This sequel/cash-in to the popular 2001 Korean rom-com apparently picks up the story where the last film left off with actress Lynn Xiong replacing Jun Ji-hyun in the leading role. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
You may also like
My Sassy Girl 2 torrent reviews
Allan C (es) wrote: The film desperately wanted to channel Robert Rodriguez' "El Mariachi" and "Desperado," but suffers greatly by comparison. The film shares much in common with "Desperado" in terms of story and aesthetics, but lacks the wit and inventiveness of Rodriguez. The film is directed with equal vigor and has a fair amount of style, but does not feel as clever or original as a Rodriguez film. Still, it's entertaining enough and has a likable cast of unknowns. Worth watching if you're in a direct-to-video action flick sort of mood.
Glenn R (nl) wrote: Funny because they didn't try so hard to be funny. Just clever conversation.
Heather M (mx) wrote: This is the kind of documentary that I enjoy. It is a well done look into the world of competitive Irish dancing and gives you an education about an event that most people don't know exists.
Anthony M (br) wrote: If you're one of those people that thinks Lucas was a genius that lost his mind, you'll be on board with this movie 100%.
Melek O (it) wrote: Other one of Jennifer movies I love this as well more drama comedy but still has funny moments. A maid trying to make a living single friends trying to set her up..
Logan M (us) wrote: "Chicken Little" isn't a good animated feature, but I'm sure it has a great personality. As likable as it is, it's just one of those bad apples Disney drops every so often.
Tanner B (nl) wrote: Irrversible (2002) C-99m. ?? D: Gaspar No. Monica Bellucci, Vincent Cassel, Albert Dupontel. Remember the days when movies used to make you laugh and could even remind you to be optimistic? Here comes yet another ugly, "artistically significant", violent-filled, gratuitous mayhem flick. Girlfriend raped (in a scene which feels like 90 straight minutes), boyfriend wants blood. One notable critic defend film by covering its nonlinear structure--which, in a way, recycles the "explicit payoff"--but that doesn't make the movie any more entertaining . . . or memorable. No must have been pretty proud of his pornography, he also wrote, co-produced, and co-photographed.
Jim A (es) wrote: Its certainly not the movie it advertised itself as an features very little of the kangaroo actually talking. Its mostly a buddy crime comedy. Problem is it features content clearly not appropriate for children despite it marketing to them and for adults its often painfully unfunny
Jake C (ru) wrote: I have this video as well.
Stephen W (nl) wrote: Film Noir at it's best!
David W (us) wrote: Yippee K'I'eh Motherfuckers!!!!!
Darwin V (nl) wrote: An accident leads to death. The death leads to another accident. And the second accident leads to... This is the chain reaction that starts off Douglas Sirk's "Magnificent Obsession." Rock Hudson plays Bob Merrick, a thrill-seeking bachelor, who, at a need for speed, crashes his boat on a lake. He survives but his rescuing inadvertently claims another life -- the well-loved Doctor Philips. The community is heartbroken and grudgingly despises the hedonistic Merrick, who's no trade-off for the philanthropic doc. Out of guilt, Merrick reaches out to Helen Philips (Jane Wyman), the doctor's widow. He offers her money but she refuses. But he's persistent; he's gung-ho to be a better person and do good deeds. This I'd-like-to-help-you / get-away-from-me tug-of-war inevitably leads to another accident. This time, it is at Helen's expense. And waiting in the wings, Bob Merrick is still the eager helper ... and perhaps still the magnet for bad luck. "Magnificent Obsession" deeply intrigued me at first; I even became engaged at its philosophical direction. Its sequence of events resonated like an episode of "Lost" and had me asking questions. What if there is a higher power at play? What if Merrick is prone to cause accident even if he wants to do good deeds? The first hour had a metaphysical undertone, touching upon themes of redemption and second chances. But alas, the plot develops a bit contrived. Those who find the premise unlikely will laugh at the later developments. The film also suffers a common pitfall for romantic films: the split-em-apart contrivance. Oh why, why, why! The second half had me shaking my head and questioning the story's logic instead of its deeper meanings. The perspective on the title itself is even misleading. The "obsession" to me seems more over a woman rather than the act of good doing. The movie disappoints but my thumb quivers to point slightly upwards. This is my first Douglas Sirk film. I can't pinpoint it but Sirk creates an aura of something soft and delicate. And yet, you can't really call this film timid. It does gather momentum and it's unabashedly sentimental (sometimes good, sometimes awful). I admit I'm still intrigued at how his other movies turned out. If coupled with a great story, his aesthetics can produce a great piece of work. Not quite an obsession but it could ignite a chain reaction for me to watch another Douglas Sirk movie ... and another ... and another.
Mohammed A (us) wrote: It's good movie to watch