Phoenix Lights Documentary

Phoenix Lights Documentary

Celebrating the historic and still unexplained Arizona mass sighting of 1997 this critically acclaimed and internationally award winning Documentary is based on the bestselling book, "The ...

Celebrating the historic and still unexplained Arizona mass sighting of 1997 this critically acclaimed and internationally award winning Documentary is based on the bestselling book, "The ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


Phoenix Lights Documentary torrent reviews

stefano l (kr) wrote: Although very preventable and a bit stereotypic, the movie is dazed and this makes it more enjoyable than not. I don't understand just one point: why the character of the "life coach" has been so remarked in the synopsis, when in the end is so superficial in the totality of the movie? Boh!

kyo 9 (us) wrote: It's like watching more of a documentary rather than a film..

Jose Alejandro S (fr) wrote: Esta pelcula es excelente, tiene mucho que analizar... El timing es ideal. Ademas el tema es muy actual (las preocupaciones sobre lo nuclear son actuales hace ya mucho tiempo)... Es un drama en todo el sentido de la palabra; Conmueve, nos hace reflexionar... ademas ciertos toques de ocurrencia le dan buenos matices...

xGary X (ca) wrote: Set during the years leading up to the British hand over of Hong Kong to China, a police inspector attempts to overthrow a Triad gang and leave it in the hands of less violent and ruthless successor. The sequel to Infernal Affairs is actually more of a prequel, fleshing out the characters and events that led up to the time of the original. It's a beautifully made and intelligent gangster movie that reveals the various shades of grey within the characters; none can really be seen as totally "good" or "bad", particularly considering Inspector Wong's manipulation of events that lead to unexpected consequences. The only real problem is the fact that it's more of a companion piece to the original than a self-contained story and as such I think anyone who watched this without having seen the original will struggle to see the significance of the events as they unfold here. But to fans of the original film it's an excellent prequel that skillfully fleshes out the story and characters with a much broader palette, making the first film an all the more satisfying experience.

Fawn R (fr) wrote: A very sad and touching look at a piece of World War 2 history most people never even think about.

Vincent P (gb) wrote: The high-rise setting is a nice switch and, as with all the Poltergeists, the special effects are clever and downright nifty... but the last half hour of this movie is a complete disaster. People come and go (some never return), are replaced by Kane-follower doppelgangers (didn't they cross over at the end of 2 though?) all culminating with Tangina sacrificing herself [SPOILERS] for naught (as the end stinger reveals). WTF-ery abounds.

Jesse O (mx) wrote: I've come to the realization that one of my favorite things to do, even though I've done it twice, that I can think of, is ordering pizza and then watching a campy 80s horror movie. I remember doing it with Fright Night a year or so ago and I had a lot of fun. I don't know what it is about the combination of pizza and an 80s horror movie but it's, honestly, a perfect combination. With that out of the way, I reviewed the remake on here and I thought it was a terrible movie. Just terrible. I don't honestly remember much of the film itself, other than I hated it, so I cannot really compare the two. But, by and large, it's similar with the exception of the reveal of who the villain is. I wouldn't call this movie good, at all. Nor would I even go as far as to call it above average. But, you know what, I had a blast watching this film. I don't know what I could say that was good about this movie. Because I think its camp-heavy factor come from the fact that the movie 34 years old. Who knows. Maybe this was considered campy even back in the day, but I somehow don't buy that. Not that I think it was taken all that seriously either. But yes a lot of these 80s horror movies have a certain charm about them that makes them a lot of fun to watch regardless of whether they're actually good or not. And I think this is the perfect example of it. It's probably the type of film that would work best watching with a group of friends so you can spend a good time laughing with and at the movie. The film itself isn't actually incompetently made, far from it. It's just that everything surrounding that, the story and the acting, are honestly a little goofy. The thing that sucks, however, is that the version on Netflix is the version that was edited for theaters to avoid an X rating. To think of how far horror movies have come that the thought of this movie getting an X rating in this day and age just seems laughable as shit. There's, apparently, a 99 minute version of the film that was the original edit of the film. This version has never been released on VHS or DVD and apparently was aired only once by a cable channel. But, and this is probably true, a lot of that is probably expository. I'm sure the 99 minute version is gorier, but I doubt that there's 9 additional minutes of violence in the film. I don't think there's enough violence in the film that there's a conceivable way that the 9 minutes that were cut out were 100% gore. I'd still like to see the original cut of the film however. I can't really say much else, honestly. This isn't a good movie and it's probably tame by modern horror standards, but it's so campy that I honestly had a lot of fun watching this. It's just an easy film to watch and it'd probably be even more fun if you watched this with a group of friends. Not good, but I would recommend it as a silly Netflix watch.

dianes profile ending p (jp) wrote: I am interged with this movie.

