Please Don't Eat the Daisies

Please Don't Eat the Daisies

Drama critic Larry McKay, his wife Kay, and their four sons move from their crowded Manhattan apartment to an old house in the country. While housewife Kay settles into suburban life, Larry continues to enjoy the theater and party scene of New York. Kay soon begins to question Larry's fidelity when he mentions a flirtatious encounter with Broadway star Deborah Vaughn

Drama critic Larry McKay, his wife Kay, and their four sons move from their crowded Manhattan apartment to an old house in the country. While housewife Kay settles into suburban life, Larry... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


Please Don't Eat the Daisies torrent reviews

Tracy P (jp) wrote: It's so bad - it can't get worse - can't stop watching.

Ricardo Junior S (es) wrote: Efficient straight to DVD sequel, that respects the original 80's movie. The plot seems a lot more plausible today than 25 years ago, but Matt Lanter and Amanda Walsh doesn't have the talent or charism (or even youth) of Matthew Broderick and Ally Sheedy. For a home video follow up, it could be a LOT worse.

Jason J (us) wrote: Might be the best film on the subject of football hooligans.

Michael G (nl) wrote: It's an average action flick but nowhere near as excellent as John Woo's The Killer and Hard Boiled.

John M (it) wrote: Though set in turn of the century Australia, this brilliant film is just as refreashing and contemporary as any film. Judy Davis in a career defining role plays Sybylla, a 17-year-old aspiring writer that has visions of grandeur that go beyond living the restricted life in the outback. A clever tomboy with little respect to her parents Sybylla feels even more out of place when she is sent to stay at ther grandmother's house in the country, where all of the women are more beautiful and finely mannered than she could ever be. There she meets a weathly farmer Harry Beecham (Sam Neill, Jurassic Park), who she feels is her soul mate but decides against marriage, knowing that she cannot take care of a family when she cannot do the same for herself. The film ends on a sad note for romantics but has a feeling of empowerment. Miles Franklin, whose semi-autobiographical book this film was based on, became the first woman of that time to break through the contrains of a society where the role of young girls was to forget their personal aspirations and marry. An international hit during the Australian New Wave in the 70s and that became part of the feminist movement of that era.

Tiger L (us) wrote: Extremely entertaining, bloody, action packed, and intense.

Banjo K (it) wrote: The movie is good but has bad quality besides that this movie is great but still flawed.

Alec B (au) wrote: Its definitely low budget and I would really have liked to see this great cast do this on stage (as they did before filming) but it has some really great performances. David Tennant's Hamlet is one of the most unique versions of the character I've seen.

Adam F (ru) wrote: "Hitch" starts off well, with some genuinely good advice for men and their relationships and introduces to us the interesting characters. Basically the story is about Hitch (Will Smith), a man who knows all of the ropes when it comes to dating women, taking Albert (Kevin James) under his wing. Normally the guy would have as much chance of getting together with the apple of his eye (Amber Valletta as Allegra) as a skyscraper has of surviving a Godzilla attack, but Hitch is a real pro, so love might just be in the air.I never thought I'd say this... but Kevin James is actually good in this movie. Will Smith is charming as usual, but the both of them really work together. There's chemistry between the actors and there are ample touching, funny and even romantic moments (well, not between James and Smith). When the two male leads are doing their comedic parts, the film is enjoyable and when it's being truthful, it feels genuine. What really hurts the movie is the last third of the running time. The story was deliberately avoiding the usual tropes that romantic comedies always have to labor through... and then it flat-out turns into a generic romance plot. Why was it necessary to include the big misunderstanding, the chase, the earth shattering revelations and the dramatic resolution, all because no one can just sit down, talk and explain themselves to the other people? This is a movie that contains one of my all-time pet peeves because just like in every bad horror movie where the dumb teenagers get themselves killed because either they've never seen a horror movie in their entire lives, or horror movies just don't exist in this film, the people of "Hitch" suddenly all lose their brains and make the same dumb mistakes we've seen over and over. For its good parts "Hitch" is worth seeing but unfortunately it fumbles the ball right before the end and falls just short of being a truly great, original romantic comedy. (On Dvd, October 30, 2012)

Eric H (nl) wrote: Excellent premise, but the execution and acting are severely lacking.

Amy H (jp) wrote: Interesting! Camp to transform women into submissive and quiet husband listening wives. And an interest twist.

