Nine Guests for a Crime

Nine Guests for a Crime

Nine members of the same family go to an island, where nobody lives - but the head of the family owns a nice house there. Problem is that he and his three sons keep a dark secret, and this dark secret begins to haunt them as soon as they are on the island. One by one falls victim to a mysterious killer.

Nine members of the same family go to an island, where nobody lives - but the head of the family owns a nice house there. Problem is that he and his three sons keep a dark secret, and this dark secret begins to haunt them as soon as they are on the island. One by one falls victim to a mysterious killer. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


You may also like

Nine Guests for a Crime torrent reviews

Derek J (ag) wrote: everything wrong with movie making. the one star is for the pg and korea scenery.

Charlie K (fr) wrote: Brilliant documentary that opens up some many doors to a horrible tragedy.

Kunal K (mx) wrote: Several attempts were made over the years to create Indian cinema's very own superhero. Most attempts were ridiculed until the 'K' obsessed Rakesh Roshan introduced an alien inspired by Spielberg's 'E.T.' who bestowed magical powers upon Rohit whose son, in turn, would be the first convincing superhero that leaped across long distances in a long black coat. This young Krishna is now back as a more refined Krrish whose nemesis is not only the mutant generating apocalyptic maniac but also his father's script that introduces unwanted drama and cheeziness to restrict this 100 crore venture from being a fine example of India's advancement in films. 'Krrish 3' or 2, as you like it, is technically impressive and stunning in several aerial shots, action sequences and the climactic showdown between two immense forces but it is the storytelling that sees no advancement or refinement. With a cartoonish plot of a villain seeking world domination with his self-generated mutants, Rakesh Roshan seldom offers intrigue, surprise or nuance in a story of good v/s evil. Expectations are high and people will certainly flock to the cinemas for the special effects from Filmkraft but one can't eliminate the realization that most of the story was based around action sequences that were adroitly visualized rather than the other way around. The sequel finds its roots in the events in Singapore when Dr. Siddhant Arya used the DNA from Rohit Mehra (the better Hrithik Roshan) to create new life. Years after Krrish's victory over Dr. Arya's malicious attempt to change the world, we see him struggling with jobs he can't keep while being the superhero that the city occasionally needs. While his father Rohit's experiment to harness the sun's power achieves limited success, his main focus is to find an antidote for a deadly virus outbreak in Namibia. An elusive pharmaceutical company finds the cure eventually, garnering enormous profits and funding for its proprietor's relentless attempts at creating a life form that can cure his handicap with a DNA matched bone marrow. Kaal (Vivek Oberoi) has no regard for human life and sends his mutants to Bombay to unleash the virus again. Millions of lives are threatened but the father-son duo create an antidote and use Krrish's powers to distribute it in Diwali style. Furious at his foiled attempt, Kaal sends his mutants to threaten Rohit's family and Kaya (Kangana Ranaut) replaces Priya (Priyanka Chopra) with her form changing ability. Intrigued by the common DNA signatures between the virus, its antidote and a captured mutant, Rohit seeks to unravel the mystery in Singapore where Kaal seizes him. Krishna, who has just realized Kaya's deceitful ways is determined to rescue his wife, unborn child and father from Kaal's hideout. Meanwhile, the nefarious villain finds the DNA he seeks and now has renewed powers with which he threatens the city of Mumbai once again. Only a superpower can stop him. Only its hero can prevent the annihilation of the city. The refinement in action sequences and special effects is delightful to watch. This is by far, the best that our cinema has achieved. Krrish's entry over the city's skyline is simply stunning. But then there is the unwanted overacting by people on the airplane. The visual effects of Krrish's antidote deployment look really cool but that is only followed by a song praising him with God, Allah and Bhagwaan. The intermission point is with Krrish standing at the edge of a crane looming over the city and its skyline. Quite impressive even though it resembles many of Batman's epic scenes. The film then drags through some love, affection, heartbreak post intermission till Rohit links the DNA facts together, bringing Krrish to Kaal's mountain hideout and then of course, the subsequent showdown in the city.The climax seems unlike Rakesh Roshan. Not to discredit the director but the sequences look incredibly powerful and thrilling, were it not for the similarities with that of 'Man of Steel'. Yet, the attempt is commendable and does pack most of the film's budget into the 20 mins. Thus, Krrish 3 leaves the impression that things have evolved in the past 6 years. The action, the budget, the superhero's powers, the villain's malice and strength as well as Rohit's role as a guiding father, have evolved collectively to create a bigger impact. However, the flaws are deep and are many. Rakesh Roshan still relies upon corny storytelling that may appeal to kids. Various themes such as Batman, Superman and X-Men are obvious inspirations and that is detrimental to all the hard work put in by the actor and the technical crew that came up with such stunning visual effects. Music by Rajesh Roshan is perhaps his dullest work and brother Rakesh favors him by featuring the various songs abruptly through the storyline. The biggest flaw however, is that the story seems to follow the action. Big action sequences were visualized and the story seems like an afterthought to the 100 crore ideas. That sadly, is the reality of the action film genre in India where there is no dearth of creativity in the technical aspect but severe dearth of nuance in storytelling. Hrithik Roshan is much better at playing the paternal role of Rohit where he is so distinct from the dull and bulky Krishna. After several years, he still portrays the same innocence, silliness and intelligence that won him accolades. Only if there was more life in Krishna's character that the series will now depend on. As Krrish, Hrithik needs to stop his facial vibration to depict aggression. It just doesn't work. But he is great with the action sequences and even when he silently stands with hands crossed behind him, looming over the villain or the city with a watchful eye. Priyanka Chopra can of course play into the melodrama and create more forgettable moments of the movie. Kangana Ranaut on the other hand, plays the role of a mutant very well. Her evil form is as convincing as her guilt ridden one that admires Krishna. Rajpal Yadav has barely 3 minutes of comedy and he does well to make us laugh. Vivek Oberoi maintains good composure as a handicapped villain. His aggression is focused and we seldom see him overact when he easily could have. Only if he were given a better metallic suit for the climax sequence, he would've had more fans. Negative roles do suit him more than romance and comedy as is evident from 'Company', 'Shootout at Lokhandwala' and now as Kaal. Rakesh Roshan had everyone's hopes up with this huge release and with Hrithik averaging one movie a year (if that), the audience shouldn't be blamed for expecting a lot. The script, storytelling and little brother's music do not work for such expectations and a film of this budget but the action sequences do when they need to because of the adroitly crafted visual effects. Cinematography in those sequences is quite stunning but not impressive otherwise. As the film closes with the sun setting over Bombay's skyline through a panoramic aerial shot of a construction crane, its hero stands tall on the edge, observing with a watchful eye and a keen sense for any looming threat. That visual is convincing. The idea of such a hero is convincing. Krrish being that hero, is convincing. - 7.778 on a scale of 1-10.

