“Someone Marry Barry” follows three friends who plot to get rid of their socially inappropriate friend Barry by finding him a wife. But when Barry finally meets a woman, she turns out to be just like him, and now the guys have to deal with not one but two “Barrys.” Through their tribulations with this uncensored duo, the guys learn some truths about the nature of friendship and love. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
You may also like
Someone Marry Barry torrent reviews
Antti Q (fr) wrote: Adding the tsunami/earthquake after writing the script didn't really add any goodness to the film and could have been shorter.
Nik M (kr) wrote: A decent fantasy animated film that predicts potentiality for a full expansion on the story. Though, for what we have, there's enough adventure and some decent animation, but there might not be enough emotion that it wants to emit.
CJ H (es) wrote: Man on a Ledge has a intriguing premise and the movie start fairly good. As the film treads along though, it falls apart and leaves you wondering what happened.
Tavis B (us) wrote: As long as they're all gyrating and not shooting people, I'm happy.
Blake P (ru) wrote: Take away its subtitles and 2010's "Point Blank" is as American an action film as any - think a little "Mission: Impossible" (1996) intermixed with "Saboteur" (1942) era Hitchcock. A wronged man thriller tighter than Teyana Taylor's tummy, the film stars Giles Lellouche as Samuel Pierret, a nurse's aid who finds himself mixed up in a race against time after he saves the life of a gangster (Roschdy Zem) following an assassination attempt. His pregnant wife (Elena Anaya) held hostage by murderous goons until he safety escorts the man in question to his conglomerate of thugs, Samuel's forced to become his own version of a thrill-seeking Tom Cruise. "Point Blank's" more than just a straightforward game of cat and mouse - also central is a subplot that involves corruption at the hands of law enforcement agents - but at a brisk eighty-four minutes is it uncomplicatedly a pulse pounder worth remembering, with no cinematic fat to deter its constant gut punches and no languid operatic pauses to dampen its lightning pace. It's all action fused with just enough dramatic nuance to render it as exciting and emotional - every bullet counts, and every twist is soaked in a covering of stakes we'd rather end in relief than tragedy. While its sequences of action are death-defying to the "Bourne" caliber, brilliantly shot and dependably harrowing to their very core, it's the performances by Lellouche and Zem we remember. Respectively frazzled and suavely 007-esque, the juxtaposition between Samuel's everyman ineptness and Hugo's cool malice makes the duo a compelling odd couple both desperate to make it to the other side for wildly different reasons that surprisingly resemble one another in their life or death urgency. Both have the in-the-moment physicality necessary for the genre in question; their characterizational believability is but a supplemental component that makes them anti-heroes whose lack of invincibility makes them all the more enthralling to behold. It shares the same name as the haunting John Boorman directed psychological thriller starring Lee Marvin, bearing no similarity in content. But arguably comparative is both films' fascinating following of men severely fucked over, with Marvin taking matters into his own hands in an effort to make right, and with Lellouche metamorphosing into someone he isn't as a way to ensure the safety of both himself and the woman he loves. In both "Point Blanks" do we see protagonists pushed to their breaking points. How they deal with their personal setbacks is thoroughly hypnotizing. Consider the 2010 film to be the more optimistic of the two.
Omar M (ca) wrote: ??????????????????????.. ???? ???? ??? ???? :)))
Kerr L (ca) wrote: I think in hindsight I liked this better than when I was watching it. But I was intrigued. Verrrrry slow burn. And suddenly when Buscemi appears it's a different movie, with him narrating out of nowhere, and then it switches back again when he leaves (with no narration). So weird! But great acting, and that's the reason to watch.
David R (gb) wrote: The Best film that MTV ever produced. Story of three small town teens (Nick Stahl, Summer Phoenix and a some guy; do not know his name) who are bored with small town living and get addicted to drugs. The film follows their descent into addict, which they may not get out of.
Lase O (ag) wrote: Not exactly spectacular, but a fun movie all the same.
Jeb N (au) wrote: Not a bad little effort, though hardly a classic. Still, there are some creepy moments here and there.
Oliver O (es) wrote: this movie is silly funny like Austin Powers or Despicable Me it's not a strong comedy but the silliness will make you giggle
Joseph H (es) wrote: Movie was entertaining
JohnnyLee T (us) wrote: How can you critique something that you are just meant to enjoy? There will never be another combination like Doris and Rock, both giving everything to their roles. And you can tell they are having fun doing them. I specially enjoyed Rock's bit of physical comedy trying to squeeze himself into a very low sports car! As for the issue of a gay star who obviously doesn't fit the stereotype, being asked to reinforce that stereotype on screen, as a gay man I can live with it because the film is of its time and during those times gays on screen were played much more over-the-top then Rock has to do here. As I said, this film is too enjoyable even 45 years on to critique too much.Final point: without going too far, Shakespeare himself (who was also gay) used the device of playing a role within a role (as Rock plays both Brad and Rex) in order to woo the beloved - see Twelfth Night eg. Just puts this plot into perspective and probably because it's so tried and true that it is still enjoyable and fun today, and always will be.