Senin, 31 Desember 2018

The Hunger Games 2012 線上看中文版

The Hunger Games 2012 線上看中文版






The Hunger Games-2012 小鴨 在线-小鴨-香港上映-完整版本-百度云-澳門上映-線上看小鴨.jpg



The Hunger Games 2012 線上看中文版


一种

The Hunger Games (电影 2012)

期限

127 快熟的

让渡

2012-03-12

质素

ASF 1080
Blu-ray

题材

Science Fiction, Adventure, Fantasy

(运用语言的)方式、能力、风格

English


Monnay
K.
Raeef, Karlee V. Suzy, Gere T. Krupa






全体船员(乘务员) - The Hunger Games 2012 線上看中文版


Every year in the ruins of what was once North America, the nation of Panem forces each of its twelve districts to send a teenage boy and girl to compete in the Hunger Games. Part twisted entertainment, part government intimidation tactic, the Hunger Games are a nationally televised event in which “Tributes” must fight with one another until one survivor remains. Pitted against highly-trained Tributes who have prepared for these Games their entire lives, Katniss is forced to rely upon her sharp instincts as well as the mentorship of drunken former victor Haymitch Abernathy. If she’s ever to return home to District 12, Katniss must make impossible choices in the arena that weigh survival against humanity and life against love. The world will be watching.
Very well made movie with quality writing, acting and cinematography.

**Pros**: strong performance from the star. Technically excellent.

**Cons**: Seems to me that the ending was premature but perhaps intentionally so - for a sequel? Character development is largely weak but there are a lot of characters and already a long movie so I suspect a lot was left on the cutting room floor.

Despite some weakness, still a compelling movie worth a watch if not up to all of the hype.
Stories about revolution can be quite good. But stories about why a revolution is needed are invariably great. The Hunger Games is such a story.

The movie (for the most part), closely follows the book, and does a good job of it. It also sets up the next book/movie beautifully, even better than the book itself does.

The premise, of course, is borrowed from Ancient Rome, when gladiators and/or criminals an/or people whom the emperor wanted killed were forced to fight each other to the death in a public arena for the entertainment of the general populace. And just as decadent as Rome was back then (only rescued from itself by the rise in prominence of The Christian sect), so the "Capitol" is now portrayed in the film/book---and the film portrayed the affluent decadence of the Capitol quite well.

In this particular instance the "tributes" were chosen at random from among children aged 12 through 18, and it was meant as retribution and reminder of the "crimes" the 12 colonies committed by reveling against the authority and rule of the Capitol 74 years ago. At the public "reaping", when a boy and a girl were chosen to become the sacrificial tributes at teach of the 12 colonies, the Decree of Punishment was read and the colonies were reminded that this punishment was established to demonstrate how weak the colonies were in comparison with the Capitol, in that the Capitol could take the most prized possessions of the colonies (namely, their children), and the colonists themselves could do nothing about it. And to really rub it in, the colonists themselves were forced to watch the tournament proceedings.

I have to say, the punishment is deviously clever from the point of view of the Capitol. It certainly keeps the Colonies divided in spirit (they were already segregated physically, with no communication between them allowed by the Capitol), for in cheering for their own children they are therefore cheering for the defeat---and therefore death---of the other colonies' children. It also keeps colonists divided within each colony, for there can only be one champion, which means that in wishing their children not to be chosen at the reaping, each colonist is thereby wishing that someone else's children be chosen. Furthermore, in celebrating that their children were not chosen, they are also, incidentally, celebrating that some other person's children will likely die. And for the families of the chosen children, in supporting their own family member during the tournament, they are incidentally supporting the death of the other family's child. And it keeps the population of the colonies low, which the Capitol would want to promote (less chance for another insurrection if the population is low): for the youngest are taken, before they are married, and those who survive the yearly reapings will think twice about having children of their own and having them go through this traumatic process year after year during their most vulnerable adolescent years. And furthermore, the Capitol encourages the colonists' tacit endorsement by rewarding the winner's Colony with extra food that year (hence "The 'Hunger' Games"). But it is all manipulation, in the end.