Rachel T (au) wrote: Lame. How dare they title this film "Blood Ranch" - there was hardly any blood in it!! This movie was all bark and no bite. A real disappointment since it started out with potential. Some twisted scenes and gratuitous gore could well have saved it.

Zeno G (ag) wrote: If you are interested in Hungarian cinematography, then you sould start with Kontroll. In case you don't give a crap about Hungary, Budapest, or Antal Nimrd, you still have to watch this one, because it's movie worth to watch for everyone who likes good cinema or likes wondering about the questions of life. Also, if you want to see a Fight Club-alike "I don't know what is going on with the good guy and the bad guy but it's badass." plot, then this movie is absolutely for you. Epic underground atmosphere with images so beautiful that you easily forget the fact that you're watching a low-budget European production. This is a truly immaculate movie, and is one of my all-time favorites... Thank you, Antal Nimrd!

Darcy C (jp) wrote: Wow...isn't destiny grand?

Melissa M (au) wrote: Two stars, I guess. They added quite a few superfluous things and left out quite a bit, so it was a bit annoying, but the worst thing was that they used a little girl to portray the Angel of the Lord/God! :-0 The good sides were that they got the main message about right, and some of the wording was close to the Biblical account.

Nikole D (us) wrote: I liked the entire movie & the end when the narrator was saying how for an insect a minute is an hour and a season is a lifetime was a really cool concept.

Mohammed A (jp) wrote: It's good movie to watch


Shawn W (ca) wrote: Out of prison for a crime he didn't commit, a man returns home and seeks vengenace on a biker gang (another one led by Will Smith) after his home is murderously violated. Hit Survivor song of the same title proves a winner again in film.

Kahu P (ag) wrote: Of course I'm going to say it's ***DA BOMB**

Anniina J (es) wrote: I've seen this movie several times -- it's a sweet and funny family comedy, well worth a watch.

Steven J (jp) wrote: While it might be somewhat of a marathon watch, it contains all of the typical David Lynch tropes, only cranked up to 11. It'll first delight you with great performances and an interesting plot before pulling the rug under you, constantly disorienting and teasing you. This might be his most surreal film, but it's also one of his most uncomfortable ones. A must see for Lynch fans.

Andy L (ag) wrote: A movie where honesty, bravery and responsibility are not part of the story as it happens very often in real life.

