplay at all in that movie. They even put another writer on it to add more action... Burt had done Sharky's Machine and Gator and I thought he would be good as Stick. But he needed a good director. Directing it himself he just played Burt Reynolds."

Kenneth L (us) wrote: Posted on 3/10/10 02:29 PMDefamitory, dispariging, insulting, stereotyping caricature. Clamored to lick the strait mans boots of every condesending conceit their prejudice can conjure. Their good acting talents could have just as easily served to compliment with respect an effemenancy that could have turned out an identity confoundment & confrontation with the biases that conspire to create such needless delimas in the first place. As halarious as the proposturousness of the situation may be, its practice in fact is a far more sobering, debasing humiliation. Nathen Lane played the hopelessly incapable of being untrue to the essential demeanor of his whole spontaneously evocative self with the dawning mettle of pride and self confident elan so painfully missing in this exercise in laughing at not with us.

David L (br) wrote: Bringing Up Baby has extraordinary performances from Hepburn and Grant and their chemistry is evident, the characters are very likable and nicely developed, the pacing is fast and hold one's attention, the story is an engaging wild road trip and it has many witty moments and lines, but something about it just doesn't feel extremely right and that is probably the fact that much of the humor relies on slapstick rather than smart lines and that the film feels weaker when compared to the other screwball comedies of the decade - The Awful Truth and The Thin Man in particular.

Carl T (ru) wrote: A brilliant noir tragedy that is beautiful in its cynicism.

Emod L (it) wrote: 92%Hook is a delightful and colorful film for all ages.V: 53%

Steve W (de) wrote: Basic sports film finds a young hotshot skier trying to break a new record. He does. Its a very straight forward sports film with some good actors in it. That is all.

Grant S (gb) wrote: Seemed to have potential, initially, but quickly degenerated into z-grade horror schlock. Not "so bad it's good" this is very bad, and stays that way. Unoriginal, predictable plot, filled with random, meaningless, nonsensical sub-plots and implausible scenes. Lame, unconvincing acting.Avoid.