Face 2 Face

Face 2 Face

When major surgery leaves her feeling isolated and alone, Emmy Award-winning filmmaker Katherine Brooks sets out on a cross-country journey to meet 50 Facebook "friends" she's never met before.

  • Rating:
    4.00 out of 5
  • Length:100 minutes
  • Release:2013
  • Language:English
  • Reference:Imdb
  • Keywords:suicide,   friendship,   love,  

This summer Katherine Brooks travels across the Unites States to meet 50 of her facebook friends, documenting the entire trip. Finally bringing us real reality. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


Face 2 Face torrent reviews

WS W (de) wrote: I guess it tried to be cult/camp but turns out to be rather terrible.

Elisabeth T (mx) wrote: Whilst the nouvelle vague phenomenon continues in NY, it's seems Berlin, and Jan Ole Gerster actually has something to say. At times comedic, at times serious, the writing is wonderfully wry. The backdrop of Berlin and the effortlessly understated use of camera and precise editing this film deserves all the hype that Frances Ha is getting and more. Refreshing, and fresh.

Nicolas C (au) wrote: Antoine Bertrand (Starbuck) give another wonderful performance as the legendary strongman

Matt R (br) wrote: Terrific..... quite deep and moving in places for a Hong Kong cop movie, quite edgey too... if you enjoy cop thrillers give this your time.

SagaciousFrank (ca) wrote: A strange one, this film. It's reasonably well shot and acted, and there's some half decent music. There's an array of fairly well know and competent cast, but the script and story fail to engage.The potential bad guys, and the actual bad guys, when revealed, are barely given any screen time. In fact the good guys and victims, who are given plenty of screen time, are poorly developed. We hardly get to know any of the characters in this film, either through speech or action. It's as if they're there, but also not there at the same time.The pace is slow with no real build up or pay off, a constant plateau from beginning to end, as if it never gets out of first gear, leaving the entire experience feeling empty and wasted. It is the epitome of underplaying and understating your narrative and protagonists to the point that no one cares. Even the cast look bored by it all.Despite being fairly well produced, it simply fails to engage its audience like a compelling mystery crime thriller is supposed to do. 2.5/5

Wesley W (es) wrote: An even more worse movie than Saw IV was and a completely pointless dull sequel from beginning to end. This fifth installment had cash grab written all over it and bothers me that they even decided to go along with this unnecessary sequel. In terms of story, trap design, acting, character development, and mystery. It was a total let down on all fronts and I was completely disappointed that the movie didn't offer very much at all. All the new actors they put together here just seemed like they were going through the motions to collect a paycheck and not one actor gave a credible or honest performance. The acting was hollow and bland all the way through, there was no emotional connection to anything, and the story here was nonexistent. Lazy is the ultimate word to describe the events happening in this fifth installment. The franchise at the beginning I thought had new story elements to offer, they had interesting characters, and the first three had me interested in what was gonna happen next and they weren't bad at all in my opinion. Here, its like the filmmakers just didn't care at all about what they were doing when working on this film and the end result is a forgettable unengaging film experience. The police investigating scenes weren't interesting and they didn't bring anymore insight on the horrible events happening. One of the best parts of the other Saw movies was the flashbacks and here, the flashbacks were not interesting at all and they never advanced the plot along or gave any new development. Most of the traps were not really even traps, they were just little things that these group of people had to go through with little effort in my opinion and I couldn't believe these filmmakers didn't think of anything more thought provoking. As the group of people were going through these events, they soon learn why they are there and at that point where I learned those things, I was just waiting for the movie to end. The only thing I could complement is that the movie had two good traps in it and that is it. In the end, this sequel came off as a complete waste of time and it had nothing to offer or say about the Saw franchise for me.

Forrest K (es) wrote: Obnoxious and ill-conceived.

Matt D (jp) wrote: It's an interesting story with good acting, but not a very good movie. I enjoy it, but it's ridiculously far fetched.

Matt M (fr) wrote: The teenage son of a Kung Fu master is sent to his uncle for some intensive training after his father has enough of his clowning around and cauing trouble in the streets of Hong Kong. The uncle will teach him a bizarre technique he calls 'drunken boxer'. Tremendous action sequences and comedy meet in this entertaining martial arts classic. The fight scenes are spectacular and will not disappoint fans of the genre, but don't expect textbook storytelling.

Eric B (ru) wrote: "Smashing Time" is a mediocre movie, but it's lots of fun. Not exactly subtle, this British comedy is full of broad, farcical performances and actually has two -- two! -- major food-fight scenes. Is that a first?Yvonne (Lynn Redgrave) and Brenda (Rita Tushingham) have a ball as two daft birds visiting the big city, determined to become all the rage with the swinging Carnaby Street crowd. Yvonne is loud and ditzy, while Brenda is mousy and vulnerable. They flip through a few menial jobs, making a spectacular mess of whatever situation they enter, while also tangling with a cheeky tabloid photographer (the young Michael York). Eventually they stumble into show business via unlikely paths, which motivates one hilarious recording-session scene where every gimmick of the day (sitar, harp, girlie backup vocals) is awkwardly thrown into the mix. The other standout set pieces are a trendy art-gallery opening (booby-trapped robots are sold to people who want to feel nuclear paranoia at home) and a misfired bedroom seduction where a sleazy bounder (Ian Carmichael) puts the moves on Yvonne (too bad that a laxative joke doesn't pay off like it should).Slapstick humor is everywhere (the laundry bills must have been incredible), and the actors exaggerate every gesture, expression and regional accent. The psychedelic band Tomorrow (featuring a pre-Yes Steve Howe) has a small, non-musical role, and the score also includes several sweet songs that Redgrave and Tushingham warble themselves. This is definitely a period piece, but don't expect too much and you'll enjoy some silly laughs.

Sofia (kr) wrote: Ok, so the movie should at least be worth an E for effort. The merit goes foremost to the guys who had to wear the leech costumes -- under water no less. Also to Ken Clark who has a name that is as all-American as his face...

Eli G (es) wrote: Great cast. We want more Craig Robinson!

AIA X (au) wrote: OMG, i cant believe he would make a movie this bad and predictable. I stopped watching it halfway through.Dont waste your time.