It's Schluufy's birthday, and the Oogieloves (Goobie, Zoozie and Toofie), along with their friends J. Edgar, Windy Window and Ruffy, are organizing a party. (Shh! It's a secret.) Everything is going along just perfectly until J. Edgar trips and loses the last five magical balloons in all of Lovelyloveville--OH NO! The Oogiloves set out to find the magical balloons in time to save their friend's party. Along the way, they meet some very interesting characters indeed, including Dotty Rounder (Cloris Leachman), Bobby Wobbly (Carey Elwes), Milky Marvin (Chazz Palminteri), Rosalie Rosebud (Toni Braxton) and Lola and Lero Sombero (Christopher Lloyd and Jaime Pressly). Can these new friends help them recover the magical balloons and get back to the cottage in time to celebrate Schluufy's surprise birthday?
Writer:Alex Greene (based on characters by), Scott Stabile, Carol Sweeney (based on characters by), Kenn Viselman (creator)
The Oogieloves -- Goobie, Zoozie and Toofie -- set out to find five magical balloons that will make their good friend Schluufy's surprise birthday party extra-special. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
The Oogieloves in the Big Balloon Adventure torrent reviews
erika b (br) wrote: Alice Upside Down is about a Girl named Alice (Alyson Stoner) That had to move because her father thought it would help him get over The death of his wife. When she starts at her new school everything went wrong for her. She has to deal with everything going wrong, dysfunctional family, school life and not getting the main part in the class musical. Over the term she made friends and had couple grown up role models. Will things keep on getting worse for her or when it gets better for her?ProsGood acting.Good plot.Really shows how it is like to grown up these days.It is also funny.ConSome parts were not as good as other parts.Sometimes lacking plot and acting.Here is a line from the film " do you ever like every time you turn around, your life is being flipped upside down? "If u likes clicking flick, tearing jerker or good family film, you should give this a try.
Jason F (ca) wrote: Devilman is a live action movie based on Go Nagai, who also created Cutie Honey and Kekko Kamen. It starts off with a cool scene of young boys wanting to grow up and become monsters. You see the boys playing around with monsters masks and having fun. I thought I was the only one who wanted to grow up to be a monster. But it happens in Japan too. Anyway, Akira and Ryo are best friends who take care of each other in high school. Akira has a super cute girlfriend, Miki, who has a cool scene where she spikes a volleyball, hitting some mean girls who are bullying her friend. That scene may be the best one in the entire film. The movie just lags. Director Hiroyuki Nasu should have paced this movie better. It would have benefitted from a better editing job. There is a lot of talk about demons being hunted and killed by humans in the middle. The only thing that kept me from turning it off, was the Bob Sapp humorous newscasts throughout. Sapp can be funny, especially when he has three separate heads. But Sapp couldn't save this film. The ending reminded me too much of the Devil May Cry games. Overall, this is a slow, painful, poorly paced movie, that drawns on and on when it should have finished earlier.
Jim S (es) wrote: Okay, I have to come clean and admit that I'm a huge fan of the "Blade" trilogy. They're actually a guilty pleasure for me, especially "Trinity". I think that's because I live in Vancouver where it was shot and worked in the film industry here for 10 years, just around "Trinity's" shooting time. I actually know several of the people in the film and, having lived here for my entire life, I'm very familiar with the locations used, and I just love the way the film is shot. Of course I can't ignore "Blade" and "Blade 2". The first one has one of the great openings in Vampire film history (with the blood coming out of the sprinkler system during a dance scene) and the 2nd one is directed by Guillermo del Toro, who is one of my favorite directors. Yeah, so that's my big confession which was triggered by the Space network (that would by SyFy here in Canada) playing all three in a row this weekend. It was a "blood binge"!