Smith D (us) wrote: I have been re-watching a bunch of Stanley Kubrick films after seeing the excellent retrospective at the Contemporary Jewish museum. I have always loved his films, since I was a young lad, even if I couldn't quite put my finger on why. After all these years continuously coming back to Kubrick, my finger seems closer to a few revelations.Feature filmmaking is an artistic genre bent towards entertainment. The Hollywood system has it's stranglehold on this reality more than ever. The irony for me with Kubrick is that it is the uncompromising artistry and vision of his films that is the primary reason I find them so entertaining. Conversely, I recently watched Jaws and realized that it is the best Spielberg film, precisely because it is the only Spielberg film that he doesn't wreck with his own art-killing brand of crowd pleasing sappiness. I don't blame the studios for this. I just don't see Speilberg is an artist, rather, the A-list Hollywood song and dance man.Kubrick was a unique figure in American folklore. He achieved popularity and, more importantly to Hollywood, his films caught on and made money. Another irony; it is when Kubrick left Hollywood and began to make essentially European art films, that Hollywood took interest. Kubrick had the artistic freedom of the English studios and Hollywood distribution. A rare symmetry. Essentially, a filmmaker with a nearly unlimited budget but whom refused to make films as entertainments. The results are, in my humble opinion, the most stunning works of cinema of the 20th century. Not just a few Kubricks. I believe that each film is entirely it's own entity. It's own masterpiece, unrelated to each other, with the crucial exception that they were directed with the exact same level of detail, excellence, massive tireless preparation, technical innovation, one of the great eyes for photographic composition, and most underrated, one of the great ears for music.Which brings me to the most underrated of all Kubrick's masterpieces, and, one of my personal favorites: Barry Lyndon. The first thing I would say about Barry Lyndon is that I went and had a quick look at Rotten Tomatoes and to my delight, it had a score of nearly 100% And why not? It's well known that Barry Lyndon was a box office disaster when originally released in 1975 and that Kubrick was deeply depressed by this tepid reaction. But we are also beginniing to realize that Kubrick was ahead of his time. What was considered his "failure" 40 years ago is now beginning to be seen as one of his great masterpieces.If you look at Barry Lyndon as an entertainment, well, you're looking at it wrong. Go watch Saving Ryan's Privates. If you look at Barry Lyndon as one of the most audaciously existential and masterfully conceived period films, if not the greatest of all, you are getting warmer to the truth of the film. After re-watching Barry Lyndon last night, for probably the 10th time over the years, it seems to me that once again, Kubrick was attempting to re-invent how stories are told using the medium of cinema. In it's odd way, Barry Lyndon almost feels like a sequel to 2001. They both use detachment, just in very different ways. Here, he is literally trying to present a Thackeray Novel on film. He presents the film with the exact same stateliness one would be greeted with opening up the novel, down to the comforting, meticulous voice of the British narrator. In the past, I heard complaints about the narration as messing with the rhythm of the story, however, this time around, I felt the film would lose it's authenticity and its originality without it. it is a film dependent on every ornate detail. Indeed, never has a film been more painterly. Each scene has a visual magic to it. Kubrick is not content with costumes. These are not costumes. These are the actual clothes worn by Irish country folk and European aristocrats of their day. And everything glows - a literal moving picture. The pantings of the era come to life. The camera zooms backwards, flattening out the image to reveal the painting. Kubrick is hard at work here, in the prime of his career. He is leaving no stone unturned, no detail has a lesser value.The other incredibly unique aspect of this film, and back to the Hollywood theme, Kubrick refuses to give us a hero. It's like baroque film noir. Barry bounds around in the first half of the film, and just when we've grown comfortable rooting for him, he ends up disappointing us. Whoring around and "little more than a common opportunist". Kubrick isn't interested in heroes. He's interested in reality. His films are like grandiose mirrors. We see the best and the worst in ourselves there. No one wanted any part of that in a 1975 movie theater.I touched on this before: Kubrick had a great pair of ears. Perhaps the greatest ears in the history of film directing. His period research into the music of the era is absolutely stunning. Each scene works perfectly; the entire picture feels like one epic song with piano accompaniment by Stanley Kubrick. The man knows exactly what he's doing with music and it's role in the art design of the film. It is one of my very favorite aspects of any Kubrick film.Perhaps the strangest irony of all is that in today's word of instant gratification, reality T.V, Netflix, films that never dare go over 2 hours, or never really dare to do anything at all, Kubrick's Barry Lyndon seems to be finally getting it's due. We love Kubrick because there are no more Kubrick's left in this world. We love Kubrick because his films are strikingly unique. We love him because we are tired of films pandering to us. Tired of Hollywood force feeding us on a tin foil platter. Bless Kubrick for giving us something that glows and breathes with the amber aura of beeswax, casting thick shadows over the harsh burn of an LED monitor.