Elder Johnson (Darin Southam) is a hard working, by-the-book missionary who is near the end of his service but has yet to see any fruit from his labors. His companion, the laid-back elder Sarath (Charan Prabhakar), has had lots of baptisms, even though obedience isn't his strongest attribute. A chance discovery of an old journal leads the Elders (and the other missionaries in the area) on a treasure hunt. Relying on each others strengths, they strive to solve the clues, which lead them to an unexpected reward!
Jason C (kr) wrote: McConaughy is really the best reason to watch this movie, he is at his prime douchie-ness that is pretty hilarious. After that there isn't much else, the conflict seems forced and comes outta nowhere when it didn't really need the extra drama crow barred in.
Bruce F (mx) wrote: For me, the enjoyability for Midnight in Paris comes from its love for both art and history (two of my passions from school). I love this film. While some may call it a romantic film, the real chemistry comes from Gil (Owen Wilson) and the city of Paris. If you enjoy history, the arts, or the city of lights... Midnight in Paris is definitely a film worth watching.
Jeff S (nl) wrote: I recently say this movie on Hulu. It took me 3 days to watch the whole thing due to how many commercials Hulu makes you sit through. I really didn't think it was all that bad. Its a very cheesy move to say the least but it kept my attention long enough to get through the whole thing... Three days latter. But I very much enjoy B movies. This one needs more then one viewing. but the fight scenes were pretty good, the ninjas were fun and the aliens... well they were aliens. if your like me, a night owl your should check out this movie.
Jason E (kr) wrote: Romantic comedies, along with horror flicks, are the two film genres I have yet to see anything great from. This movie was well on its way to a great rating until it threw in stereotypical chick flick junk towards the end.
Nina U (jp) wrote: Big budget nonsense... some nice effects but not much more. Abishek needs to start reading the scripts before signing on...
KaLiegh K (jp) wrote: Entertaining bizarre musical that I quite enjoyed. Admittedly, I am a little biased being a glee fan and absolutely adoring Zooey deschanel, but still.
David Ray G (de) wrote: If this was a movie based on a Jane Austen novel, I'd get it. But the Louisa May Alcott Little Women way of living should have stayed in that era. I find it unforgivable that a book written in modern times is reminiscent of times 200 years ago - times during which women married for money and not love and they stayed with men they didn't care about or were treating them horribly. But of course, I cannot judge the movie based on the motivations of the writer of the book it was based on.So, movie-wise, for me, it really didn't capture the castle. Some characters were interesting, but by end, I didn't care for anyone because they had all become self-involved and spiteful. Mildly enjoyable and that's about it. I know that people love both the book and the movie, but neither appeal to me much.
Colum O (au) wrote: 2 sugars, dead milky like BELTER, PURELY BELTER!!!
Ville H (ag) wrote: Vh olis saanu olla parempi!
Matthew M (gb) wrote: a bizarre horror movie about an Ice Cream Man serial killer. It is pretty funny and nasty sometimes. The mental hospital is one messed up place.
Colby F (au) wrote: Although not all of the film is technically possible (Alfred Molina's abrupt character change comes to mind) this is still a gripping, suspenseful drama that plays almost like a classic black & white thriller (one could easily imagine Audrey Hepburn in the starring role) and Sally Field is astounding, delivering an emotional and heartfelt performance. Beneath the film's more controversial themes are those of a more relatable nature: the intense bond between mother and child, the problems society creates when comparing man and woman in discriminating gestures, and the simple urge to rebel against an oppressor. Sally Field takes us on a tense journey, portraying a woman thrust into a world she doesn't understand, which, really, could happen to any of us. 5/5 stars!
Devilish G (ag) wrote: One of the best movies in the 1980s!
Kevin S (gb) wrote: Niko Tuskani is an ex CIA who was in Vietnam and saw a prisoner of war being tortured and quit. Now A cop in chicago he discovers what he thinks is a narcotics ring going down when its really C4 and the real plan is to assassinate the senator. Its your typical stephen seagull vs the bad guys scenario but still fun and entertaining nonetheless. Personally, I enjoy his movies because they always contain great action scenes in them. Just him beating the bad guys up is so enjoyable to watch. I thought it was a good movie from start to finish.
Jo D (es) wrote: This movie is too long and it's plot is predictable