The Cat Concerto

The Cat Concerto

Tom enters from stage left in white tie and tails, sits at the piano, gets his focus as the orchestra in the pit beneath him warms up, and begins to play Liszt's "Hungarian Rhapsody." Unbeknownst to Tom and the audience, Jerry is asleep across several of the high-note keys inside the instrument, so Tom's playing eventually wakes him. Jerry is pummeled by hammers, bounced by wires, and squeezed by Tom as the cat tries to play the concerto while dispensing with Jerry. Jerry's defensive antics add to the brio of the program and answer Tom with Jerry's own skillful musical attack. By the concerto's end, the duet leaves only one animal standing for the audience's applause.

Jerry is determined to disrupt Tom's concert while Tom fights him with the piano without missing a single note. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechers

The Cat Concerto torrent reviews

Jamin G (it) wrote: IT WAS HILARIOUS. .... DON'T LEAVE TILL THE CLOSING CREDITS

Jason G (mx) wrote: Again a better screenplay than the human-acted editions, but the "boss" battle was a little much.

Deepak A (mx) wrote: Conceptually and in terms of slickness of execution - This is a decent movie. Where is fails is in its attempt to string together a cohesive theme or story line. In the end, this is a montage trying to be a collage of ideas and opinions about digital media. There are some valid assertions made about democratization of content creation and distribution but you'd have heard those elsewhere too.

Jacob E (it) wrote: Is this serious? No, not at all. Anyone who takes this seriously at all is completely missing the point. Afro Samurai is a hilarious spoof of 2 popular genres from the 70s, Kung-Fu action flicks and blaxploitation, and Afro spoofs them beautifully (the "beautifully" part is meant to be taken literally, the animation is awesome). The storyline is thin, but since it revolves around a classic staple of the 2 aforementioned genres, avenge father's death storyline, you can forgive it rather easily. The action sequences will make your head spin and the humor is as dark as it is hilarious. Highly recommended and absolutely worth at least one viewing.

Mike T (es) wrote: Loads of fun, way way better than I expected, good monsters, an all out fun experience, that gets ridiculous and queer at times... but that's what makes it good! I guess it's not an awesome creature movie, but its uncomparable to most of the highly rated crocodile/shark/piranha/man-eating-lion movies. A decent movie, and tons of fun.

Sarah G (gb) wrote: kk, this one has got to be the best but by a tiny bit.

Justin O (de) wrote: An ok romantic comedy.

David C (au) wrote: One of my all time favorites! Still makes me laugh!

Hayden A (gb) wrote: Scream 3 is a pathetic attempt to sum up the iconic scream trilogy. This move failed to recognize the main protagonist: Sidney Prescott, not showing up for at least half the movie. To add, the ending was very difficult to understand and ultimately failed trying to tie up loose ends. In addition some of the acting was god awful. However, Neve Campbell once again brought back her amazing performance as Sidney, and while also providing interesting deaths.

Paul D (gb) wrote: As ridiculous as this movie is it is still one that I find incredibly enjoyable every time that I watch it. It brilliantly spoofs Star Trek and convention culture while at the same time offering a decent sci-fi space exploration story. I found this to be very fun and I can't recommend it enough.

Praneet C (mx) wrote: Prabhuji's magnum opus,the greatest work of creativity in Indian Cinema.

Barney o (it) wrote: WHAT I LIKED: Two words: Tom Hanks. Yes this is arguably the legend's best performance, and it just goes to show what talent he has in the fact that he can literally hold an entire movie on his own. The character he builds is really meaningful, and the paces he's put through make for a very despairing and heart-breaking experience indeed.WHAT I DIDN'T LIKE: The plot drifts to shore a little in the second act as it's ultimately just the same plot dealing with the same ideas pretty much from start to finish. Only Tom Hanks' magnetic performance is able to keep you there.VERDICT: Tom Hanks is the glue that keeps the audience's eyes on screen. This is without doubt his most impressive performance yet.

Gabriella P (ca) wrote: I think Martin Lawrence has done better. And what's with Eric Roberts?

Shane S (br) wrote: A triumph of a film. Scorsese has had a long and distinguished career along with the film's lead Robert de Niro. This movie showcases both of these film legends at their best.It is hard to say what exactly this film is "about". The narrative plot is straightforward enough, it follows the life of a 1940-50s boxer. The movie also explores many of the complex issues of violence against women and the psychological destruction of a man who cannot accept or understand intimacy. The real magic is that these issues are expressed through the warped psychological outbursts of De Niro's character. Everyone around LaMotto can see his problem, his unhealthy obsession and suspicion but he cannot help himself. The film finds its expression through the emotional immaturity of the lead character.LaMotto cannot introspectively evaluate his emotions. His thought process is endlessly fascinating to watch as he warps any act of kindness or love into betrayal and distance. He lacks the emotional maturity or awareness to communicate his frustrations to words. The audience simply watches as any small act or suspicion is a window for him to confirm what he wants most of all, confirmation that his partner is unfaithful and by extension he is, himself, unworthy. His hate is a profound one, not a hate of others or what he attacks, but a hatred of himself. Everyone around him senses it but LaMotto simply cannot.The film delivers the signature eye for detail that made Scorsese famous. The boxing fight scenes are brilliant and brutal. The supporting cast is also excellent.