Once there was Disa and Laban and their two kids. But now Disa's husband has found a new love, new clothes and a completely new future, while Disa is stuck in a life that is put on hold. ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Once there was Disa and Laban and their two kids. But now Disa's husband has found a new love, new clothes and a completely new future, while Disa is stuck in a life that is put on hold. ...
You may also like
Hallåhallå torrent reviews
Jonny P (au) wrote: "Dear Mr. Watterson" tells the story of Calvin and Hobbes, a comic strip that defied industry standards and ended in its prime. There is a lot more to this strip than a simple cartoon boy with an active imagination. The strip itself has been lauded as one of the greatest of all time. The stylized social commentary is genius in its own rite and is then combined with some of the best artistry in the industry. The sterotypes and social issues of our society are exaggerated in the imagination of this young boy, but always in a comical way. It appeals to all age groups, from kids who think that the tiger is cute to adults who are amused by Calvin's view of the adult world. But this documentary explores even deeper layers by examining the man behind the comic. Do not expect to see an interview with Bill Watterson in this documentary. That is part of the mystery. After completing Calvin and Hobbes, he removed himself from the public eye and lives in privacy with his wife. He rarely gives an interview, not even for a documentary about his life. Watterson ended the comic after a mere ten years to avoid a formulaic comic that repeated itself. He also passed on tens of millions of dollars that could have been made in merchandise because he did not want to cheapen his characters. Many of his colleagues share their perspectives on Watterson's choices throughout this documentary and it is amazing to see the level of respect that the community has for Watterson and his Calvin and Hobbes comic. He did not create this comic to make money. He created it for his love of comics, and consequently impacted most people who lived between 1985-1995. I have personally felt this impact of this comic, selecting a panel from a Calvin and Hobbes strip to be recreated as a painting in first grade. Perhaps the greatest moment of this comic was its final strip. It is so simple and perfect, and open to many different interpretations. I believe that Watterson is telling us that our childhood never has to end. That even when we move on to something new, we should approach it with the open-mindedness and imagination of a child, and that we should never stop exploring. If you were not a Calvin and Hobbes fan before watching this documentary, you certainly will be afterwards. Now please excuse me while I borrow one of the Calvin and Hobbes collections to relive my childhood.
Erin F (ru) wrote: SO AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
Chint (ru) wrote: Will give it a B- for wasting my time!!!!
Hollie T (jp) wrote: What a horrible, horrible POS.
Alec B (mx) wrote: Good, for a Syfy movie.
Omar K (ca) wrote: One thing we have learned from director Brett Ratner and his films is that they are essential, not out of a need to be cinematically thrilled off our seats, or for any worthwhile experience, but simply for brainless entertainment that reaches the very far side of our mood, and satisfies our desire to be incessantly amused. He is an auteur of fun films with plenty of moments of comedy and character bonding time, but movies that are pretty dumb, and lack a degree of intelligence. The 2004 action comedy film, After the Sunset, is a pinnacle representation of Ratner at his dastardly addictive, yet simultaneously at his most disappointingly low standards he has come to embody. The first and second Rush Hour films preceded, and then the third Rush Hour followed, as did Tower Heist. But it isn??t just about comedy for him, for his foray??s into drama-land again produced bare films with a lack of brains; I??m looking at you X-Men: The Last Stand and Red Dragon. He may not make the greatest films, but we need his films, for without their brainless entertainment factor, the film industry would be devoid of this sense of dim-witted fun that speaks to us when we are in true need of a dose of nonsense. After the Sunset revolves around a master thief named Max Burdett and his attractive accomplice and girlfriend, Lola Cirillo. After stealing the second of three famous diamonds known as the Napoleon diamonds, and making a fool out of FBI Agent Stanley Lloyd in the process, he and his woman head for Paradise Island in The Bahamas to settle down. After being suspended by the FBI, Stanley follows Max to The Bahamas and the two unwittingly befriend each other, but underneath both have ulterior motives. Max wants the third of the Napoleon diamonds, which is sitting safely upon one of the ships in Paradise Island, and Stanley, aware of this, tails Max constantly in order to gain his respect back. With Max involving a local gangster-like figure in his plan, and Stanley working closely with a local female detective, the climax is seemingly thwarted as love gets in the way for both Max and Stanley. Pierce Brosnan stars as Max Burdett, a thief who seemingly is a master at his job, yet we barely see him in action. I think we are meant to think Brosnan is talented based on his career as James Bond, but otherwise he doesn??t dawn on you in any way. His romance with Lola is tedious for he lacks any emotion other than the self-centeredness of his ambition to collect diamonds. Salma Hayek??s Lola Cirillo definitely exudes the raw eroticism she is meant to embody, but you end up feeling sorry for her by the end for she is used by Brosnan and is made to be simply a romantic tool for the plot. And Woody Harrelson??s bumbling FBI Agent Stanley Lloyd is potentially the best thing about the film. He is in all the