Six months after the events depicted in The Matrix, Neo has proved to be a good omen for the free humans, as more and more humans are being freed from the matrix and brought to Zion, the one and only stronghold of the Resistance. Neo himself has discovered his superpowers including super speed, ability to see the codes of the things inside the matrix and a certain degree of pre-cognition. But a nasty piece of news hits the human resistance: 250,000 machine sentinels are digging to Zion and would reach them in 72 hours. As Zion prepares for the ultimate war, Neo, Morpheus and Trinity are advised by the Oracle to find the Keymaker who would help them reach the Source. Meanwhile Neo's recurrent dreams depicting Trinity's death have got him worried and as if it was not enough, Agent Smith has somehow escaped deletion, has become more powerful than before and has fixed Neo as his next target.
Neo, Morpheus, Trinity and Smith are back, and the battle for the human race continues. Upon their arrival in Zion, Morpheus locks horns with rival Commander Lock and encounters his old flame Niobe. Meanwhile, Agent Smith has returned with some surprises for Neo, most notably the ability to replicate himself as many times as he pleases. Neo makes his way to The Oracle. While Merovingian refuses to cooperate, his wife angry at her husband's dalliances with other women, offers to help, but only in exchange for a taste of Neo's affections. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Adam R (us) wrote: The other "girlfriend comes back from the dead" horror comedy of 2014 alongside Burying the Ex. Whereas Ex failed however, Beth succeeds (for the most part). If you're at all curious about this movie, then first I implore you to not think about it from a logical standpoint as it will completely fall apart. There's barely an explanation for the dead being resurrected, the quirky traits for the zombies have no rhyme or reason, and certain scenes go absolutely nowhere. Some viewers will certainly find this frustrating, even to the point where it's completely unwatchable, and that's understandable. However, Beth manages to make up for its glaring flaws with committed performances (particularly from Dane DeHaan and Aubrey Plaza), some clever comedy, and even some genuinely horrific moments. But at it's core, Beth actually has something heartfelt to say about relationships, the difficulty of sudden loss of a loved one, and finding ways to make peace with yourself. Beth is far from perfect but it certainly stands out in the endless wave of generic zombie movies out today. This one is worth a watch.
adity p (fr) wrote: awesome movie !belive in love
Ruben G (es) wrote: It's a great film (remake). It's one of my Favorite Pornografic films I've ever seen ;) if you wanna watch porn, don't go online or anything... go watch this film, the remake, & the sequel (; very gory, lots of hawt gals, & heart pumping attacks. There were a few problems I encountered when I saw this film but it's pretty good movie.
Rebecca M (it) wrote: Great movie!!!!! Wish they would made the other books into movies
Mara A (fr) wrote: Great film - beautifully edited with a wonderful soundtrack. Andre Benjamin is a pretty good actor and Terrance Howard was excellent, as usual. I thought it could have been a bit more colorful [it was Outkast & Bryan Barber for God's sake] but it stayed true to the Speakeasy era.
Jena F (ag) wrote: I was never a fan of the manga, but my friend convinced me to check out the movie. I regretted it since. There's no real strong plotline, just basically biblical references and blood. I stopped halfway through because I couldn't take it, but others may like it.
Timothy S (br) wrote: Although his films were not always successful, John Carpenter is a very adventurous filmmaker who is never content to make the same movie twice. "Prince of Darkness" is very ambitious, but it fails to follow through on the promise of the nifty set-up making it one of the few of his film misfires. The first half is a whole lot of talk, some of it theological mumbo jumbo and some of it scientific mumbo jumbo, but I was admittedly intrigued by the basic premise. What I could understand of it, that is. I was fascinated as the two separate story lines converged into one as Carpenter's masterful score portends of something ominous to come. But unfortunately, the movie doesn't have a lot of faith in its convictions and the second half settles into a far more conventional groove as Satan possesses this group of students are forces them to do his evil bidding. It's a very conventional plot device in a movie that had, up to that point, successfully avoided all conventionality. All of the deep dialogue and musings about life and the universe are quickly thrown out the window in favor of gruesome mayhem. The film isn't even very scary, mostly because the idea of the Devil isn't particularly real enough to terrify the audience. The scariest thing in the film are the brief shots of a dream shared by the students that brings to mind the popular "Found footage" pictures of recent memory. The cast is mostly lethargic, and even revered Donald Pleasence in the lead role doesn't bring much to the proceedings. "Prince of Darkness" is a rare misstep for a director known for his passion and creativity.
John N (ru) wrote: One of the best Oldman and Roth have never given better performances but for me Phil Daniels steals the show
miruna (ru) wrote: the illness came out of the blue, felt misplaced. suppose it's realistic, though
Bruce B (us) wrote: Based on a dark, soapy bestselling novel, this is definitely one of Ronald Reagan's best performances, if not THE best. Like "Peyton Place", the original novel focused on the dark secrets underlying an outwardly nice, moral, family-oriented town. Unfortunately, unlike "Peyton Place," the subject matter had to be way watered down to get past the censors at the time this was made, leaving one of the key storylines - a doctor's incestuous relationship with his daughter - so vague that the first time I saw this film prior to reading the book, I didn't understand what was going on with that subplot. The other weird thing about this movie is that Kings Row manages to have not one, but TWO messed-up doctors: one's the aforementioned incest committer (played by Claude Rains) and the other (played by Charles Coburn) is a sadist who enjoys amputating limbs and wreaking vengeance on patients he doesn't like. Reagan plays "Drake", a dashing rich party-boy who falls victim to the sadistic doc but then manages to have a decent life thanks to the tender mercies of his childhood friend "Randy" (Ann Sheridan), the girl literally from the wrong side of the tracks. I thought Reagan and Sheridan pretty much carried the film, with the other main part, their friend "Parris" (Robert Cummings) finishing a very distant third. As someone else noted, the amputation theme was timely due to WWII even though this book is set in an earlier era. A decent soap opera for its time, but not quite as good as the book due to all the controversial (for then) issues that had to be presented very obliquely or left out entirely.. 5 Stars
Veniea T (ru) wrote: All CLASSICS are GOOD
Doc H (it) wrote: Some of the directing and effects needed more attention but overall if you are a Trek fan - worth watching.
Michael S (gb) wrote: A good, fun movie, but drowning in fan service. This new Star Trek universe is great, why waste a film on a Wrath of Khan remake?