You may also like
Number 9 torrent reviews
Klavs P (br) wrote: The first one was not exactly good but also not the worst horror comedy ever. I never saw part II (and probably never will after seeing part III.) It's so fucking lame that you just stop wondering after a few minutes. Not even the blood and gore and the few funny jokes can make up for it. It utterly sucks.
Alejandro L (us) wrote: Es la tpica comedia-drama en donde no hay risas, pero si mucho drama. Puede verse un domingo en la tarde sin mucho que hacer.
Adrian A (br) wrote: horrible movie!! i hated it so much!
Andrew R (au) wrote: A movie I thought was pretty creepy and good until I found out the behind the scenes of the flick and now I can't even enjoy it.
JJ J (es) wrote: bug's bunny piece of **** i rather have a buffalo take a diarrea dump in my ear than watch this film!
Lucie F (ca) wrote: Em 1893, o escritor HG Wells inventa uma mquina do tempo e precisa us-la para impedir Jack, o Estripador de cometer crimes em 1979. Ele ento vai para o futuro e para em... San Francisco. Guilty pleasure e nada alm disso.
Des S (br) wrote: I enjoyed this remake because it kept to the same story as the original, but brought it into modern times.
Liliana M (ru) wrote: My lil girl lovez tinkerbell
Simon D (ru) wrote: Compared to the other Cronenberg fim I've seen recently (Shivers), this is a masterpiece, it's really just an interesting film. In the context of 80's US horrors, it's quite a weird one. Debbie Harry put's in the best film performance I've seen from her. The subject matter is a little concerning but the film doesn't go very far down the wrong route so it's alright. The story is a bit dumb, I think it's a cynical reflection on TV viewing habits and the dangers of watching disturbing stuff.
Leslie D (de) wrote: Must-see controversial thriller. Kinda sad but still unsettling.