You may also like
La caccia alla volpe nella campagna Romana torrent reviews
Raji K (ca) wrote: Bill Murray stars as Vincent in St. Vincent, a film written and directed by Theodore Melfi. Vincent is a man of questionable character, in that he drinks heavily, gambles frequently, visits prostitutes, and owes money all across town. When his new neighbor Maggie (Melissa Mccarthy) moves in and accidentally damages his tree, fence and car, Vincent threatens to sue for retribution. Right from the start Maggie and her son Oliver, can tell he will be an unpleasant neighbor. When Oliver gets locked out of the house, Vincent agrees to watch him for an hourly rate. The two begin to bond, due to Maggie's working schedule, and unknown to her, he teaches him how to fight, gamble and even goes to a bar. These events cause her to lose her custody and hate Vincent. What they do not know is that Vincent, is actually a caring person underneath who is a war veteran, a man caring for his dying wife, and simply is at a rough point in his life. The prostitute he is with (Naomi Watts), is a woman that he still cares for and helps her with her pregnancy. Oliver deems that all these characteristics make Vincent equitable to a modern-day saint. St. Vincent features solid performances, particularly from Bill Murray. Melissa McCarthy proves she has a bit more range than being the comedic fat girl in a film. In many instances its McCarthy's character who is more of the bad person for she is quite stubborn. She fights for her son even though she clearly cannot tend to him, and she is completely oblivious to any of the circumstances that occur throughout the day with her son as Murray's character does point out. Despite good performances, the film feels a bit too contrived. All the events that continue to unfold throughout the movie seem to just be all too obvious to advance the story or try and throw an emotional curve and element to the film. The moral of the story is certainly to love your neighbor, and to not judge a book by its cover. There were many times where I felt the film is trying too hard to be an deeply emotional, but uplifting drama. The film is worth watching for those who are a fan of Murray or independent movies, but does not extend much beyond that. -12.19.2016
Iac V (mx) wrote: This was an above average romance with a plot that avoided typical romantic movie clich (C)s. It was an interesting albeit depressing film that featured Miles Teller's second best performance (to whiplash). As well as a terrific performance by Shailene Woodley that propelled the film to a very high level.
Shannon M (kr) wrote: This movie was beautifully shot. Simplistic and clean it reflected the mood of the characters and story. The acting went above the standard I was expecting from this young Australian cast and I was pleasantly supervised. The story was pretty basic and rather cliche for a film in this genre, but its twists and turns accompanied by its near perfect execution was enough to really satisfy the viewer. I will admit that I was not in the right frame of mind to give the film my full attention and as such I will take the time to see it again, but at this point I did enjoy the film.
Brent M (gb) wrote: Decent movie. Though marketed as a movie with "shades of Rosemary's Baby," it felt more like Smilla's Sense of Snow. Interesting conspiracy and twists. Supernatural and sci-fi elements. Basically Diane is a translator who was orphaned as a young child and ends up adopting another orphan. The child develops an odd mark on his chest and they start to share a similiar dream. A car crash occurs and the child falls into a coma and then the excitement starts, though a little late in the movie. The child is kidnapped while in the hospital and then the hunt carries Diane to Mongolia to the final face off with the Stone Council who have nefarious plans for her child. Unfortunately the copy I rented didn't give the option of French language and english subtitles so I was stuck with an english dub over which did not help the movie at all.
