Christopher is an ambitious college freshman, striving to become a writer. Through a computer fault he's assigned the same room as Alex, a real party freak and... a girl! He's annoyed and tries to get a different room as soon as possible, but when he learns to know her, he also starts to like her. She not only improves his sexual life, but also his writing skills
- Stars:Patrick Dempsey, Helen Slater, Dan Schneider, Kevin Hardesty, Marius Weyers, Barbara Babcock, Gloria Hayes, Brad Pitt, Aaron Harnick, Ron Sterling, Eric Lumbard, Michael D. Clarke, Wendy Lee Marconi, Yvette Rambo, Shawne Rowe,
- Director:Mel Damski,
- Writer:Craig J. Nevius
Christopher is an ambitious college freshman, striving to become a writer. Through a computer fault he's assigned the same room as Alex, a real party freak and... a girl! He's annoyed and ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Happy Together torrent reviews
(it) wrote: yep i relly enjoyd it.............
(jp) wrote: In short: Remarkable film about sex tourism in Africa for 50+ womenI saw this film at the Ghent filmfestival 2012. We were told that it was the first of three related films, the two successors to be named 'Paradise: Faith' (already released), and 'Paradise: Hope' (to be released in 2013). Quote from festival announcement: "On Kenya's beaches they are known as 'sugar mamas': European women who seek out African boys selling love to earn a living. Teresa, a 50-year-old Austrian woman, travels to this vacation paradise. 'Paradise: Love' tells of older women and young men, of Europe and Africa, and of the exploited, who end up exploiting others."The festival screening took place in a fully booked venue (225 seats). More than half (very unusual) of the people stayed for the final Q&A with the principal actor (Margarete Tiesel), and there were (also unusual) many relevant questions. She admitted upfront that she had not read the script prior to shooting (though she did after wards). She is a professional actor, but the African boys are all amateurs.What struck me the most when watching this film, is that the "boys" never ask money for their "services" in a direct way. Rather they always seem to have a family member in financial difficulties, badly in need of financial support, medical bills being the most common story. We see that happen on Terese's first trip outside the hotel, where her "boy" takes her to his sister (not really, as we see later on), and subsequently a school teacher. Each one has a sad story and needs money. And when she does not cough up enough money, the boy refuses to be touched anymore. On her second trip Teresa seems very aware of all this, recognizing it as standard operating procedure. She starts playing along without feeling awkward about it, and gradually appears to have found her way in this "game".In the final Q&A the subject "exploitation" came about several times, apparently without easy answers. It is not exploitation per se, when both sides look happy with the arrangement. She talked with several other women there with ample experience in the matter. Some bought for instance a motor bike for her African "lover", or even a house, and travel a few times per year to the area. The "boys" speak one of the usual European languages (English, German, etc); which one is dependent on the area. Yet, while the story progresses, we nevertheless observe a certain language barrier, several times causing misunderstandings about mutual intentions.All in all, this is a remarkable feature film bordering on a documentary about sex tourism. We have heard about sex tourism in Thailand, particularly for men. This time it is about women with money to spend. The film clearly demonstrates to us how it works. What the films shows is very explicit, even to the extent that we see Teresa explaining to the "boy" how she prefers to be touched, and we closely observe him learning which way works best for her. This scene marks the duality of their respective roles, not parasitic but rather symbiotic. Showing all this in a natural way, without too much embarrassment for us viewers, is an achievement in itself. I scored a 5 (out of 5) for the audience award when leaving the theater.
(us) wrote: Terrible rehash of a plot already overused, but is is the dire all-round acting which makes this one very missable.
(br) wrote: This is not only my favorite anime movie, not only is this one of my favorite animated movies, this is one of my favorite movies of all time(period)
(br) wrote: This movie makes me laugh. Especially with Bill Murray!
(br) wrote: I saw Distant Voices, Still Lives and Caravaggio back to back and it makes sense to review them together. I have to admit to a bit of ??user editing?? to get through them. Both mid 80??s and re-printed by the BFI hence (I assume) their inclusion on the top 100 list above their quality. Both at the arse end of the top 100 list. Both VERY personal projects by their directors (read self indulgent). Both ??stylistic?? (far more attention paid to how they look than telling a story) and I hope to never see either of them again. Pete Postlethwaite gave his standard gaunt, northern shtick in ??Distant??? but it was good to see where Dexter Fletcher started out (in Caravaggio)Getting there ?? 10 to go but I know there are some classics left!
(fr) wrote: here in the uk its just called Catholic Boys anyway really enjoyed this flim.
(nl) wrote: Un putain de classic!!!Comme dirait l'autre : avant Pequeno, il a eu Pixote
(ru) wrote: pretty boring but still close to the comic.worth watching if your a fan of the comic.
(us) wrote: A movie with some funny moments and an ok plot. It could have been much better and it was kind of [i][u][b]cheesy[/b][/u][/i] at times.
(es) wrote: "This is a cocktail, isn't it? That's Mr. Charles, isn't it? They'll find each other."
(it) wrote: Arthur Christmas is such a good movie. Its stupidly frenetic pacing and too much action really hurt the movie, but it is still such a great mix of traditional and modern with impressively well developed characters, some sophisticated themes here and there, superb character interactions, a great story, a positively childlike tone to it and many heartwarming moments. It isn't one of Aardman's best, but it is one of the finest animated films of 2011.
(ru) wrote: A tight and macabre thriller. Dial M for Murder may even keep new generations glued to the screen.
(br) wrote: Directed by Robert Mandel (School Ties (1992)), this is a very good suspense thriller that shows all the tricks of the trade when it comes to making films. It was made for a pittance, but it would become a very successful film in 1986, and would eventually spawn a sequel. It's a product of it's time, and it makes you pine for the good old days of special effects, as this film is a good showcase for them. Australian special effects man Rollie Tyler (Bryan Brown), works in America doing on screen effects for films from explosions to monster make up to blood squibs for shooting. But he gets an unusual offer from Lipton (Cliff DeYoung), a government agent working for Justice Department. Lipton wants Tyler to stage the assassination of mob informant Nicholas DeFranco (Jerry Orbach). Tyler is reluctant, but he's assured he'll be 100% protected afterwards. The staged assassination goes well, but then Lipton tries to kill Tyler but Tyler escapes and goes on the run, and Leo McCarthy (Brian Dennehy) ends up trying to work out what's happen, and Tyler has to stay one step ahead of the Justice Department. It's a very good film, and it has some good special effects too. It's got all the hallmarks of an 80's action film, but it's still enjoyable today. It's a film that would be impossible to remake, as CGI has take over from effects like the ones portrayed in the film. Plus, you hardly ever see Bryan Brown or Brian Dennehy these days, pity really as they're good actors.
(us) wrote: This was a rom com worth watching. Funny acting, good plot. Simply hilarious!
(jp) wrote: a mind fu*k, basically.
(br) wrote: Empty storyline. Flat dialog. Genuinely boring throughout.