Tootsie

Tootsie

Michael Dorsey is an unemployed actor with an impossible reputation. In order to find work and fund his friend's play he dresses as a woman, Dorothy Michaels, and lands the part in a daytime drama. Dorsey loses himself in this woman role and essentially becomes Dorothy Michaels, captivating women all around the city and inspiring them to break free from the control of men and become more like Dorsey's initial identity. This newfound role, however, lands Dorsey in a hot spot between a female friend/'lover,' a female co-star he falls in love with, that co-star's father who falls in love with him, and a male co-star who yearns for his affection.

The film centers on Michael Dorsey is a excellent actor, but all of producer in New York do not hire him because of his bad character. In fact he needs a lot of money so he decides to disguise himself as a person who makes everybody feels surprise. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechers

Tootsie torrent reviews

Luis P (us) wrote: a non traditional romance with the hilarious Stephen Merchant!

Kristal C (jp) wrote: Starts out as a sweet culture clash dramedy with some tasty-looking Indian dishes thrown in a la Julie and Julia, but turns into a strange and annoying con artist caper. Perhaps if Don McKellar's character weren't so nice or Stella wasn't such a meanie, the outcome would have been more satisfying but as it stands, this movie was super disappointing.

Gabe H (au) wrote: Funny! Classic PIXAR!

Mohammed A (mx) wrote: It's good movie to watch

Daniel K (mx) wrote: With a name like Penny Dreadful, you honestly expect this movie to just be more than being about a girl named Penny and happen to be outright dreadful. The acting is passable, but overblown in several parts, the premise just teetering on the brink of outright ridiculous, the script is flimsy, the scares predictable, the main character sympathetic in the cheapest of ways and the ending gives precisely nothing in terms of narrative closure. Don't get me wrong: schlock like this has a place in cinema as an art form. But that doesn't win it any prizes or seals of approval. Of the series that released this, there are infinitely better films: go directly to them, and give this one a pass.

Sevket E (ca) wrote: Essential for Samurai Shodown videogame fans

Claire T (kr) wrote: loved it but thought the original peter pan (1953) was better, I thought it was good film but I don't think I want it on DVD, it was an good film but could have been better, I don't want to see this movie again

David U (mx) wrote: Pretty slow-moving, but the payoff is worth it. I imagine this film would be more captivating in 1980s Britain.

Hugo G (ca) wrote: I had a very good amount of gore, but none of it felt as over the too as I expected, bra sue I've seen other movies from those years too, that were more explicit and graphic. Also, the story was kind of dumb and it wasn't very scary. I did expect a lot more from this movie, but it at least had some gore.

Kevin D (kr) wrote: Loved it. Can't believe I never heard of it before now. Someone referenced it in a review of Transcendence (which I saw in the theater). This is way better. A must watch for paranoid sci-fi fans.

Pale H (it) wrote: EAPP11_REV2016Ado Kyrou : "For the first time in the history of the cinema, a director tries not to please but rather to alienate nearly all potential spectators."Although this statement of Ado Kyrou about Un Chien Andalou speaks the truth, the film still possesses an enchanting feeling that draws the viewers despite its rejection. As if a child yearning for the love and attention of a far away parent, it makes you desire. It is haunting despite it having no meaning but maybe the reason it is haunting is that it has no meaning. It is one that attaches itself to you; each clip vivid to your mind even before sleep. "No idea or image that might lend itself to a rational explanation of any kind would be accepted" This was the anthem used in developing this masterpiece, Un Chien Andalou. It stays true to this anthem to the point where a lot of theories were made applying Freudian,Marxist, and Jungian yet those would only ever be theories. Words are not meant to describe this film. It is simply shocking and surprising shots one after the other yet it is in our instinct that it is more than that; that there are words able to describe such a piece. We desperately interconnect the people and the events that occurred in this film for it is in our nature to link ideas and because of this nature, such theories arose which only made Bunuel laugh. This simply reminds the audience that sometimes, events were never meant to have a purpose or meaning viable to that of our understanding. It was simply made to happen and no such words could describe it. Truly, this film opens the eyes of the viewers in their habit of using words to appreciate beauty rather than simply appreciating what is in front of them. They depend on words and symbols rather than simply using their eyes. We have forgotten that words are limited to humankind, it could never transcend intangible concepts such as beauty. With this said, the audience need not dissect this film with words and explanations, they simply need to watch it and that would be plenty.Despite all of what has been said; despite its purposelessness and rejection towards society of that time, it continues to exist within the minds of humans living in the present. The present of the directors are now long gone but their legacy through this film is alive. The film was never to please or entertain but modern society has accepted and learned its techniques, studied its aesthetics, and greatly appreciated its beauty. It was the avant-garde of their time, an innovation, yet now it is the norm. This acceptance to the surrealists' techniques and films, as said by Roger Ebert, is proof that the surrealists' revolution succeded and had been built as foundation in modern films. Their purpose which was to convey the dispensable traditional manner in art and that conventional mannerisms are what makes art captivating to the audience and artist.

MariePier D (ag) wrote: Un trs bon film, celui qui m'a fait d (C)couvrir Brittany Murphy. A good psychological suspense.

Lisa F (ca) wrote: Very strange but cool :P

Tyler S (ca) wrote: A very solid, if not by the book sports movie, about the 1980 USA Hockey team who were extreme underdogs to the Soviet team in the Olympics. Full of college players, and losing 10-3 in an exhibition, they rebounded to shock the world.Let's get something straight here....This is one of the finest Kurt Russell performances I have ever seen. No one in this movie is on his level and it's not even close. He fuels this movie with his stern, no nonsense attitude that gets the young team to buy in. I was more than impressed to see his acting in this film.The movie has the regular cliche that sports movies has but Russells performance outshines it's flaws. The film also has terrific action sequences and shots. The games look real and I bought in on the sports scenes.Overall very solid film.

Carlos I (es) wrote: Fantastic performances lead this seemingly small story. Really make it a compelling affair.