A conflict of interest between two high-kicking assassin sisters is complicated as they're pursued by the criminals who hired them and an equally high-kicking female cop. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
A conflict of interest between two high-kicking assassin sisters is complicated as they're pursued by the criminals who hired them and an equally high-kicking female cop.
You may also like
So Close torrent reviews
Neil D (nl) wrote: I think there are a lot of angry Trekkies out there who disapprove of the amount of action that Star Trek: Into Darkness has, while believing it's a dumbed-down version of Star Trek II: The Wrath Of Khan. The truth is I myself have yet to see The Wrath Of Khan, but as far as Into Darkness goes, I thought it was an amazing movie in its own right, as it blends old and new ideas to have a bit of everything for everybody (whether they know their Star Trek or not) to like, just like the predecessor. And in many ways, I consider Star Trek: Into Darkness an even better movie than its predecessor.The movie starts off with action, which may not seem related to the actual plot. On the contrary, it was quite important to begin that way, because that's how it sets the characters feelings and actions for the real plot. In comes Benedict Cumberbatch, who I believe was the right choice for the reimagined antagonist, Khan. He and his character are what made the plot far more memorable than Eric Bana's Nero (though to be honest, starting off with a new antagonist like Nero was a good thing, rather than bringing up an existing foe so early in the new series).Cumberbatch delivers in manipulative fashion, similarly to Tom Hiddleston's Loki. His character also has a strong emotional commitment to back up his motives, and in that aspect, Cumberbatch's effort pays off. And I can't believe I'm saying this, but Chris Pine deserves an award for his performance this time around. Unlike the past movie, his role as Kirk was MUCH more likeable and respectable here, as his character is more fleshed out with depth, adding to his more heartfelt performance. Zachary Quinto's Spock also has a lot more depth this time around, while also being just as goofy with his "logic" as before, only even funnier. In fact, the humor in this movie has doubled since Star Trek '09, with Karl Urban's Bones as worrywart as ever, and Simon Pegg's Scotty getting more screen time, therefore exponentially increasing the amazing goofiness one would expect from Pegg. Sure, there's a notable amount of arguing involved, but at least the drama is believable. It puts the crew's trust to the test, and it also brings them closer together like a family. My god, that sounded incredibly cheesy, but you know what I mean, right?The visual effects are as phenomenal as they were since 2009, only this time, we get bigger panoramic views of futuristic skyscrapers and foreign lands that truly look like they're out of this world. A few subtle changes here and there as well, notably the Enterprise ship going into warp speed, now with a new starting sound and a shiny disappearance, similar to Serenity. Even the camera work resembles that of Joss Whedon, which possibly could've inspired it. The action sequences are tightly edited and are exciting to watch, thanks to J.J. Abrams' assured direction. Again, he does cut corners here and there as the director usually does, but the increased depth of characters here as opposed to Star Trek '09 makes up for the speed. A lot of people seem to complain about the director's fetish for lens flares, but I actually thought he toned it down in this entry, therefore not being nearly as distracting as in his first attempt at Trekking.And last but not least, the musical score is just as epic and beautiful as it was previously, but now included are some beautiful piano ballads that are effectively used in certain areas of the movie, adding to the emotions undergone throughout those moments.With all that said and done, any problems I may have had with the movie feel left behind hundreds of thousands of kilometers as Star Trek: Into Darkness has officially become my new favorite J.J. Abrams movie. Again, I'm positive that this movie doesn't intend to be better than The Wrath Of Khan, but merely a different take on it and featured in an alternate timeline, while also paying homage to the original timeline. Those who're angry about it must have overlooked the characters that drive this movie. But I can't argue any longer if they did take the performances into consideration. Either you'll love it like I did, or you'll refuse to accept the new events that don't necessarily replace the old ones.
Cody L (mx) wrote: The cast does a good job, and while it has a good story, I felt they could have made it a little more dramatic.
Ashley H (kr) wrote: Sanctum is a decent film. It is about an underwater cave diving team that experiences a life-threatening crisis during an expedition to the unexplored and least accessible cave system in the world. Richard Roxburgh and Rhys Wakefield give good performances. The script is a little slow in places. Alister Grierson did an alright job directing this movie. I liked this motion picture because of the drama and action.
Tod D (ca) wrote: A wonderfully ambitious and thought provoking film. "Turk Pipkin takes us around the world, discussing war, famine, ecology, medicine and technology with a raft of Nobel Prize laureates. Green Belt Movement founder Wangari Maathai, noted economist Amartya Sen and 1984 Peace Prize winner Desmond Tutu top the list of articulate thinkers who discuss the human condition. Displaying boundless passion and intelligence, these Nobelists are both skeptical and hopeful about our will to improve the planet."
Peter W (es) wrote: I have no clue what's happening in this script. I doubt anyone knew whatever was happening the script before it was rewritten to be a Hellraiser movie. This one sucks big.
Andrey B (mx) wrote: Another nice Tom Hanks movie where it's a pleasure to follow the story, the not small runtime of the film just gives you the notion that this pleasure will last a while longer
Joseph E (br) wrote: I undoubtedbly enjoyed this made for tv spectacle until the verey last second. "Sinise" conquers all acting and "Jolie" rejuvaneted all of the rest.
Brian P (br) wrote: didnt like this one...... nope thats for sure
Pratick R (au) wrote: um... yes.. this is one is nothing special
andrew (es) wrote: This sci fi film is very clever. For the time the special effects were great and the film was full of twists and turns. The only sci-fi film from the 50s that is better is Forbidden Planet.