Dr. Wai in the Scriptures with No Words

Dr. Wai in the Scriptures with No Words

A serial adventure writer with problems in his personal life lives out the adventures of his literary hero, King of Adventurers.

  • Rating:
    4.00 out of 5
  • Length:86 minutes
  • Release:1996
  • Language:Cantonese
  • Reference:Imdb
  • Keywords:fight,   beating,   hero,  

A serial adventure writer with problems in his personal life lives out the adventures of his literary hero, King of Adventurers. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


Dr. Wai in the Scriptures with No Words torrent reviews

Mugdha S (mx) wrote: Different genre movie, much better than Chennai Express/Once upon..

Skijiniwi P (gb) wrote: hmmm...looks like a lovely movie

Simon B (au) wrote: Well the acting and script were pretty bad. But to be the first real vampire and almost first "real" horrorfilm in sweden it works! Cred to Banke!

Luke Z (kr) wrote: What a great way to start off a trilogy! Bateman is my favorite superhero so watching this plot take off on the silver screen was just awesome! From beginning to end filled with the perfect amount of action and one of the greatest cliffhangers ever for an end to the movie! Awesome!

darryl c (ca) wrote: cheryl dunye obviously enjoyed herself as she told this story about a young filmmaker that delves in to the life of an obscure actress from the 1930s. that is what is missing from film these days. filmmakers need to play more and pontificate less. not be frivolous mind you--but play. there is a difference and that difference is what makes film fun to watch.

Francisco L (br) wrote: Gremlins 2 is a totally unnecessary sequel, whose screenplay is horrible, the plot is boring, none actor stands out, it isn't original, but is predictable and detestable.

Zane T (it) wrote: This is a bad movie. A movie so unwatchable that all the actors sleep walk through. Considering that many of them were just fulfilling a contract, it's no wonder. Basically, this is the last of the disaster movie genre and you can see why. the special effects are terrible. I mean, c'mon, when Pat Morita goes tumbling off the bridge into the volcano, it looks like he's doing a back flip at the Olympics and when the pic resort blows up at the end, you like wow, a piece of burning hot lava rock would make a big hotel explode on impact.

S Q (es) wrote: Seriously don't understand the low rating for this movie ... It's actually quite funny. So much so, I have gone back to watch it a few times!

Connor B (jp) wrote: Surprisingly emotional for a film that is about a solely physical affair between a near 50 year old American man and a 20 year old French girl. Marlon Brando excels easily here.

Lisandro R (ru) wrote: Recomendada para gente que ame la paz y sepa ver la belleza contenida en un simple paisajito con flores y pajaritos... Medio hippiosa la movie, principalmente por las rolas... me gust.

Anne F (au) wrote: This film, considered to be the first Ealing comedy, was filmed in London in 1947 and shows many scenes of the damage caused by wartime bombings. It's the story of a group of children tracking down a criminal gang and gives a lovely view of how teenagers and pre-teens behaved at that time. Alastair Sim was not on-screen for much of the film but he was brilliant when he was in the camera's gaze, whilst Jack Warner played a wonderfully evil baddie.

Panayiota K (ca) wrote: Overrated and boring as expected. It's 4 hours for goodness sake. Rhett and Scarlett are awful characters both as a couple and as individuals. No offense but she was too pretty for him and he was abusive too. Everyone in the reviews is bitching about the controversial issues but they were there during that time (some still are). They are not being praised. The scenery was pretty though especially during the sunset scenes.

Nickolas I (mx) wrote: The Wonderful World of Weird.

Jamie C (fr) wrote: Good comedy, But just like most rom-coms it ditches the comedy and gets too serious and boring.

Peter B (ag) wrote: Great acting but the negativity of the script (especially its anti adoption agenda) made it hard to watch.

jarrad b (br) wrote: Made to look like a 70/80's flick which it achieves well. The acting especially by the doctor is horrible and the story is basic