Jo's Boy

Jo's Boy

Grandson of a legendary rugby player, son of a legendary rugby player, and he himself a legendary rugby player, Jo Canavero raises his only son, Tom, in a small village in the Tarn region. To the great displeasure of Jo, thirteen-year-old Tom is as good at math as he is useless on the rugby field. For a Canavero, the legend can't stop there, even if it means setting up a rugby team specifically for Tom, despite the wishes of the whole village and of Tom himself.

Grandson of a rugby legend, son of a rugby legend and himself a rugby legend, Jo Canavaro brings up his 13 year old son, Tom, alone in a small village in the Tarn region of France. To the ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechers

Jo's Boy torrent reviews

J Rockdrigo M (fr) wrote: chafisima ...........

Todd F (kr) wrote: I was really excited about this one, but I was let down. There's plenty of beautiful imagery, to be sure, but the film loses focus after the first 45 minutes. Not particularly damning nor particularly objective.

Nikita C (es) wrote: Pretty cool movie!:)

Paul C (br) wrote: I pretty decent film. But he story gets pretty confusing and boring through the movie. Near the end, it really picks up and takes your mind for a whirl; but a good whirl. Now the young actress in the film, Seo-woo Eun did a pretty good job. There are parts when she was possesed by Jin-hee's ghost and she did a great job of acting creepy. One thing the film was missing was more scary or creepy parts. This left the movie boring until it finally picked up near the end. Luckily the story was decent enough to keep the viewer interested. I can't say that the title of the film is very good; but it does make sense. It is about a ghost with a cellphone; enough said.

john cody p (kr) wrote: perfect film for you and your women 2 sit down and watch together

John A (jp) wrote: Despite Seagal's Absence From The Action Scenes (Due To Seagal Walking Out After 18 Days Of A 30 Day Shoot, After A Disagreement With Director Alexander Gruszynski), This Film Comes Out At A Decent Quality. This Meaning That The Action Scenes Were Seagal Was To Be Originally Involved, Were Now In The Hands Of His Partner (Tamara Davies), With A Small Part Being Acted Out By A Stuntman Due To Seagal's Absence.This Film Features A Mediocre Plot, With A Somewhat Decent Script, That's Slightly Bad, And Enough Action And OK Performances That This Fits In Nicely With Most Of Seagal's Films. A Nice Sequel To The Foreigner, That Even Though Without Seagal In The Action Driven Scenes Works As An Average Straight-To-DVD Film.

Sylvia S (us) wrote: Is there a dvd of Impolite?

Juan C (ca) wrote: A successful series for Stephen Chow that begins will a dull thud. There is something hilarious in the idea of recovering a policeman(TM)s gun in such a convoluted manner, but that is where the inspiration ends. A shame that not the most is made of the high school setting beyond a complete disdain for exams.There are moments of great non-sequiturs. The Saddam Hussein t-shirt and European villain are highlights. As is the European(TM)s eventual downfall in the back of a truck. The sequence with a condom, blowing bubbles and advice pertaining to 15 minutes is also grand.Often though there are only bursts of madness, with the setup and timing of the jokes failing completely. The constant mash between farce and serious action also adds to this incongruity. This leaves a film that starts to drag as it moves towards a forgettable climax.

Jason M (us) wrote: I watched this film recently because a friend told me it was great and that Prince was a musical genius. After watching this film, it validated what I always suspected. This was not a great film and Prince was an overrated musician.This film is Prince. This launched his career and music. In my opinion, his career never did much else after this. Never again did he release great hits despite so many years in show business. Prince was in the 90s, 00s and 10s, much like the Rolling Stones have been after Tattoo You in the early 80s. At least the Stones had a myriad of classic hits from 1964 to 1981! The film plot is light fare. Apollonia is teen boy wet dream fare. Prince's music is pretentious fare. His guitar playing is lightweight and overrated. Despite not being a Prince fan, he has a tremendous amount of hit material in this film. Objectively, this is an okay watch, but not a good or great film. Predictable plot. Prince takes himself way too seriously. I assume fans bought into this. I never did. As a guitarist myself, I never had any respect for his musicianship.The film defines the 80s Prince music genre.

Bryan J (nl) wrote: Excellent script, character development, storyline, and all-star cast... and there are sooo many great lines from this film.

Emmanuel S (it) wrote: OK, this feels like a TV movie.