Mira Mohd S (de) wrote: Ever since, Liam Neeson took over the reigns of the ageing Bad Ass in 2009s Taken, almost every worn out actor in Hollywood has been trying to do the same to ignite some light into their dying careers. But honestly who would have thought of a once successful comedian Vince Vaughn to pick this act up! Who's next? Jim Carrey? Eddie Murphy? Matthew Broderick? As it was pretty obvious from the trailers, the film is quite bad! The film went into some production troubles when Universal cancelled the film back in October 2013, just a month after Hailee Steinfeld was cast in. Lucky for them QED International and PalmStar Entertainment revived the film and co produced it. Nevertheless the film is as bad as Vince Vaughn's hairstyle in the film. Based on a graphic novel of the same title written by A.J. Lieverman and Nick Thornborrow, the story follows Nick Barrow (Vince Vaughn), a career criminal who plans bank heists, big ones, and he's very good at it. But his last job goes sour and he ends up on the bad end of a conversation with the Mexican mob boss Victor Fuentes (Jordi Moll), who thinks Nick knows more than he's letting on. Meanwhile some dirty cops, led by Detective Keenan (Bill Paxton) are also wanting him dead. His estranged daughter Kate (Hailee Steinfeld) gets marked so she and Nick go on the run as he tries to figure out with his close friend Harper (Jonathan Banks) how his plan brought him into so much trouble. Directed by longtime Vaughn associate Peter Billingsley (Couples Therapy)-still best known as the kid from A Christmas Story-this vapid genre exercise doesn't have much going for it beyond the over-qualified supporting cast, who are given little to do in roles than rarely amount to more than a couple of scenes. The premise, which pits crooks on both sides of the law against each other in the aftermath of a heist gone wrong, might bring to mind the foul-mouthed Tarantino imitations of yesteryear, but this style-less 'Take Your Daughter To Work Day' release doesn't even have the personality of a knock-off. The screenplay is based on a graphic novel and I have to imagine the comic book is nowhere near as unbelievable as this hack of a screenplay. Because the story in the movie relies on supposed smart people doing things they wouldn't do but do them because apparently because the writer couldn't come up with anything better to get where he wanted to go. The film is also a strange mix of black comedy, thriller, action and parody, though none of those descriptions come easily the movie is never really good at any of them. With names like Vaughn and Jon Favreau, you might expect some comedy and to be sure, there are some moments that elicit laughs, though it's hard to tell if it's intentional. That starts with Vaughn's hair (which is even poked fun of in the movie), a mop top that looks like he's a member of 60s pop band revival. There's the deadpan narration throughout as well that sounds like the filmmakers used the first practice recording Vaughn made the day he showed up on set. There's a lot of mediocre gunplay, dirty cops and double crossing, and the most compelling element of the story (Nick and Cate's relationship) becomes a secondary plot point. I could maybe overlook the flimsy screenplay if the movie was well made, but it's not. The whole debacle feels like something a bunch of friends made in the backyard while playing around with a video camera. There are moments that make you question what your watching, like you should be observing more carefully as if the filmmakers are doing something so creatively ingenious it's transcendent. But that's wishful thinking. Nick talking to his daughter on a park bench while eating ice cream talking about how to rob a bank is so perversely rudimentary it's almost offensive, yet you watch, waiting, feeling like there is something you're missing. You want it to be meaningful, clever and poetic somehow, and in the hands of people who understand that better, say the Coen brothers, it would be. Here, it's empty and so obviously setup to make a future scene work, it's downright frustrating. Then there's moments when it does work. Paxton has a tremendous scene with Shea Whigham that is the most jarring in the film and makes you wonder why anyone didn't see that and decide this is where the movie should be going. It seemed it desperately wanted to echo Shane Black's better thrillers, but considering that the R-rated language is mostly witless and the action is surprisingly bloodless, it just ends up feeling totally safe and trite. The action is not great either, one can see from the first brawl that the choreography is tedious. It's definitely not the caliber of high pace fisticuffs or intense shootout. In fact, any fighting seems a bit underwhelming and might even be detrimental to thriller aspect the movie is setting up for. Director Peter Billingsley isn't much of a talent behind the camera, and the who's-who parade of his impressive posse of buddies (including Bill Paxton, Taraji P. Henson, Terrance Howard, Mike Epps, Jonathan Banks and Jon Favreau) feels like hasty rather than inspired casting. One things for certain: these actors are too good for these pitiful roles. I have never been a fan of Vince Vaughn's one tone comedy, if you all though casting him in the second season of HBO's True Detective was mistake, his role and performance here reassures the fact he should strictly stay away from dramatic roles or might I say any role which has him doing action. Bill Paxton comes off best as the cornered detective feeling the pressure and trying to tie up the loose ends. The character is typical and does typical things as that character, but Paxton is effective given what he must do. He has some genuinely good moments, as do the rest of that cast, but is wholly stunted by a script that lets them down and sadly, a director who simply can't do anything to make this interesting. The lovely Steinfeld is a mildly entertaining here and certainly the least embarrassing of the main cast. Honestly, I actually think the best thing about the film was Vince Vaughn's haircut. It is a thing of ridiculous beauty and if not for that hairdo, this movie would've lost me even more quickly that it eventually did. Jordi Mola seems to have amped up his act from recently released 'Criminal'. On the whole, 'Term Life' is a poorly made film which falters in every direction it takes. Its neither an engaging drama nor an adequate crime thriller.