Man Of Steel

Man Of Steel

A young boy learns that he has extraordinary powers and is not of this earth. As a young man, he journeys to discover where he came from and what he was sent here to do. But the hero in him must emerge if he is to save the world from annihilation and become the symbol of hope for all mankind.

The film revolves around Clark Kent, a guy from Krypton, is sent to Earth due to his planet was attacked and destroyed. From Clark Kent was a kid until as an adult, he was adopted by a kind couple and the more Clark grows up, the more he awares the power which is available in his body. Until one day, the old enemy who destroyed his planet comes to destroy the Earth, he has to rise to defend the earth where he grew up. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


Man Of Steel torrent reviews

Andrew C (jp) wrote: Last Ounce of Courage is a "B" movie that still brings a lot of drama to the table. An amazing story of loss, American values, and the fight for freedom.

Matt C (it) wrote: If I'd known this was a Friedkin movie I probably wouldn't have bothered, the man hasn't made a decent film in 30 odd years. This is a real turkey (and I'm not just referring to the Kentuck Fried Felatio scene). It's not funny at all and is basically just a trashy film about trashy people. Even the half-arsed psychic bit is just boring.

Jerrod B (us) wrote: I'm sorry, this movie looks like it was shot with a camcorder. One from 1995. The actors couldn't really show their talents with the way it was written. Wait for the bootleg, then borrow it.

Jillian L (ca) wrote: So...I don't know how I feel about this. I wanted to like this so badly. I really did. Great cast, Julie Taymor, Shakespeare, this should have been a home run. Yeah...I thought it was pretentious. Which sucks, because normally I love Julie Taymor. Where I normally love her crazy visuals, I thought they were too much. I think there was a concept beneath all of the craziness that was happening. Why was the little boy there? Is he from the time period? Why does he suddenly become the grandson? Was he always the grandson? Why was the last two minutes just him walking? Just...meh. The acting was fine in my opinion. Except Jessica Lange. She was more than fine. She killed it. But honestly, there's better Shakespeare adaptations out there...I think I'll just go watch She's the Man now.

Michelle P (mx) wrote: Very different and pretty good.

Overton L (kr) wrote: The ending completely blows the continuity, making it one of the worst movies of all time.

Anthony S (fr) wrote: My 2nd film from Italian director Francesco Rosi. Not nearly as good as the near masterpiece Salvatore Giuliano, but I was somewhat expected that. Sometimes the film feels cold, but that's just me and the way Rosi decided to tell the story. Not a real flaw in the film, but it does hamper me from really liking it.

Tawseef R (nl) wrote: Quite predictable but worth for a one time watch.

Ian R (br) wrote: I'm not a fan of when a movie stacks the deck so much on one side that it is forcing you to feel only one way, avoiding any nuance to the story, but that said, this is a true enough tale that has a lot of feeling, even if it feels forced at times in its telling. It's sad and melancholy for sure and would be a good movie to use if someone needed to know what a weepie was.

Sergei K (ca) wrote: Sherlock Holmes police detective knows everything about the psychopath killer, but it takes a vengeful Liam Neeson killer cop to take him out. Holds some entertainment value but has way to many 'Why's.

Gavin S (es) wrote: Couldn't really fault the movie except Bruce Willis' character which is most films anyway!

Tim S (ag) wrote: David Lynch never fails to disappoint me, even with some of his less than stellar work. I really enjoyed this movie and I found it a lot more interesting than most people give it credit for. Everybody gives great performances and the story, while a bit head-scratching, still is pretty gripping. Lynch doesn't seem afraid of pulling the rug out from under his audience in this film, giving us a lot but very little to go on. It's a tough film to work out, and one viewing simply won't do it. It's not one of his best, but can you really call any of his work the worst? I can't. Even when he's not firing on all cylinders, he's still creating some high art.

Jon T (nl) wrote: A computer geek and his girlfriend get zapped into a dark underworld. She gets chained up by this evil sorcerer guy who compels the nerd to face seven different challenges in order to procure her freedom. The "challenges," each of which are directed by a different person (no, seriously!), are little more than just scanty encounters with monsters, giants, bands(!), museums, and explosives, each setting in caves, concert halls, or pyramids. Predictably, the nerd conquers all of them by way of his cheesy zapper watch. At the end of it, the nerd fights the sorcerer, and the victor of it all shouldn't be so surprising. That sums up THE DUNGEONMASTER, a truly heinous turkey with everything which defines a major stinker. It's atrociously acted, with dialogue that ranges from groan worthy to just plain laughable. It looks tacky, as well; poorly shot and cheap in execution. The "monsters" are hideous, and not in a good way; they look fake, they are robotic, and they are unpleasant to look at. Not a single minute of this movie excels believability. Even the gravel-voiced Richard Moll is saddled with dialogue that verges on overly hammy. Which is a shame, as he COULD have made the villainous sorcerer a half decent villain. The best part of the movie is that it's short, at 74 minutes long. Even as a generally tolerant fan of movies some would find unwatchable, THE DUNGEONMASTER proved to be not only a waste, but a totally uninteresting and immanently forgettable one. MYSTERY SCIENCE THEATER 3000 fans, beware: of all films, this has to be the absolute worst. If you dare to sit through this movie (and I challenge you to), expect to be disgusted through every minute. It's really that awful.