Matthew P (mx) wrote: Laurel Canyon is about as boring as a good movie can get. It has some interesting developments, a couple of characters worth watching, but nothing particularly special and it all drags on for far too long with little that's actually worthy of your time. It's predictable, relatively dull, and while it's made with skill and has good to really good actors taking part, I just couldn't invest myself in the story it was trying to tell. Perhaps that's a failure on my part, but the film didn't win me over. I like movies with smart characters, and this one has two very smart people in the leading roles. Sam (Christian Bale), has recently become engaged to Alex (Kate Beckinsale), and the two have decided to move to Los Angeles. Sam has recently graduated and is starting his residency at the local hospital, while Alex is continuing her studies. They are going to stay at Sam's mother's house, which she won't be at because she'll be on her beach house. Or so we think. Turns out, she gave the beach house to her ex-husband -- something you can do when you're a rich record producer -- and has herself, and a band, staying in the one she promised Sam. Oops. It's no big deal, right? Alex only needs peace and quiet to finish her dissertation, and a band will totally not be an inconvenience considering all they do is play music really loud. Right. Anyway, Sam's mother, Jane (Frances McDormand) is in a relationship with the band's lead singer, Ian (Alessandro Nivola), which is about as open a relationship as you're going to get. You can already see the ways these different lifestyles are going to clash. So, Alex, who spends the day around the house, eventually starts to get involved in the culture that is Jane's life, while Sam, who rarely gets to leave the hospital -- such is the life of a doctor -- starts finding himself spending a lot of time with another woman, a fellow doctor, Sara (Natascha McElhone). Problems arise that need solving, obviously, and it'll all work itself out in the end. Maybe. Probably not. I don't really know or care. The point is that it doesn't matter. The film could have complete closure, or it could be open-ended, and it would make no difference to me. None of the storylines managed to connect in any meaningful way, and even in the really tense, dramatic moments, I found myself yawning. There's not a whole lot of character depth, and any development that happens is superficial. These characters have to act this way because of the way the film has been written, not because they really should. At the center of all the film's chaos is Frances McDormand, the only actor here who both creates a new character and becomes fully immersed in that creation. She deserves the top billing received here, even though the film isn't about her; it only becomes that way because of the presence she has while on-screen. Here, her hippie-of-the-70s woman is always compelling to watch, and if Laurel Canyon was about her and not a couple set on different trajectories, it might have worked. But, alas, this is not the movie we've been given. Everyone else in the film is fine, but nothing special, especially when compared to or sharing the screen with McDormand. Bale, Beckinsale, Nivola, McElhone -- they're all accomplished in their own right, but their performances here are just fine. Nothing special, nothing bad; they do what they're told and they do it believably and credibly, but without managing to capture the screen. There are only so many ways to say that their performances are what's required and nothing more. Fun fact: McDormand is also the only main actor who gets to use a natural accent. Beckinsale in English, playing an American. Bale is Welsh, also playing an American. Nivola is American, but playing a Brit, while McElhone is English, but playing an Iranian, I believe. That's not noticeable while the film is playing -- all of the accents are credible and if you didn't know the actors' natural accents, you wouldn't notice -- but I thought it was a fun thing to mention. The problem for me is that it's all well-made, and that if it had something to interest us, I would have been very appreciative. Lisa Cholodenko, whose previous directorial effort was the acclaimed High Art, knows what she's doing. But the story is the problem here, not the director. Very few people could make this plot captivating, as it has been done before and isn't particularly interesting regardless of how many times it has been done. Laurel Canyon is the type of film about which I have little to say. It's all fine and competent, but not compelling. If you're looking for a film to watch just because it's technically sound, then it's fine, but if you want a drama in which you can invest yourself, you'll want to look elsewhere. Good dramas have strong characters; Laurel Canyon has one. Frances McDormand shines, and fans of her should see it even though everything around is uninteresting. She captures the screen with the character she creates, and actually helps hide flaws in other areas. But, the film as a whole is not worth your time.
Jessica H (kr) wrote: Perfect timing for this disaster.
Daniel S (ca) wrote: 2nd favorite film of the Disney Renaissance after Lion King.? Such a masterpiece, great soundtrack
Sam M (fr) wrote: Must be seen. Nice movie.
gary t (ru) wrote: well umn just seen this movie 4 the 1st time n think that this is a brilliant movie 2 watch...its a really sad movie 2 watch but its good 2 watch..its got a good cast of actors/actressess throughout this movie..i think that faye dunaway, anthony higgins, james mason, jonathan pryce play good parts throughout this movie..i think that the director of this Drama, Art House & International movie had done a good job of directing this movie because you never know what 2 expect throughout this movie its a good movie 2 watch its a really powerful movie but its worth watching as its a true story
Casey T (nl) wrote: must-see experimental doc with a crew mutiny and a polish hobo
Keith M (mx) wrote: A long winded film that goes very bizarre in the middle. alan has a dream and floats upto a club in space where cliff richard is singing with the shadows. And there are stone snakes on mars that shot things from there mouth. not really thunderbird stuff to be honest. If you're a fan then stick with the TV shows as this is not really what i remember and they don't do much rescuing
Bosco F (ag) wrote: Interesting, no too shocking but anyways entertaining.
Paul D (it) wrote: Good Pacific War mission movie, although not entirely believable, still an entertaining outing for a young James Garner but one that never stands out.
Jennifer S (nl) wrote: Not one of Esther Williams' more memorable films, but Red Skelton's antics are always worth a watch.
Farah R (mx) wrote: A horrid motion picture.
Greg W (br) wrote: s/b called 'empire of the angst'