Janet is an over-weight girl who has a knack for making the other children in school laugh...by making fun of her own weight. In seeing the other kids reaction, she feels that she might ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Janet is an over-weight girl who has a knack for making the other children in school laugh...by making fun of her own weight. In seeing the other kids reaction, she feels that she might ...
You may also like
Introducing... Janet torrent reviews
Desmend S (kr) wrote: good movie ppl need to see It
Seth Y (es) wrote: Zombies meet indie mumblecore in this well-made film. It's an interesting hybrid, which sticks out in a horror genre that has become played out and quite stale. The main focus is the character development, allowing the undead element to almost take a back seat. I'm not complaining though, because it's anchored by some great acting that really works well. The Battery is not your over-the-top, typical zombie flick, but rather an excellent small-scale character piece.
Kevin M (it) wrote: A number of family tragedies encountered by Thailand natives and tourists as the '04 tsunami disaster set into the coastal shores of the Indian Ocean. Ejiofor, Roth, Collette and Bonneville give great performances to gain credibility to the touching family, journalist, and diplomatic drama within. The original flooding video shot by a real-life tourist ('04) is seamlessly spliced into the wave scene. Although its an HBO film, it's better than a Hollywood production.
Cynthia S (nl) wrote: Funny. Screwball kind of movie. Well done. William H. Macy is fantastic, as usual.
John B (ca) wrote: The first time I watched this I liked it for its shock factor. Just watched it for the second time and the shock factor has worn of. It's still good purely because it's so different. It's also a very hard film to concentrate on though as it's so all over the place. The strong cast definitely elevate it for sure. Watching this film is like having a mental breakdown, which I think was Oliver Stone's intention. There doesn't appear to be one sane character in it.
Robin T (nl) wrote: What the hell is that?I understand the virulent message about media control and human thought but this movie is very weird!
Sean H (nl) wrote: A lot to like. Just missing something from the first two.
Keiko A (it) wrote: Sex and Fury was always one of those wider known Japanese exploitation films. We saw Meany of these in the 1970s right up till they really just stoped making them. Though Sex and Fury is the most well known one of them all. Mainly because it heavily inspired films to come like Kill Bill. The story is about this little girl called Ocho Inoshika. When Ocho sees her father get murdered right before her eyes by a bunch of Yakuza leaders she grows up to be a vengeful spirit. She does nothing else in this life but search for her father?s killers. And that she does, but not without helping a soul or two along the way. At first when Sex and Fury started out, I thought it was going to be a rehash of the story I had seen before. a very similar story dealing with a little girl who grows up to be a stone cold killer because she had an extremely traumatic childhood experience, I mean the fight sequence goes on for a long time, Of course it does add a level of nudity to the movie because its obviously gratuitous nudity we are seeing here solely for the purpose of titillating the males in the audience. Though Females still take a very big likening to the film. And as for the violence, well there?s lots of it. Blood sprays body parts fall and the snow is sprinkled with red on more then one occasion. Its pretty freaking obvious this one was also a heavy influence on Tarantino. The whole ending sequence is extremely similar to Oren Ishii and Beatrix Kiddos final fight in Kill Bill Vol. 1. Both in terms of music and shots. It was crazy but I was having flashbacks. The only thing that hinders this film a bit is the acting from Christina Lindberg an American actress that appears in this film playing an English spy. But as for the acting with the other cast member I have to put it as very solidly done. They really known how to play there parts. So I have to put Sex and fury as one of those great movies were a female is standing up to the people she hates and will kill them in an act of revenge. Keiko?s Score 79-100
Bob V (nl) wrote: Another triumphant performance for Davis and one of the five Best Actress nominations she got in a row, a feat still unsurpassed. Like several of her other classic films, the plot easily lends itself to soap opera melodrama, but the able direction and pitch-perfect acting are what makes it transcend this to cinematic masterpiece. Also, first time I remember seeing a film with Ronald Reagan. That was just a random remark really. Although Geraldine Fitzgerald is completely lost in the emotionally overwhelming performance by Bette Davis, she deserves praise for her portrayal as Davis' best friend, something of a thankless role in this case, doomed to be outshone, and yet she manages to bring something unforgettable to the part, holding her own and even giving the star a bit of serious competition in some scenes.
Greg W (gb) wrote: one of the funnier-ie better longs from the duo!