worthwhile moments in the film, most of them comedic, and so we can??t help but love his character??s personality and thank Harrelson for providing him. After the Sunset after all is a mismatched film that struggles to flow. Everything is in the wrong order, or chosen wrongly, even some of the choices of casting, setting and storyline are questionable too so it doesn??t bode well for audiences. The characters are so unbelievably mismatched I don??t understand how the filmmakers even considered these mixture of actors, let alone watch them in action and record their every move, and later on edit them without worrying that this would be a devastating combination. Disorientating and disjointed is what the setting switch does to you, because going from a dull and cloudy urban landscape to the lush tropical island of The Bahamas never allows us to really embrace the humid atmosphere. It is truly a switch for the better, but it is a massive difference that doesn??t flow that well. The biggest problem however is that we don??t really know what the main storyline is, all we know is the bareness of each subplot is evident, making After the Sunset quite a lacklustre film with nothing worthy of recalling. It is a romantically led film mixed with interweaving action, just what Brosnan embodied as James Bond. If you showed a person this film, then told them Brosnan was once James Bond, they would be shocked to the core, for Brosnan exudes none of the qualities of the world??s greatest spy and simply stumbles his way through the film. The unlikely duo, Brosnan and Harrelson, are perhaps together the only decent feature of the film for the comedy arises from the bromance between them and only them. They are meant to be the worst of enemies that turn friends, and although it makes for good comedy, the lack of identification between Brosnan and Harrelson, ruins ever so slightly the bromance that plays a big part in the film; the blame here goes to the stiff and awkward Brosnan who seems to be the root of everything negative. From the technological car jacking, to the fishing bonding and sun cream spreading, the supposedly drunken night in the Caribbean and the bunking together in the same bed are hilarious moments that make After the Sunset symbolic of Ratner??s signature mindless entertainment. Brosnan and Harrelson are such different actors in terms of their backgrounds and personalities that together they are unthinkable, but somehow at times they function as a comedic team and it is a pleasure to watch. It is a chilled film and that is what makes After the Sunset bearable. We watch it with a drought of high hope and that is why we can hack its thinness as a film, and to an extent enjoy what it offers because we cannot take it seriously. I don??t think the actors seem to enjoy their roles that much, and so put in a lack of effort, and After the Sunset reeks of a lack of effort, but we know that and that??s all right depending on the mood we are in. After the Sunset was released as Brosnan??s James Bond career culminated, so what could go wrong? Considering he was in the best shape of his life, which was entering the middle-aged stratosphere, and was fresh from being the world??s most recognisable spy, the answer to the question is everything! Doing another spy film that borders the thresholds of romance was at the time and in hindsight a bad decision, for comparisons to Bond will always be made, and let??s get the facts right, After the Sunset never had the same audience and would therefore get ravaged by audiences and critics alike. We don??t really care much for anything that happens, especially when the diamonds are stolen, or Hayek??s heart broken, we just simply feel nothing for what occurs. The twist at the end isn??t at all spectacular, but it does make sense, so we can??t complain, but like the rest of After the Sunset, it lacks a wow factor that should have been there seeing as it was essentially a knock-off of Brosnan??s past career as James Bond. After the Sunset is still a slick film that never remains in the same place, just like pretty much all of the James Bond classics, but unfortunately doesn??t do anything meaningful with its time despite being on the move constantly. The Verdict: As we??ve come to expect of Brett Ratner??s films, After the Sunset is quite brainlessly diverting, but it is effectively third-rate stuff that shouldn??t be given the time of day. ???????????????????? 2/10
JR F (ca) wrote: Quite possibly the worst piece of trash I've seen with this level of star in it. For some reason, release dates are reported all over the map for this, but best I can tell, this was filmed and completed in 2002, and took till 2011 to get released (riding Cooper's popularity, no doubt.) DO not be fooled, this is an older movie, with cheap production values, terrible lack of on-screen chemistry, and even worse written dialog. Awkward phrases turn with difficulty out of actors mouths who are incapable for doing them justice. If anything, this shows how true an actor Cooper really is, as his lines come out with such a real-ness that he almost plays a human stuck in a cyborg world. If you dare watch this, the 8th-grade-dace-reenactment scene that was probably intended to be funny was just craw-under-your-own-couch cheesy and embarrassing. The female lead, while quite hot, couldn't act her way out of wet tissue paper, and had zero chemistry with her co-stars. The character was flat and gave no plausible reason why the other main characters would put up with her flighty mean-spirited garbage. Several scenes looked to be filmed in the director's basement, several more were exceedingly poorly re-dubbed. Lots of credit, however, to the movie poster designer who did a phenomenal job creating imagery that made this look like a sweet romantic comedy. It fooled my wife into renting it, so well done, sir. Note to movie makers; always hire a good graphic artist.
