Charlie pretends to be a dentist though he is only his assistant. When a patient can't stop laughing from the anesthesia Charlie knocks him out with a club. He is sent to the drug store, ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
You may also like
Laughing Gas torrent reviews
Daniel G (nl) wrote: A Haunted House starts fairly funny, and it has it's moments. The idea was good. But it gets old pretty quick.
A Y (jp) wrote: Not the worst movie I've ever seen, by far. In fact, I thoroughly enjoyed myself most of the time. I must warn you, though, it is not for the faint of heart or turbulent of stomach. I went into this movie expecting what I got: A seriously screwed up girl torturing some people out back in the barn. And let's face it, most of them deserved what they got anyway. One thing that I do have to knock the movie for was the acting. Not to speak ill of the dead, but John McGarr's acting constantly reminded me of one of the Soprano's goons who tended to get killed off quickly so they wouldn't remind you how bad they were. Andrews' Izzy was kind of what you'd expect from a sociopath--her faked emotions were not consistent with what real emotions are like. Maybe that was great acting? Who knows. I would have liked to see a little more character development, specifically, how Izzy went so nuts. She was obviously a little messed up to begin with, considering her brother issues, but it would have been fun for me to get to delve into her mind a little more. I know they were working with low budget, and I commend them that I sometimes forgot that fact. However, the characters could have used some flesh. I will say this. If you are into watching a fully visible but hopefully (...i mean, obviously...maybe) faked castration, you will probably enjoy the last ten minutes of the movie. That's just a friendly heads-up; there was some gnarly shit that went down. This is definitely a thriller for the whole family. More likely though, you will never share the experience with anyone and you'll hide the DVD when you're done so no one will know. Either way, if your bar is set at the right height, you will be appropriately disturbed by the end of this film.
Catriona T (nl) wrote: I actually caught this on Lifetime TV one lazy Sunday morning. It is a good adaptation of Sue Monk Kidd's excellent novel. The topic might be disturbing to some people, as it includes the story of a married woman and a monk who have an affair. It is an interesting story with a surprising ending, and I can't wait until a movie adaptation of the author's other book 'The Secret Life of Bees' comes out.
Nia E (us) wrote: Boring and waste of time.
Jarret W (mx) wrote: Not nearly as good as any of the Scorsese movies it tries to make itself look like...some of the choices made in the editing department were confusing to say the least..in a movie about one of the greatest poker players ever it would have been nice to see a little more poker action than just the river card...Michael Imperioli was good in parts allthough didn't quite get all of Ungars mannerisms down....decent supporting role from his Soprano's co-star Steve Schirripa and from Pat Morita.
E L (au) wrote: A small likable film.
Jack G (ag) wrote: The whole sub-plot, if you can call it that, with the girl falling down the elevator didn't work at all for me (or the supposed 'wrap-up' of it at the end), and some of the scenes feel too lightweight for a Lee Joint. But when it works, it's cracklin good, mostly thanks to Randle's performance and a fall-on-the-floor laughing scene with a parody of the Jeffersons (Spike Lee plays Mr. Jefferson, if you can imagine that). And QT is... QT. Oh, and Richard Belzer makes a sex call, whoda thunk?
Rob S (es) wrote: people have some weird criteria for what makes a good movie. this is one of the best 80s movies i've seen, and i can't believe i didnt know about it for all these years. think Better Off Dead but better.
Ernest M (gb) wrote: Standout choreography/acting.
Daniel K (de) wrote: Perfect example of a noir tied much more directly than most to the event that gave birth to the genre: WWII. Not much violence is needed, simply the threat and anticipation of violence lend the film an atmosphere and tension of a noir thriller.
Dylan M (br) wrote: I didnt find this one funny. I feel like ive seen it before as its very predictable. Very few funny scenes and laughs. The Change-Up has the stars, but its comedy and plot cant even be held together by Reynolds and Bateman. Most will be disappointed with this movie.
Brett C (kr) wrote: Review In A Nutshell:Time Bandits is everything a children's film should be; filled with important and daring themes, appealing characters, and visual imagination that wonderfully represent the curiosity and wildness of a child. I had fun during my first viewing of the film, but I did not write a review for it as I was so distracted by Gilliam's visual and comedic touch. Now that I have seen it for the second time, I have understood and seen almost everything that Time Bandits has to offer, and what a magical and thoughtful ride that was.In its surface the film is an adventure, following young Kevin along with a number of dwarfish international criminals, hopping through multiple points in time, hoping to earn, or better yet steal, money and gold from the most prominent figures of history. Just by its synopsis, Time Bandits is an entertaining ride that allows younger viewers to be aware and appreciate the significant individual of our time, made accessible through Gilliam's trademark wit and a dash of innocence. I especially had a laugh-fest when the group arrived and encountered Robin Hood played by the brilliant John Cleese, stealing my attention with every time he opens his mouth or gives a polite grin. Time Bandits does not make their "pit stops" repetitive, as each one carries a different tone and with each successive stop, character development have been established, with Kevin becoming less of a one-dimensional character. Each historical point is also beautiful to look at, with set designers and the location crew recreating iconic environments, helping not only Kevin but also its audience be immersed in its time traveling adventure.The film's second half becomes a different film tonally. It collects all of the film's themes and ideas that were built quietly built in the first half and uses it to provide a climax and a conclusion that would leave a mark on its viewers; ambitiously trying to change a young person's views on morality, life, death, and spirituality, while still conveyed in a way that is accessible and entertaining for its targeted audience. Gilliam portrays technology as a facade of evil, allowing its consumers be obsessed with self-improvement and in competition with thy neighbour; forgetting the value of virtue. Due to the film's large and insightful themes, it allows the film to not only be restricted to the young and innocent mindsets, but also to the adults watching. Though adults have already established their values and opinion towards the ideas of morality and spirituality, Time Bandits has the potential for these types of audiences to reconsider their views of life; yep, this film is that powerful.After all of the positive things that I have just stated about Time Bandits, why does it not get a perfect score? Well, though I adored the ambition in its storytelling and the ideas it explores, I felt the middle of this film was stretched out; it seems to be a common problem of Gilliam's films, he seems to cherish his vision so much that it is difficult for him to let a scene go or to shorten his favourite sequences. I doubt this would pose as a problem in subsequent viewings, as potentially I might see the value of those scenes that never were clear to me in previous viewings.Time Bandits is the film that all children's films should use as inspiration; tackling honest and essential ideas needed for the transition of a person from childhood to adulthood. Many consider Brazil as Terry Gilliam's pinnacle, but for me, Time Bandits is his magnum opus.
Gordon B (de) wrote: Despite its sell out ending, street has a smart premise terrific acting especially by Freeman, and like Training Day is up front in its exploitation of racial fears
Philip N (au) wrote: Samuel plays a character Tom an ex cop that cleans up a messy crime scene in your house that you can't stomach yourself. It's a bit of a creepy job to have but I guess someone has got to do it. You can guess what's going to happen to Tom due to his kind of work. There are a lot of close up shots of various things to get across Tom's attention to detail or perhaps he has OCD. Sam doesn't have a great relationship with his daughter and that probably has something to do with his wife not being around anymore. Things start to spice up towards the end with Ed and Eva's characters getting heavily involved with the case so enjoy the journey that it takes. Renny did well with his directing as it is beautifully shot. Give it a watch if you want to see something a lil different an surprising