In this dark, tongue in cheek, British Horror, six friends take a holiday in the heart of the English countryside which turns into a culinary nightmare when they discover that their hosts are a sadistic family of cannibals, set on turning their guests into their next meal! It's nice to have your friends for dinner

Six friends holiday in the heart of the English countryside. The holiday turns into a culinary nightmare when they discover that their hosts are a sadistic family of cannibals set on ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


Gnaw torrent reviews

Makayla A (nl) wrote: Mean Girls, released in 2004 and directed by Mark Waters, was a well composed, comical high school story about a new girl from Africa battling her newest challenge, the clique. Mean Girls 2, a so called sequel, only adjusts a few details of the Mean Girls plot. This movie lacks its true purpose of continuing on the story. Mean Girls 2 should go back to middle school because this high school comedy needs some serious education due to its childish acting and an unoriginal plot. Jo Mitchell (Meghan Martin) starts her senior year of high school at a new school because her dad (Linden Ashby), NASCAR mechanic, needs to travel often. She plays a tomboyish, confident teenager who befriends Abby (Jennifer Stone) in exchange for college tuition from Abby's wealthy father. Just as she is starting to find friends, the plastics come along. These are the most popular girls, but not necessarily the most kind or bright, including an easy blonde, an insecure brunette and their stuck up leader: Chastity (Claire Holt), Hope (Nicole Gale Anderson) and Mandi (Maiara Walsh). Jo and Abby become closer friends as they form a clan called the "anti-plastics" to plot against the mean girls. Along the way there's conflict when the two clans try to tear each other apart. But hey, that's just high school. The actors' performances do little to enhance this film. Besides Principal Duvall (Tim Meadows), all of the actors are different from Mean Girls. Melanie Mayron, director, attempts to use Disney Channel stars to perform as well as Tina Fey and Lindsay Lohan did in the first film. That is pretty tough to beat. Meghan Martin's acting of a teenage girl should only be shown on the Disney Channel. This may be due to the script, but Martin's character seems nothing like a senior in high school. She does not worry about anything a normal student would, like homework, but only the social aspect. Her poor acting is revealed through her sarcastic demeanor and emotionless connections with her surrounding characters. The "clique" displays acting through pre-planned facial expression and staged actions which lack reality as well. Claire Holt, Nicole Gale Anderson and Maiara Walsh are all unacquainted actresses that could have seen this movie as a breakthrough, but clearly that wasn't the case. The cast never quite sold their parts to the audience because they demonstration no true value or meaning in friendship. Not that the actors make or break a movie, but an unoriginal plot sure can. Melanie Mayron may have watched the first Mean Girls too many times, because this plot is almost identical to its previous movie. To me, only adjusting roles of several characters and the use of different actors does not qualify as a sequel. They both have the new girl at a high school with a set of the popular girls that want to cause drama. Mean Girls at least has entertaining twists added in the normal high school scene with cafeteria fights, prom drama, and fashion nightmares. Melanie Mayron tried to recreate this scene with poorly rated actresses, average cinematography and indistinguishable score, which strikingly wasn't very engrossing. The audience, teenage girls, expected something new yet failed to receive that. Why even write a sequel if there's no continuation of the plot? Melanie Mayron has previously directed television series such a Thirtysomething and the film The Babysitters Club. This film might have been a chance for the starring actors and the director to prove themselves better than the previous Mean Girls, but Melanie Mayron may want to stick with directing ABC television series.

J K (au) wrote: Given the somewhat lame title, I expected to be bored by this movie. However, I found the film to be both surprisingly funny and deeply moving. The performances are great, the soundtrack keeps things moving along, and the conclusion is profound. It would be nice if the "critics" would give this movie a chance, and not get hung up on their predisposition to the message. "Billy the Early Years" is a well-made film and it will definitely join my DVD collection when it's available.

Jessica Q (kr) wrote: Rpattz as Salvador Dali, and kissing boys. Hee.

Tyler W (mx) wrote: A beautifully shot docu-drama that tries to make sense of the true story of the death of a Seattle man after he has anal sex with a horse. I was hella curious when I read about this movie and I must say it raises alot of questions like what is considered animal abuse and can an animal consent to sex with a human. Being a huge fan of cinematography, the camera work in this film is outstanding. The opening shot is utterly amazing. Though not great, this is a film where you expect one thing but by the end, its so not the film you expected

Gaspar O (mx) wrote: This is just not good. Normally, taking a dump on a tennis court would be hilarious, but even that wasn't funny here. No amount of pee, vomit, running around in jock straps or crazed laughing Chinese guys were going to save this disappointment. There were very brief moments of humor, but that's absolutely as generous as I can be."I rub Crotch Horsemaaaaaaan!"

Nicki M (mx) wrote: Watched 20 minutes and then extreme disinterest caused me to switch it off.

Joseph H (us) wrote: Don't you miss when M. Night Shyamalan made good movies? Signs is a classic and easily one of the best alien films! The film is very smart at building suspense and gives us lovable characters and memorable beasts.

