'We come in peace' is not what those green men from Mars mean when they invade our planet, armed with irresistible weapons and a cruel sense of humor. This star studded cast must play victim to the alien’s fun and games in this comedy homage to science fiction films of the '50s and '60s.
It is a normal day for everyone, until the President of the United States announces Martians have been spotted circling Earth. The Martians land and a meeting is arranged, but not everything goes to plan, and the Martians seem to have other plans for Earth. Are they just misunderstood beings or do they really want to destroy all of humanity? . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Mars Attacks! torrent reviews
(br) wrote: What surprises me most is not that the Guillermo Del Toro/Tim Burton infused children's tale turns out to be more of an adult whodunit thriller - and a good one too even though yours truly did guess the ending, not that I mind when it makes sense, but I digress - but that what I thought initially to be whiplash-inducing tonal unevenness of the film turns out to be a misjudgement on my part and that all those various elements and strands (murder mystery; family drama; quasi-supernatural fantasy; horror and probably more) come together in the final reels of the film producing something almost magically coherent and fascinating to watch. This is one of those films that knowing any more will spoil one's enjoyment so I will only say it is about an accident prone boy called Louis Drax, an overly articulate and thoughtful child, who fell off a cliff and is now in a coma. The film then oscillates between Jamie Dornan's psychologist trying to find out what happened in the present and flashbacks to Louis's 9 short years on earth so far. The direction by Alexandre Aja and Max Minghella's script are effective, unsentimental and manage to avoid over-cuteness. The ensemble is good, especially Aiden Longworth and Sarah Gadon as the mother and son duo at the centre of the drama, producing a pretty little film that will surprise and delight an unsuspecting audience like it did with me. A small film that will come and go rather quickly, I recommend checking it out when it hits the small screen at home or on a long haul flight if you missed it in the cinema.
(kr) wrote: On the flip-side of a craigslist joe, people can be quite scary... And make really dumb decisions.
(gb) wrote: What? She should not have left her day job as a model and start making films..... WHAT? Some moments were funny but for the most pointless Balkan-style violence. WHAT? And many pron films have less action than this one......
(us) wrote: This movie was suprisingly good; there's an original idea (animated Olympics, "as-seen on TV"), some great jokes and some brilliant animation (mostly near the beginning). The songs are pretty good too! It's a funny little movie that derseves some more recognition (and maybe an updated sequel). I'd definitley recommend this movie. And until someone releases this DVD, the whole movie is available on YouTube.
(de) wrote: YEAH,TODAY IS MY BIRTHDAY
(ru) wrote: LETTERBOX. Una obra maestra. Excelente matrimonio entre cine narrativo e ideolgico. / A masterpiece. Excellent marriage of narrative and ideological cinema.
(it) wrote: Overall I gotta say that I like this film. What stood out to me the most was the performance of Gregory Peck who plays Mr. Finch as this lawyer who defends Tom Robinson. I also love the cinematography of this film despite being black and white. I think all the supporting characters did their best in portraying their characters. The best part for me was the court room drama. What I didn't like was that it took too long to get there. I wish we would had seen as an audience how that actual incident in question took place but, I understand that we are basically seeing all this unfold through the eyes of Mr. Finch's children. In particular Scout. I understand that now but, he was that I had new that coming in. I had these expectations that it was a court room drama film. I had not read book so I didn't know what was coming or what to expect. Like I said the best parts where definitely the court room scenes and I love the scenes with Nr. Finch and what his character represents. What I also didn't like because I didn't really understood was the thing with Boo ( Robert Duvall's character ). Overall I would like a second viewing of this film some other time. This time knowing what's gonna happen. Do I think it's a masterpiece l. No I just think it's a really good film that I enjoyed watching. I just don't love or like it as much as other people do.
(br) wrote: Uneven but ultimately entertaining old-fashioned western from director Fritz Lang. It's pretty cheesy at times, framed by a handful of incredibly hokey country songs. But the original story with psychological depth and intriguing characters makes it compelling enough, even if it is only a minor achievement in Lang's impressive career.
(it) wrote: Wars Bond shoots a plane with a tommy gun, calls Hitler toots and shaves off his stache. Pretty awesome!
(jp) wrote: Deciding to review some old movies as I watch them. Christmas in July is a terrific Preston Sturges comedy. Gonna be revisiting his work over the next few weeks. Dick Powell was great.