Daniel M (it) wrote: Oh, Spy Kids are still pretty cool.
Paul D (ca) wrote: It uses a tried and trusted formula of animal tormentor of humans but even so it's still done very badly.
Jay B (nl) wrote: Swingers isn't terrible, but it is boring. If I wanted to listen to a man whine about a woman for 96 minutes, without interruption, I'd hang out with ZeBrain ;)
Kenneth L (ru) wrote: This is one of Woody Allen's smaller, lesser-known films, and to be honest, I can see why. Made in between the similarly slight Alice and the more troubling Husbands and Wives, this is one of Allen's mannered homage films, which, while often interesting, usually don't end up as memorable as his more original movies. Interiors was his take on Ingmar Bergman; Stardust Memories was his Fellini movie; and this one is his tribute to German Expressionism and the writings of Kafka, and it particularly reminded me of Fritz Lang's M. While Allen certainly gets the visual aspect of the homage right, the actual content of this movie is often not especially distinctive.The movie begins promisingly enough, with a clerk named Kleinman (Allen) being woken in the middle of the night somewhere in 1920s or 1930s Eastern Europe by a posse of men out to catch a local serial killer. The idea of Allen hunting for a serial killer is pretty funny, and the movie does get some laughs whenever it focuses on his storyline, but unfortunately it spends a lot of time on a second, less interesting plot. Mia Farrow plays Irmy, a circus performer who runs away from her home after she finds her clown husband (John Malkovich) cheating on her with another performer (Madonna, oddly wasted in only one scene). She is taken in by a group of street-smart, down-to-earth prostitutes (including Lily Tomlin, Jodie Foster, and Kathy Bates), and unexpectedly finds herself mistaken for one by an eager young man (John Cusack). The cast all give decent performances, though many of them end up reduced to only a scene or two.When the movie focuses on Allen's character, it manages to get some easygoing, if predictable, laughs from the tension between Allen's neurotic persona and the supposedly high-stakes business of catching a serial killer. The ending, featuring the sorely under-used and under-appreciated comedic actor Kenneth Mars as a magician, is particularly kind of delightful. But the scenes focusing on Farrow's character are almost never funny, and don't really have much of a dramatic arc, either. They feel brought in from a different movie. While Allen effectively used the comedic and dramatic halves of his earlier Crimes and Misdemeanors to comment on each other, in this case the two strands of the plot just kind of sit next to each other without any very compelling reason to be together. While the Farrow storyline isn't terrible per se, it just doesn't feel like it needs to be in the same movie with the other material.Visually, the black-and-white movie makes its relationship to German Expressionism quite clear, almost to the point of overkill, actually. There really is quite an emphasis on shadows, but they're so omnipresent and so dark that for much of the movie you can't really see the actors' faces. While Allen is certainly capable of using black-and-white and shadow artfully (see: Manhattan), in this movie he overdoes it, and it's distracting just how dark everything is all the time. The set design is nicely evocative, but again, you can hardly see much of it. Overall, this isn't Allen's weakest movie (I would still say that would be You Will Meet a Tall Dark Stranger), but it never feels like it reaches its full potential. It's occasionally amusing and has a distinct visual identity, but the story ends up falling short of Allen's better movies.
Giorgio P (jp) wrote: A well made film with a really compelling premise
Anne F (de) wrote: Surprisingly exciting tale of a wouldbe croupier whosedrug-dealing husband turns up with her pregnant sister (his baby) and stolen illegal drugs (not his).
Norm d (de) wrote: The definition of a movie epic and spectacle - as was fully intended by MGM-Cinerama. Having seen the first run Cinerama road show engagement as about a 10-yr old at a downtown movie palace that no longer exists, the Bluray, pretty as it is, just doesn't quite get it done. There's really no way Cinerama can translate to the flat screen. However, the lush, splendid soundtrack is recaptured beautifully with the prelude, intermission, and postlude overtures. Miss those days of film exhibition ... Interestingly, from the events of recent days (with Debbie & Carrie), this film foretold much of Debbie Reynolds life, feisty and unsinkable until the very end. She is the thread that ties the eras and elements of the film story together.These were the Kodachrome "See the USA in your Chevrolet" days. This major film reminds of that America when the rest of the world hadn't developed yet or had just cleared the rubble of WW2. The transistor was beginning to be installed in radios & TVs, soon to transform the entertainment & media world.
Muhammad T (au) wrote: beneath is a excellent horror movie, specially, Makeupunderwater scenes, are awesome, & obviously, Acting of Children,
Terry M (de) wrote: The only reason this gets a 4/5 is because I wanted more! I felt like they made Superman a wuss. But, all in all it was VERY good. I loved Batman. I would've loved Kevin Conroy as the Caped Crusader, but ya know.