Though absent from his ancestral home of Blackmoor for many years, aristocrat Lawrence Talbot returns to find his missing brother at the request of the latter's fiancee, Gwen. He learns that something with brute strength and insatiable bloodlust has been killing the villagers... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
You may also like
The Wolfman torrent reviews
Daniel M (kr) wrote: Surprisingly Delightful
Armando B (nl) wrote: This fourth installment of the Resident Evil franchise was very good actually. I love how they are telling the story and keeping Milla Jovovich in every film. I like every effect that this movie show and the action was great, at first I wasn't convinced, but after watching it a few more times I realize this was a good movie. As that being said for this being one good fourth installment and for meeting my expectations I give " Resident Evil: Afterlife " a B-.
Abishek A (kr) wrote: Good movie! But it has the same old fashion alien story line but in a different context!
Dan O (ag) wrote: Wish there was more Pollock, in Pollock, but the performances are great and I liked the "indie-approach".
Allan C (ca) wrote: Larry Cohen originally pitched this idea to Alfred Hitchcock in the 1960s, but they couldn't come up with a good reason why someone would be trapped in the phone booth. Nearly 30 years later, Cohen came up with that reason, with publicist/hustler Colin Farrell answering a street pay phone that's ringing and then finds himself trapped there by a sniper who forces Farrell to not just stay in the booth but to also do all sorts of unpleasant actions (mostly involving him disclosing some facts involving his wife and his mistress, Radha Mitchell and Katie Holmes), or else the sniper will shoot him or others he cares for around him. Kiefer Sutherland is great as the voice on the other end of the phone, giving a performance full of scary menace without having hardly any onscreen time. Forest Whitaker plays a detective who shows up on the scene when it becomes a standoff situation. Where the film falters, besides the fact that there phone booths really didn't exist much anymore in 2002, is the 1970s style street people stereotypical characters and over direction by Joel Schumacher, bringing unnecessary stylistics to a film that didn't need them. The dialogue between Sutherland and Farrell (who is also terrific) is more than enough to sustain the film. Sure, you need to keep a film visually interesting that take place almost entirely in one location, but I think Schumacher took it further than needed. If the film had had more a William Friedkin 70s gritty style, I think the film would have much stronger. Still, it's a smart, suspenseful film that I really did not know how it was going to end, which is more than I can say for most Hollywood thrillers.
Larsa M (ag) wrote: I Love it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Love you Christian Stewart and Robert Pattinson!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Mike G (ca) wrote: Choppy, hastily made sequel that doesn't measure up to the original. I read that Robert Quarry and Vincent Price didn't get along and that each considered each other enormous hams. Almost 40 years later it's diffiuclt to tell who's the bigger overactor, but Price is certainly more likable and has a cult following so I vote for him. What always kills me about these old horror flicks from this era is how stupid the police are. They could have a potential victim sewn on to their chest and Phibes would still find a way to kill them. One standout in the movie is Hugh Griffith, who was a great character actor with a failry high profile. He's killed so fast that he's almost forgotten, but he does make a little mark.
Dave J (ag) wrote: Tuesday, March 20, 2012 (1960) Ballad Of A Soldier (In Russian with English subtitles) WAR Anti-war movie coming out of Russia which centers on a young soldier, when in dire circumstances barely escapes with his life, managed to taking out two enemy tankers forcing others to flee. And upon the Russian general attempting to pin a medal on him for this act of bravery, this 19 year old wants to substitute it for seeing his mother instead and at the same time fix her roof which he is then given 6 days to do. But while doing this, of course, he meets an assortment of characters asking him for favors or that it requires help which only he can give. It's not as sad the title indicates since it centers on the humanity this fellow brings to his country despite many Russian soldiers may not return as a result of this war. The film sometimes drags, since there's alot of films similar to this magnitude made already in some form or another with the only difference was that this is based on Stalin's rule. 3 out of 4
Rangan R (ag) wrote: Half movie, half documentary, the story of most crucial scientific discovery.The film was inspired by the real life stories of the two women from the same timeline who had no connections, except theirs involvement with something. That means there are two sets of stories that's told one after another in parts which covered the events from nearly the three decades. So it all begins in the 1960, where two little sisters promise to each other about something, but 10 years later one of their's life changed forever when another one dies of cancer. So this is the story where the other sister begins her fight against the disease that took her family away.This is a small budget film that shot entirely within a month of time. There are lots of actresses in this, even for the small roles. I thought Helen Hunt would lead the narration, but then there were Maggie Grace, Alice Eve, Aaron Paul and others. Great dedications by all, but this was Samantha Morton's film.I did not know what this story is about when I decided to watch, but I'm pretty happy for the film. Except the material was more a documentary suitable kind, especially the story of Helen Hunt's character. Moreover feels like it is a short film with a decent story. I think it is worth a watch because of unfolding an important scientific discovery of our time. So a big yes on that perspective, but entertainment wise it is just an average. Now you can decide this on what you're seeking.7/10
Clay B (de) wrote: NEVER TALK TO STRANGERS (1995)
Sean L (it) wrote: Young Will Shakespeare, suffering a bout of writer's block, happens across an intense love and draws inspiration for new material from the whirlwind romance. For a best picture winner, this is awfully mediocre stuff. The plot is simplistic and over-familiar, the acting merely acceptable, and the constant nods and winks to the budding auteur's work quickly grows excessive and wearying. Gwyneth Paltrow and Joseph Fiennes are attractive people and make convincing googly eyes at one another, but their relationship is so swift and passion-fueled that it never feels like more than a fiery seasonal fling. Judi Dench took home a best supporting actress statue for her work as Queen Elizabeth I, though she barely makes a cameo appearance and most of her work seems done by the wardrobe department. Irritatingly blunt at times, particularly when it tries its hand at comedy, I appreciate the freshness of the concept if not its flimsy, dated execution.
Pete S (kr) wrote: It wasn't that bad, but the special effects were a bit 50's like.
TTT C (mx) wrote: Here's another film rating.
Steve W (mx) wrote: Silly comedy finds a vapid male model being brainwashed in order to assassinate the new leader of Malaysia. The movie has a few good jokes but it feels a bit stretched in places, definitely a one time watch and never again.