Gunga Din

Gunga Din

Based loosely on the poem by Rudyard Kipling, this takes place in British India during the Thuggee uprising. Three fun loving sergeants are doing fine until one of them wants to get married and leave the service. The other two trick him into a final mission where they end up confronting the entire cult by themselves as the British Army is entering a trap.

In 19th century India, three British soldiers and a native waterbearer must stop a secret mass revival of the murderous Thuggee cult before it can rampage across the land. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechers

Gunga Din torrent reviews

Heather M (es) wrote: I am going to skip this one.

Jason C (nl) wrote: Possibly overtaken by 'Sucker Punch' as the archetypal adolescent's favourite film, this homage to the exploitation genre of the 70s is 'out there' to say the least. Perfect for those who always wondered who would win between a horde of zombies and a stripper with a machine gun for a fake leg.

War sucks L (ca) wrote: "Seoul" man cracked me up lol

Samuel M (fr) wrote: Para muchos la peor entrega de la saga. Para m, una de las ms interesantes. Me gusta pensar que ese odio viene del hecho de que Tommy Gun no es un rival tan grandilocuente como en anteriores entregas, pero lo cierto es que su importancia viene por otros aspectos: el hecho de que sea el pupilo de Rocky, su primer estudiante, el hecho de que se vea reflejado en l, el hecho de que el propio Rocky est aprovechndose de l para volver a sentir todo aquello que haba perdido (Micky, su posibilidad de luchar, su xito)...Son tantas lecturas las que se pueden sacar de esta pelcula, que me sorprende que no gustase.Ah s, y todo se resuelve a puetazos...como buen americano...Yey!

Mike G (mx) wrote: Worth seeing just for the ridiculous ad slogans and insane asylum characters.

Peter M (nl) wrote: i like stories within stories.

TTT C (ag) wrote: (** 1/2): Thumbs Down This is a tough one to rate because the film is a truly bad film, with bad dialogue and not the greatest acting efforts from the cast. But, this is one entertaining and fun film that I probably would see again. Still, I just can't quite give a "Thumbs Up" because it did irk me with some of its ridiculous moments.

Daniel W (mx) wrote: Saw this movie back int he day....I don't remember it being so hammy though??? Some stuff is better left in the past.

Justin R (jp) wrote: A phenomenal documentary about Hendrix, created 3 years after his death. A must see for all Hendrix fans.

Samuel J (br) wrote: "It's an odd thing, Mr. Ireton. Every man who wages war believes God is on his side. I'll warrant God should often wonder who is on his." Director: Ken Hughes Starring: Richard Harris, Alec Guinness, Robert Morley, Dorothy Tutin Running time: 139 minutes Country: UK I had high expectations for this film because it stars two great and late actors who were both very talented but what I was mostly disappointed with in this film was that I don't think the acting from the actors were brilliant. It is good when it comes to action but when it comes to the story it feels sort of rushed. When the English Civil War ends it feels really rushed from then until the end. The Civil War ended about 1 hour 30 minutes and it had less than 40 minutes to try and write up and film the rest of the story with 2 hours 15 minutes duration. Well, that is what I think about it anyway. The costumes, art direction and cinematography were the best thing about this film apart from that is was pretty crap. I wasn't that keen on neither Richard Harris as Oliver Cromwell nor Alec Guinness as King Charles I because neither actor made Charles or Cromwell very believable like they were history and lived 400 years ago. Richard Harris was better than Alec Guinness but neither actor gave me that feeling where there was any proper emotion involved within the characters like that really was England 400 years ago. Ken Hughes' direction wasn't brilliant to be honest because it wasn't as believable as I was anticipating. The epic action scenes in the English Civil War didn't really help it very much. I wasn't that fond of the script neither because it was more like a made-up story rather than historical England. I am disappointed with saying that but it is true though. This film won the Oscar for Best Costume Design and was nominated for Best Music Original Score but lost to Love Story. It was nominated for Best Music Original Score at the Golden Globes but lost to Love Story. Overall, Cromwell is a film that I found really disappointing. Alec Guinness was a legendary actor and his portrayal of King Charles I is at the moment his most disappointing. The late Richard Harris wasn't bad and wasn't good either but he was better. It is a film that is extremely underrated but should be considered for its technical design rather than its acting, directing and producing.

Mark M (ca) wrote: It's silly, satirical, humourous & somewhat romantic & a bit uneven. Now Hepburn almost always sizzles as one of those truly special movie stars & William Holden does a decent job in his role but Paris When it Sizzles kinda works & kinda doesn't.

Rene W (mx) wrote: As the movie states: the characters are fictional, but the political and social situations are not. These situations were obviously relevant in 1960's Italy, but I think similiar arguments could be made for Italian bureaucracy today.

Scott R (it) wrote: Beneath its glib exterior, there is a pretty serious, sober film

CJ M (de) wrote: Really enjoyed this and thought miss Monroe was excellent. A well polished performance

Amanda R (ca) wrote: One of my favourites! Cagney turns in a heartbreakingly real performance

Jarad B (es) wrote: digital copy does NOT WORK!!

Mike S (ag) wrote: Lousy follow-up to "In the Heat of the Night." Bad script, bad directing, and bad acting.

Taylor S (gb) wrote: A lot of people who have seen this movie have described it as "pretentious" or "overly artsy" and I couldn't disagree more. The shots were stunning and the music really exudes the passion between Freddie and Hester. Tom Hiddleston and Rachel Weisz did an excellent job and their chemistry was apparent throughout the whole movie and Tom did really well playing a character so opposite to himself. Lastly, The ending was extremely disappointing only because it left it to your imagination and I wasn't sure if I wanted to imagine what would happen afterwards. Overall, I think it was a beautiful movie and I will probably be watching it many times over.