Harry W (us) wrote: Serving as a collaboration between Howard Hawkes and John Wayne which was said to be one of the greatest western films of all time, Red River sounded like an exciting old-fashioned adventure.Since Red River has been frequently cited by director John Carpenter as one of his favourite films, I figured it would be a very distinctive feature. Unfortunately, I set my hopes a little high as it still had a heavy reliance on traditional western tropes and plot points. When I say that, I mean that the feature is one which relies on stereotypical tropes and iconography to keep audiences entertained while the story moves along at a slow pace. In actual fact, Red River moves along even slower than many other westerns because it attempts to branch out its focus onto multiple characters rather than relying strictly on the antics of the hero. In that regard it is innovative, but it is still slow in the process. It's not uncommon that the large amount of talking in Red River manages to slow down the pace of a film which comes from a genre already distinctive for its slow rate of movement, so audiences must be patient to embrace the full effect of this 133-minute feature. It's also no great testament to Howard Hawkes' storytelling that there are arbitrary text transitions at multiple points in the film since they appear too briefly and are written in a form of cursive which takes time to decipher.Nevertheless, Red River is no standard Cowboys and Indians fare. While Red River is not precisely a revisionist western film, it does display a step in a direction away from the more formulaic genre pictures John Wayne is known for. Red River serves as a spectacle of traditional western filmmaking with a more innovative use of character drama, sourcing intelligence in from the way it depicts the relationships between its characters. John Wayne leads a crew on a cattle drive in the story this time, but the other characters question his leadership rather than following blindly. This kind of distrust and conflict puts an involving spin on the narrative and creates a story of unprecedented characterization, creating a thought-provoking story. A key theme in western cinema is the change brought on by the frontier. Older sheriffs begin to lose their power in an age dominated by the young and the fittest, and this theme is epitomized by the title of Cormac McCarthy's postmodern western novel No Country for Old Men (2005). This theme was explored heavily during the 1960's western stories told by filmmakers such as Sam Peckinpah, but by the point of the 1940's the genre was just starting to touch upon its revisionist era. Red River displays a key step towards a change in generic conventions, and though it still maintains many traditional western elements there is enough clever new permutation in this film for it to stand out amongst the countless other John Wayne vehicles. Overall there are various characters in Red River that are of key lasting relevance to the narrative so the film is not a vanity project for the star, but one with wider ambitions which Howard Hawkes tackles.One thing that Howard Hawkes has always had a knack for is crafting a spectacle. With Red River, the man brings that on board without problem. With plenty of on-location scenery providing a realistic backdrop to the story, Red River uses plenty of western iconography to make for a visual experience. The cinematography captures it all nicely, and there is enough in the way of horse chases and fight scenes to entertain fans of the old-fashioned action. There isn't too much in the way of shootouts, but since the film is mostly narrative-driven and does have enough production values to support it, it manages to push on through its slow pace well enough. But the most impressive thing about Red River is the talented array of actors who never lose grip on the material.John Wayne delivers one of the finest performances of his career in Red River. It's not too common that we see John Wayne portraying a cowboy with as much thoughtful character developement as he puts into the role of Thomas Dunson, but Red River stands to gain a major benefit from the man's fine acting talents. Much of the film relies on the man's instinctive persona as the distinctive old-fashioned cowboy hero to keep things amusing, but his instinctive talents don't grow tiring. Fans of his can easily embrace the actor's natural charms, but for once audiences looking for something a little more innovative can enjoy the calibre of the man's talents. We see him far more angry than usual; savage in his battle against Native Americans and threatened by the dominant presence of his adoptive son. It's a vulnerable edge to the character which he attempts to disguise beneath his masculinity, but for once we see John Wayne playing a character who is both a strong hero and a human. He comes with insecurities and even an antagonistic nature to him, adding more dimensions to his character than he is known to do. John Wayne is an extremely solid lead in Red River.Montgomery Clift also takes a strong stand. While John Wayne is the central hero of the story, Montgomery Clift refuses to submit to him. With his own skills as a leading man, Montomery Clift takes command of his character with a firm grip over the role, one which he brings a fearless charisma to. While John Wayne is a more vulnerable figure, Montgomery Clift is the one playing the single-note archetype of the story which he does with sophistication and handsome appeal. Montgomery Clift is very blunt, consistently maintaining a kind of strength which is unmatched by the surrounding characters, making him an intensely figure. Him and John Wayne share a really intense chemistry, and having the two actors go against each other in Red River is really a remarkable sight.Walter Brennan is also a firm fit since he has a distinctively western nature about him which Howard Hawkes is able to work naturally into the film. Red River has the slow pace of any standard western film and a shortage of action to help support this during the long narrative, but Howard Hawkes still keeps it as a stylish film all while breaking new ground with revisionist themes and a very strong performance from John Wayne.