Jake W (ru) wrote: Good movie and funny
William C (it) wrote: Rating-3.5/10Dracula: Dead and Loving is a Mel Brooks comedy about well, yeah you guessed it, Dracula. Leslie Nielsen is our blood sucking main man and he dons his best Bela Lugosi cape and accent to boot to create a, memorable performance. Brooks uses his comedic interests well in picking the theme but not in styling the substance, and although I feel many hate this more than I do, I still thought it was pretty bad too. Now don't expect massively over the top jokes, you know the kind where Dracula turns into a bat and hits a window(although that does happen). Brooks seems to create humour which looks promising, but then waters it down for some reason, so that it doesn't fit. Now I'm not saying this isn't funny at it's certain moments, I even dare say I slightly enjoyed this movie(to say it is very poor), the movie has it's laughs and some well timed jokes not to mention crazy characters too.You might think I'd say the funny guy is Nielsen here but in truth my praise if you can call it that is all to Peter MacNicol who as Renfield is hilarious, the top person and thing about this movie. I'm not kidding when I say that Renfield is probably the reason this movie is a whole rating higher, I mean he also works well with Nielsen, the jokes run well between them and even those who are hard pressed to laugh will still I feel laugh maybe a little at MacNicol.Having said all that previously, I do however find this lazy writing and although I felt Brooks directs OK, his skill with the words is not his strongest suit in this case. In the case of the sets, you will only find horrible Hollywood staging that OK OK maybe has something to do with the comedy of It all, still didn't make me laugh. There's actually very little to say about this, in fact I think anyone who can write an essay about this is a hero, it has so little depth to it just becomes another silly joke to be tossed under the pile of films you will only watch once. Now who could I recommend this too?, ah yes those who like silly humour of course. Now Nielsen fans I hate to say that this isn't a patch on Naked Gun or Airplane but you do see some jokes along those kind of slapstick type humour lines. I think it is funny as mentioned, for me it starts to get more funny a little too late but nevertheless is still lazy work and probably too silly most of the time to create a reasonable film.Overall a Mel Brooks comedy that fails to shine, you know the type of movie that never delivers on it's promise of being hilarious, but can have it's moments in the spotlight. Watch out for Renshaw played by Peter MacNicol and a certain scenes with bugs is for me the top scene of this entire thing, in fact you could just cut all the parts out that make you laugh and that would be the best way to watch this movie.
Andrew (fr) wrote: The title sums up the movie. You feel sorry for these kids, but at the same time, you don't feel sorry for them. On the "sorry" side, you understand that they are too young to get jobs and rent apartments, and they have run away from home for various reasons -- probably good reasons in many cases. On the other hand, they are hustlers trying to squeeze as much money out of clients for doing as little as they can get away with doing. Their horizon is limited. Would they be interested in someone who really wanted to take care of them? That seems doubtful. On the other hand, how many people who are interested in these young men for sex are willing to do more for them than pay them money for a one-night stand? My guess would be not many. The bottom line: a pretty face will make you money, and sex is a fungible commodity in this modern world of ours. The only thing that really seems to pull people together for a long term commitment is children.
Jhaneb K (it) wrote: Thinking about the positives in the movie..... still thinking..... Wait i am thinking man...... thinking..... still thinking...... still thinking............. So i got nothing...
Jeff T (ag) wrote: Sean Connery is at it again! Driving buggies around and what have you.
Bill W (us) wrote: A gem of a film for rail fans made by people who oddly enough hated trains. It certainly doesn't show. The comedy is very clever and character driven though it does spill into slapstick. But slapstick can be good and it is in this film. The film could have benefited with a little extra time to work through the situations and relationships. It's worth your while. See it.
Luke H (nl) wrote: Look out those two are in the legion causing all sorts of trouble.
Devon B (us) wrote: Crosby gets Hope to pretend he's retarded so that he might beg for some food, but wouldn't you know it, the first guy they try it out on has a speech impediment and thinks they're making fun of the way he talks. So then, in order to pay for a meal, Crosby sells Hope into slavery. But when your new owner is Dorothy Lamour... ooh la la, who minds getting sold? It's a very cheesy film, even by 1940s standards, but at least Hope and Crosby are letting the audience know that they know that we know, by breaking down the 4th wall and giving us the inside jokes, gags and puns. It probably pays to be in a certain mood when watching this movie, and I don't think I was in it.
Edgar C (us) wrote: Little Caesar's represents Cagney's gangster counterpart, and the more elegant and "sophisticated" side of gangster "values" and "family loyalty". The Roaring Twenties (the era, not the movie) had barely ended, and thanks to the powerful performance of Edward G. Robinson, along with some memorable scenes in the history of cinema and several classic lines, this movie and The Public Enemy gave the courage to Hawks to release a particularly groundbreaking gangster film titled "Scarface". 99/100