Ajayesh S (us) wrote: My fav Hindi patriotic flick of all time...has two of the best songs ever..Jo haal dil ka & Hoshwalon ko khabar of the best nazms ever...

Nicole G (de) wrote: Very sad true story.....made my skin crawl....its amazing what humans are capable of.....

Marie B (au) wrote: Loved it. It was totally mad, funny and sad.

Joel S (nl) wrote: An enormous downgrade from the original, and an obvious cash in on its success.

Blake P (ca) wrote: It's strange how a film with such lush beauty can also feature the unbearable ugliness society can hold. "Jean de Florette" is at once beautiful, poetic, maddening, and whimsical; I've never seen a film quite like it. There are few times where I truly have been involved with the lives of characters in a film, and "Jean de Florette" is a great example of one. How can it be so cruel, but also so human? Taking place on the photogenic French countryside, the film follows the sickening plight of two struggling farmers, Ugolin (Daniel Auteuil) and his uncle Cesar (Yves Montand); they plan to drive out an incoming family, who plan to be farmers, out of their land so they can sell the property for quick profit. What's their master plan? To plug the spring that provides constant nutrition for the garden the family plans to live off of. How do they get ownership of that spring? By killing the original owner. The twosome try every trick in the book to cause their new neighbors to leave, but Jean (Gerard Depardieu), the husband and father, won't budge, despite the fact that water is short and the weather is unbelievably dry. For months, the struggle is huge - but when (spoiler alert) Jean tragically meets his demise, and the uncle/nephew pairing of farmers come out successfully, we're left sick to our stomachs. If there wasn't the promise of a follow-up to "Jean de Florette" in which Jean's daughter Manon (Ernestine Mazurowna) grows up (Emmanuelle Bart) and gets revenge (in the follow-up, "Manon des Sources), I swear I could have a breakdown. "Jean de Florette" is often times so heart wrenching that it's almost impossible to stand. It starts off with a bit of sweetness; Ugolin is seen as a kind, simple man that simply wants to grow flowers for a living, and Cesar seems to be his wise, caring father-figure. But as the film goes on, their despicable acts of selfishness grow to a point where we can't help but despise them. Surely, their cruelty isn't unneeded - after all, everyone in the area in which the characters live struggle just to get by. But seeing that the family they target, the Cadoret's, are so harmless and warm-hearted, it's somewhat hard to emphasize with them. Claude Berri, who is incredible when it comes to balancing style and hard drama, flawlessly balances the struggle each and every character has, and, despite the hatred we have for Ugolin and Cesar, we can slimly understand why they're doing what they're doing. Ugolin and Cesar are played by Daniel Auteuil and Yves Montand, two fantastic actors from different generations, Auteuil being the up-and-coming dynamo and Montand being a respected film veteran. Their characters are difficult to truly understand, but they flesh them out in a way that makes them complex instead of being one-dimensionally diabolical. Depardieu, who gives one of his best performances, his tragic as Jean, who at first is so kind and hopeful, but by the end is turned into a depressed failure that can barely get by. "Jean de Florette" is simply spectacular, and a feel-bad movie has never felt so good - I simply cannot wait to see how it all pans out in "Manon des Sources".

Miriam H (us) wrote: Such a fantastic movie ;) Ty Amazon :)

David A (ag) wrote: No disrespect to Prince. He's a great singer and performer, but when it comes to this film, it's awful. The storyline was terrible and all over the place. The acting was cringe worthy at best. The actors really overly acted when they didn't needed to. Theres a few moments that I almost wanted laugh because the scene was either absurd or badly directed. "Purple Rain" would have been better off if it stayed as an album rather than a movie. Might as well call it, "Prince: The Concert Movie." Yes, I know the movie was made to show his talent, but was it difficult to least to make the storyline decent?

JeanFrancois V (au) wrote: I watched the first half-hour of this film and then finished it on x4 fast forward just to make sure it was going where I thought it was. It is said to be "based on an idea by Gabriel Ronap", which idea probably consisted in doing a remake of "The Leech Woman" that recycled the legends that grew around the life of Countess Nadasdy (1560-1614), better know as Elisabeth Bathory, a Hungarian aristocrat rumoured to have killed and tortured several hundred people (though reliable historical works on her life seem to be few and far between.) The film contains more nudity than gore and suffers mostly from an uninspired script, mediocre (and apparently sometimes dubbed) actors, non-existent cinematography and corny make-up. What I particularly liked about it was the opportunity to see what Lesley Anne-Down actually looked like at 17 without the heavy make-up she always wore later on. She was quite pretty, but the film doesn't give her much of a role (she gets abducted, and her idea of an escape is throwing a plate of rice at her gaoler's face and then banging on the locked door.) Compared to the "Leech Woman", it mostly suffers from the lack a MST3K commentary, which is why I couldn't finish it.

Jose C (ag) wrote: Good script but too slow development... a runaway film