Die-ner (Get It?)

Die-ner (Get It?)

Ken is a wandering and unassuming serial killer who enters a forsaken and empty diner during the graveyard shift. After a long conversation with the diner's lone waitress Rose, Ken kills ...

Ken is a wandering and unassuming serial killer who enters a forsaken and empty diner during the graveyard shift. After a long conversation with the diner's lone waitress Rose, Ken kills ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


Die-ner (Get It?) torrent reviews

Diana C (gb) wrote: This movie is bad on every level. I wasted 1 hour and 30 minutes trying to figure out if Bill Oberest Jr.?s face had something to do with an ending that might pull the pieces together. But life being what it is, I was bored and bored can get.

Kathkeen G (it) wrote: This Movie is kind of a mix between The Land Before Time and Ice Age 3 Dawn of The Dinosaurs. I think this movie will come in American Theaters. "I Hope".

Tim N (ag) wrote: pointless with a point

Alison G (de) wrote: Just your average teenage movie. It's not really what you think it is and it turns into a horror story...stereo typical boring..

Knox M (au) wrote: Slightly better than GoldenEye, Tomorrow Never Dies is average, not in quality, but in action, among other things.

Estela M (kr) wrote: Add a review (optional)...

Ryan L (it) wrote: Like so many movies that critics pan but are entertaining and become classics, Harlem Nights showed Eddie Murphy was a cinematic force in front and behind the scenes. The acting is great, story is enticing, comedy is off the charts. It was a superb film upon its release and holds up just as well today.

James H (de) wrote: Really a completely unnecessary sequel, it is supposed to pull at your heart strings but hardly did for me. Overacted and or poorly acted by most. George Burns is always good to watch though, but the material he has to work with doesn't make use of his talents.

jesse k (nl) wrote: This one is more like the French Confection two.

Deanne H (ru) wrote: absurd, heavy handed, and graphic. the summary above made it sound like it had potential. it tried to be shocking but was mostly boring.

Brett B (kr) wrote: Stylish and moody (taking the ultra-low budget into account), with some really eerie moments, but there are also some very serious script issues. The plot is the sort of thing that's been done to death, but Bava puts enough of a weird slant on it that the final product just barely works well enough to be passable. And though Ridley Scott claims not to have seen it, 1979's ALIEN feels strongly influenced by this film.

Rut H (us) wrote: Are you kidding, horrible horrible horrible sequel to one of the best classic movies of all time. This is suppose to be Yeller's son? ARE YOU JOKING?! The damn thing is not even yellow. In old yeller the pup is yellow. In savage sam he looks like a damn blue tick hound. Crap crap crap, i cant say it enough. The only thing i appreciated about this flim is they kept the main characters the same.

Steve C (ru) wrote: Although the names have been changed, this is the story of the "thrill kill" murderers Leopold and Loeb in the Roaring '20s of Chicago. They were a couple of rich, privileged, young men who murdered a kid, as the story goes, to try to pull off "the perfect murder". The killers are very well played by two very good actors in this brilliantly cast movie. Bradford Dillman and Dean Stockwell play the two. They have some nice scenes together early in the movie with the crime planning. These scenes also contain a type of emotional depth that is a little surprising. We see a certain domination and submission role playing going on between them with Dillman playing the dominant to Stockwell's submissive. There is a particular scene in which Stockwell's guy is going on a date with a nice girl. Dillman's character basically encourages him to rape her. These two have somehow become infected with a sort of distorted Nietzsche like "superman" philosophy and they know that they are superior to everyone else. The murder is partly to prove that. The scenes are so well done, that even in 1950s Hollywood commercial cinema, there is a strong hint of the question "Just what exactly is the relationship between these two?"So they get caught of course, no spoiler there, we know that will happen. Another damn good actor, E.G. Marshal looking youthful with hair and eyeglasses, is brought in to prosecute. The the great Orson Welles shows up for the defense. Legendary lawyer Clarence Darrow was the man in the real case. Welles plays it very cool at the outset mumbling his few lines to begin with as if saving it up for the big delivery at the end when he gives the final defense speech in court. This is a terrific scene and one of Welles's greatest scenes in any movie. The speech is a lucid and convincing argument against executions beautifully written and performed. I'm surprised that it hasn't shown up on FaceBook as a stand alone YouTube short like Chaplin's final speech in The Great Dictator has. It is a fine scene in an overall excellent movie very nicely presented in high contrast B&W and CinemaScope.

Nathan D (ru) wrote: The last third was much better than the first two thirds. Poor Judy - her weight fluctuating and at times you could see the pain in her eyes...

Robbie H (gb) wrote: underrated western..never even heard of it..picked it up for 2.50 at a flea market...fast paced...great cinematography..ahead of its time....interesting characters - Peck, Baxter, Widmark is great as the villain, and some of Peck's gang stand out as well....some funny dialogue also

LA L (it) wrote: I hate Dane Cook with every fiber of my being. But Steve Carell is funny; it looks good.

Stephen S (es) wrote: Decent. Not nearly as bad as I thought it would be. Definitely kept me entertained for 90 minutes, which is more than I can say for most vampire films I've seen.

Isadore H (gb) wrote: Not Tarintos best but still a good movie to watch if you have time.

Brian T (ag) wrote: It was cute and entertaining. Not super realistic. But hey, it's a com-rom.

Allan C (ru) wrote: Enjoyable but a mixed bag of a fantasy/horror film. Julian Sands plays an evil warlock from the 1700s who is being hunted down by Richard E. Grant. Their chase leads them to travel through time into the present (or the 1980s version of the present). Lori Singer (real-life brother of The Beastmaster, Marc Singer) plays the love interest. The most pleasant surprise about this film was that it was written by David Twohy (as D.T. Twohy), who'd was hot off his first writing writing credit, "Critters 2" but before he would go on to write "The Fugitive" "Pitch Black" "Below" and the underrated "Terminal Velocity." Although this film has a rather cheap low budget feel to it (the special effects are pretty terrible even by 1980s standards), the script has some interesting ideas and some better than average warlock battles, which is something that more often than not are poorly done in films and usually amount to witches and warlocks pointing their fingers and shooting something out of them. Twohy also brings better developed of characters than you'd expect for this sort of film. Also of note for this film is that Richard E. Grant is great and this made me want to watch some of his old films again. The film also features a fine Jerry Goldsmith score, which greatly helps the film along. On the downside, I've never been much of a Julian Sands fan and I think that's why I'd never watched this film before. Also, the film as directed by Steve Miner who I don't think ever made a film of note in his 40 year career (okay, maybe I did enjoy "Lake Placid" about the giant alligator). So overall, it's entertaining enough, even if it's a mixed bag.