Chris W (br) wrote: It's a typical Hammer film, filled with great gothic set deign and art direction, cleavage (and a bit of actual boobs), and of course some blood and gore, all strung together by a lurid and ridiculous plot.Picking up where its predecessor Dracula Has Risen From the Grave left off, the ending of that film is slightly retconned so as to have Dracula's demise witnessed by a guy travelling through the countryside who decides to take the Count's cloak, dried blood, and ring.Later on, that guy, Weller, sells Dracula's things to three bored wealthy English gentlemen with an interest in the occult, and, after drinking some of Dracula's blood, the three guys beat Weller and leave him for dead. He transforms into Dracula, who, upset over his servant being killed, seeks revenge on the three men.This is a nutty plot, but it does have some neat ideas. Unfortunately, the technical apects and the ideas can't ave a film if the execution is boring and subpar. I liked individual moments, but overall found this to be a bore. Heck, Dracula is barely in it, and Lee says mayeb 10 words the whole time. Of course, since he's Lee, he's got a commanding presence, even though he rarely speaks. He's a high point, and it's a hame he's got limited screentime.You can't say that Hammer made uninteresting films, that's for sure. It's just a bummer that they weren't always very competantly made or as entertaining as they should have been, which is definitely the case here.

Kris H (nl) wrote: I'm proud to be reviewing the new Barbara Stanwyck collection before it's release. This movie was great. I'm a sucker for anything Douglas Sirk. He cracks me up in an unintentional way. Most of these have never been seen before. My favorite being "The Lady Gambles." Hilarious. Think Reefer Madness with a gambling dame as the subject. This collection is highly suggested.

Edith N (mx) wrote: All-Singing, All-Dancing Soldiers One of the side effects of this project is that I tend to be about the only person on Rotten Tomatoes to have seen some of the movies. (Yes, this is library, not Netflix--it appears in their catalog as [i]Irving Berlin's This Is the Army[/i].) Sometimes, this is not necessarily a bad thing. This movie was not terrible, though it's World War II propaganda at its finest. With a little residual World War I propaganda thrown in for variety's sake. It also features some wildly dated material--and the worst bit of it even has someone saying that it isn't dated and is always in good fun. Times were different then, of course, but there's a reason there's a disclaimer at the beginning of the film about how certain of the bits of the movie are perhaps not in the best taste, for all they're a thing that happened then. First, it is World War I. In order to improve morale, a bunch of guys are allowed to put on a show, which they take on tour. And then, they're pretty much marched offstage and onto ships to take them overseas. Some of them die, and the lead of the show, Jerry Jones (George Murphy), gets seriously wounded and ends up with a gimpy leg. Obviously, he has to give up his career as a hoofer, but he becomes a show promoter instead. So that's all right. But then World War II rolls around, and we start by pretending we cared that the Germans invaded Poland. And the sons of the men who were in the first show go off and join the military and end up in a second show. Jerry's son Johnny (Ronald Reagan!) is one of them. He's also refusing to marry his childhood sweetheart (I didn't catch her name), because he doesn't think it will do her any good. Because he's stupid. That whole subplot really bothered me. He was himself a war baby. His mother was a war bride. Theoretically, his parents should be able to tell him that there are, actually, substantive benefits to getting married before the man goes away to war. Heck, I considered it myself, though the benefits would go away when he came back, so we didn't do that. However, we have special circumstances. We don't count. Ronald Reagan's stance here doesn't make any sense, and I really wanted someone other than the girl to tell him so. She could be seen to be biased. His dad or his sergeant or his dad's sergeant could have set him straight on that, but it doesn't seem as though anyone even tried. So that offensive stuff? Yeah, blackface. And that was bad enough. What's even worse is that some of the men in blackface are also in drag. Indeed, there's an awful lot of drag in the movie. It's kind of alarming. They kind of use it as a punishment for one of the characters at one point, but that doesn't seem to be the case for the other twenty or so people. If I remember correctly, it's all in the World War II show, too. It's not as though there aren't women in auxiliary capacities in the military by that point. Heck, Ronald Reagan's girlfriend, there, shows up in a uniform toward the end of the picture. Yeah, okay, Red Cross uniform. But still. And hell, there are actual black people in the show, including Sergeant Joe Louis. Sure, the sergeant, there, is stiff as hell, but doubtless there were other black soldiers who wouldn't be. Ditto actual women. I guess people thought this was funnier. I've seen some good World War II propaganda. This isn't the worst of it, but it certainly isn't the best. Reagan is, as always, a bit on the stiff side, which is odd, given his later fame as--let's be honest with ourselves--a public performer. (Great Communicator my eye--great speech reader.) The odd thing is that the characters and so forth do not seem to have learned a lesson from the War to End All Wars. Once again, these men are being marched off the stage and onto transports, or at any rate back to their units. This should be familiar to everyone. The really heartbreaking part is that the finale is them singing about how they're going to go off to Europe and do it right this time. So it won't ever happen again.

Margaret C (mx) wrote: It's a movie for those who love seeing tons of 3D effects in movie. :-)

Karen B (es) wrote: Exciting and enjoyable as the other MI movies.

Aaon R (ca) wrote: It's a classic, but it's not perfect.

Igor A (us) wrote: Dakota Fanning,Elizabeth Olsen,Demi Moore,Richard Dreyfuss,Ellen Barkin...