Joo P (it) wrote: I was just a lad of ten when I saw this 1973 BBC production of "Jane Eyre" for the first time. Michael Jayston and, above all, Sorcha Cusack made an everlasting impression on me. After all these years, to be able to see her again as Jane is... all joy! To acknowledge how well both these actors did portray their respective characters from Robin Chapman's fine script and under Joan Craft's competent direction, allow me to transcribe here the following excerpts from Charlotte Bront,'s immortal novel: From chapter XIV (Jane about Rochester): - "[...] he rose from his chair, and stood, leaning his arm on the marble mantelpiece: in that attitude his shape was seen plainly as well as his face; his unusual breadth of chest, disproportionate almost to his length of limb. I am sure most people would have thought him an ugly man; yet there was so much unconscious pride in his port; so much ease in his demeanour; such a look of complete indifference to his own external appearance; so haughty a reliance on the power of other qualities, intrinsic or adventitious, to atone for the lack of mere personal attractiveness, that, in looking at him, one inevitably shared the indifference, and, even in a blind, imperfect sense, put faith in the confidence." From chapter XVI of the novel (Jane about Rochester and she): - "[...] I knew the pleasure of vexing and soothing him by turns; it was one I chiefly delighted in, and a sure instinct always prevented me from going too far; beyond the verge of provocation I never ventured; on the extreme brink I liked well to try my skill. Retaining every minute form of respect, every propriety of my station, I could still meet him in argument without fear or uneasy restraint; this suited both him and me." From chapter XXVII (Rochester to/about Jane): - "[...] You entered the room with the look and air at once shy and independent: you were quaintly dressed - much as you are now. I made you talk: ere long I found you full of strange contrasts. Your garb and manner were restricted by rule; your air was often diffident, and altogether that of one refined by nature, but absolutely unused to society, and a good deal afraid of making herself disadvantageously conspicuous by some solecism or blunder; yet when addressed, you lifted a keen, a daring, and a glowing eye to your interlocutor's face: there was penetration and power in each glance you gave; when plied by close questions, you found ready and round answers. Very soon you seemed to get used to me: I believe you felt the existence of sympathy between you and your grim and cross master, Jane; for it was astonishing to see how quickly a certain pleasant ease tranquillised your manner: snarl as I would, you showed no surprise, fear, annoyance, or displeasure at my moroseness; you watched me, and now and then smiled at me with a simple yet sagacious grace I cannot describe." In these three passages of her novel, Charlotte Bront, gave to all readers a crystal-clear synthesis of how she imagined Jane Eyre and Edward Rochester; and it is exactly this we have the exquisite privilege to contemplate in the 1973 BBC production of "Jane Eyre". Please, believe me: in no other production (not even in the rightly praised BBC 1983 production, with Timothy Dalton and Zelah Clarke...) you will find these characters portrayed so faithfully to the novel and so perfectly on screen as in this one! Michael Jayston is a great, truly great Rochester; Sorcha Cusack, with that beautiful round face, those lovely eyes and that velvet voice, is a Jane from the other world; and the connection between them is way, way far beyond simple "chemistry" or "physical connection": it is genuine empathy - just like the connection there is between their respective characters. The portrayal of the secondary characters is made in much the same way. The performances of young Juliet Waley, as young Jane, Tina Heath as Helen Burns, and Isabelle Rosin as Adle, of reliable veterans John Philips as Mr. Brocklehurst and Megs Jenkins as Mrs. Fairfax, of glamorous Stephanie Beacham as Blanche Ingram, and of "Leslie-Howard-like" Geoffrey Whitehead as St. John Rivers, are all very good and quite close to what can we read in "Jane Eyre". The real marrow of Charlotte Bront,'s novel: this is what one can get from this, the 1973 BBC production of "Jane Eyre". Nothing of real importance is missing here - above all, God. The final lines said by Sorcha Cusack, taken out of the last chapter of novel (sadly missing in all the other TV and movie versions...), are a sort of resume of Charlotte Bront,'s faith in God: after helping both Jane and Rochester going through their ordeals, God blesses her supremely and judges him with mercy; so, there is reason to believe in God. Just like the novel, this TV production is a story told by Jane's own point of view: it's a "flash-back". The use of narration through Jane's "inner-voice" is as effective here as it is old in the History of English Theatre (and Cinema, for that matter): it harks back to William Shakespeare, who used to make his characters turn to the audiences and speak out their intimate thoughts. Drama and humor, suspense and surprise are all very finely balanced in this BBC production of "Jane Eyre". As for the humor, I don't mean to be rude to those reviewers whom have written here criticizing Sorcha Cusack's performance, but I'm afraid they simply don't grasp British humour - particularly, the "understatement", which is present in almost every line of many of the intimate dialogues between Jane and Rochester (both in the novel and in this production). Every time I see Sorcha (with a naughty smile) saying to Michael (with a wicked grin): "Won't she [Miss Ingram] feel forsaken and [pause!] deserted?", I roll myself with laughter! That's Bront,'s humour at its best! What a cracker! It should be noted that this is neither a "romantic" nor a "gothic" production of Charlotte Bront,'s novel. In fact, I'm not even sure that "Jane Eyre" is a true romantic or a true gothic novel. As far as I remember, it was Jorge Luis Borges who stated that it could be classified as one of the predecessors of the so-called "Magic Realism" in Literature. Indeed, between "Romanticism", "Gothicism" and "Magic Realism", I personally find "Jane Eyre" much closer to the latter... and, judging solely from what we can watch in this TV production, both Robin Chapman and Joan Craft fond it the same as I do. I've seen the DVD release of "Jane Eyre" (1973) so many times since I bought it that I'm seeing it now in bits and parts - specially those witty ones with Jane and Rochester. That's how good this production really is! To my mind, in a scale of 1 to 10, the 1973 BBC production of "Jane Eyre" deserves 9.9. It would get a clear 10 out of me if it had (as it should!) at least fifteen episodes; but, since it was a "low budget" production, it has only five - and, because of that, the "gipsy scene" had to be pruned up to the point of becoming just a hilarious scene, and the character of Rosamond Oliver had to be simply tossed off. Nevertheless, it is the best of all screen versions there are of "Jane Eyre": the most faithful to novel, superbly tight and paced, very well put up together, with first class performances and Elgar's Introduction and Allegro for strings, Opus 47 (1904-05), as the musical background. In short, it is a sublime piece of Art. Don't miss it!...

Roman R (kr) wrote: "La Grande Illusion" es la primer cinta humanista que he visto sobre la guerra y el retrato del ejrcito alemn. Es una historia de enorme poder que nos introduce a un grupo de prisioneros de guerra franceses durante la primer guerra mundial y sus intentos por escapar de los campos donde estn detenidos. La cinta crea momentos memorables y conmovedores (como la secuencia donde un comandante alemn se arrepiente de dispararle al capitn que ayud a liberar a sus amigos). "La Grande Illusion" esta brillantemente dirigida y actuada y representa un gran clsico del cine en el gnero blico. Muy recomendable.

Renae A (it) wrote: Anthony Perkins steals the movie with his excellent portrayal of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. But the rest of the movie lacked appeal.