(kr) wrote: An amazing story, and also a wonderful visual display of the marvellous aspects of sea. Another masterpiece from Pixar.
(gb) wrote: this was made in 2014? Stellar cast, crap story. There were some "oh wow you can do it!" parts but they were successfully converted into "bleh". Missed opportunities bonanza!
(it) wrote: The films of David Cronenberg - at least the ones billed as products of the "body horror" subgenre - always achieve a certain sort of impressive unpleasantness. Never are they necessarily scary, explosive, or even blackly funny. They stew in a concoction of emotionless carnage and metallic surrealism more ominous and disturbing than directly intense. We sit as an uncomfortable, sullen witness, prone to wincing as there isn't much else to do. It's eerie without the eventual emotional crescendo we might expect in a typical horror closer; it doesn't feel like a horror film so much as it does an inexplicable nightmare you'd rather forget than dwell on. And so I give props to Cronenberg for making a fright-fest incomparable to his peers, but that doesn't mean I necessarily like "Videodrome." It's too abstractly unpleasant for me to arrantly recommend it, since most will likely have a similar reaction. But it does what it sets out to do quite smashingly, which is to devise a television satire more reflective of a macabre tale of terror than, to be outrageously broad, "Network." Whether you venerate it all or not is up to fate, and I just so happen to be one of the few who feels the need to take a hot shower and watch a couple hours worth of '90s sitcoms after viewing, just to get the unshakable feeling of abhorrence off me. It stars James Woods as Max Renn, a TV producer who runs CIVIC-TV, an underground Canadian station that specializes in the spotlighting of softcore pornography and brutal depictions of staged violence. Well-aware of audience fascination regarding such horrors, Renn is conscious that his consumers are on the brink of tiring of the same old standardized faux taboos. So his world lights up when he accidentally discovers "Videodrome," a plotless television program from Asia that looks and feels like snuff, torture and murder its most prevalent features. It must be phony, Renn tells himself, but in the context of a David Cronenberg film, we know that this mostly likely isn't the case. But Renn, being too optimistic in a profession that should be cutthroat, foresees the program as being the future of frowzy television. Before making the final decision as to whether he should air the program or not, though, Renn makes the regrettable mistake of becoming addicted to the series, which ends up being much more sinister than he might have at first believed. As it turns out, the feed is coming from a mysterious location in Pittsburgh, and has, similarly to the supernatural tape in "Ringu," dramatic physical and mental impact on the viewer. Shortly after his introduction to "Videodrome," Renn begins having bizarre hallucinations, ranging from images of his TV coming to life to his stomach disfiguring into something reminiscent of a VCR. Things only grow more grotesque the more Renn delves into the situation. "Videodrome's" plot thickens as it wears on, covering the devastations of governmental conspiracy, media dependency, and forthrightly strange malice, and their blending together leaves us distinctly uneasy. Never frightened, but aflutter, a feeling of all-powerful danger following our every move, unable to be stopped. Enigma is key to the fears of the film, and the more erratic it gets, the more violent it gets, the more tremulous we become. It isn't hair-raising in varying bursts akin to "Halloween" or "Suspiria"; "Videodrome" has an incessant rumbling of disquiet lingering throughout every scene. But I hesitate to say that I felt anything but disgust during the entirety of "Videodrome." Watching it again sounds about as appealing as only eating undercooked meat for a week, and I wouldn't want to inflict such pain onto myself or my readers. My experiences with Cronenberg have been nothing less than uneven over the years; I love his spectacularly screwy "eXistentZ," like his take on the gangster movie, "Eastern Promises," and actively loathe his widely praised "Dead Ringers." For once, "Videodrome" carries the feeling of indifference that I so desperately try to avoid when watching movies. I hold it in high regard, its craftsmanship, performances, and imagery intriguingly unwonted. But when reflecting upon a movie, one question always stands out as being most potent: did I like it? No. But there's a lot to admire.
(au) wrote: A solid three and a half stars for me with this movie, a really good family movie.
(us) wrote: Peter Fonda is very good in this movie!
(de) wrote: It can get slow at times, but the payoff is totally worth it plus the chills along the way are fun too. Great thriller/mystery movie. Very well acted, as the characters more than adequately evoke the emotions from us that the director would've hoped for.