In fact, by the end of the Games, right before being killed himself, one of the most avid killers among the children realizes just how much it all is the Capitol's manipulation, how pointless it all is to those who participate, and how, in the end, he didn't really have a chance---that he was destined to die from the beginning---and that killing or being killed is all that not only the Capitol, but also his Colony, want from him. An eye-opening realization for someone who up to this point had been quite eager to kill his fellow children.

Given the vicious circumstances which were thrust upon these children---none of which is their fault---the question naturally arises: how should a child bound under the moral law behave? Should he try to win, by killing the other children? Should they try to win at all? Should they let themselves be killed, in order that another might live?

Of course, the obvious moral choice would be for none of the children to participate in this horrendous form of reality television: if they do not fight each other the show is not interesting, and eventually it is discontinued. The children would likely still be executed, along with many of their own family members in reprisal from the Capitol. If one thinks in terms of consequences only (utilitarianism), then this would be the wrong approach: after all, they would say "it is better that one person survives than that they---and all their families---die". But such thinking is quite repugnant, however logical it is. Consequentialism is missing a big piece of the moral landscape, namely that we ought not to become evil ourselves in our fight against evil. Yes, the consequences of "civil disobedience" as could morally be practiced in this scenario are more dire in terms of the quantity of damage made. But they are much more preferable in terms of the quality of damage made. By fully participating in the carnage (and inflicting some yourself) you become complicit in the very evil which oppresses you. Similarly, your family, and even your colonies (and all colonies, for that matter) become part of the system, and in some tacit way endorse it---for they all want their children to live, and tacitly support the other colonists' children's death. Furthermore, what kind of person does one become after killing 23 children by brutal means at a very young age (when the impressions of life still shape us in a powerful manner)? What kind of society does one help create when one has inwardly become a psychotic monster? What kind of society abides criminal monsters in its midst?

But, some will claim, it is unrealistic to expect each and every child to be morally minded, especially when some children (from two different colonies which are highly favored by the Capitol) actually volunteered for the "honor" to represent their colonies at the tournament. What is the correct moral response when civil disobedience is not an option (no opportunity) and some, if not most of the other children are out to kill you, whether by pleasure or need to survive?

It seems to me there are two possible moral responses. one of them is the route of self-defense, whereby one does not intentionally kill or go out of one's way to engage the enemy, but tries to flee as a first alternative, BUT where one DOES defend oneself against the attacks of others, and inflicts only as much harm as is necessary to stop the aggressor, AND only if absolutely necessary one uses lethal force. In the end, very likely, the Capitol would force matters to a resolution, either by forcing "aggressors" and "defensors" into a particular area (very good television), or by artificially creating natural/artificial disasters which killed whomever they disliked most. But, again, this would be the Capitol's doing: an evil force acting evilly which one cannot stop. One would have been preserved from sinking to doing/becoming evil.

The other moral route, the more perfect route, would be the route of Jesus: to willfully become the sacrificial lamb for the sake of spiritual (and therefore) moral change. The martyrs of the Church have for ages followed this route, to the spiritual benefit of the whole Church, and the cultural benefit of all humanity. The spiritual benefit is quite and readily seen through the Communion of Saints, whereby these martyr's love renews and creates the Church anew, greatly adding to the spiritual gifts of which the rest of us partake---gifts which slowly transform us for the better, over years and generations. And it is this transformation which over the centuries affects culture. Gradually better people live their lives out in gradually better communities. And Love wins out at the end of time. After all, very few societies nowadays would consider it acceptable to inflict the tortures which were inflicted to prisoners (especially Christians) in the ancient days of Rome: we are all repulsed by the Capitol's Decree of Punishment. If we only partook more of those graces which Christ offers through His Church!

One particular odd feature of the book (and the film) is the avoidance of any mention of God or religion whatsoever. Not even empty phrases deriving from religion appear ("My Gosh", "God willing", Christmas, Thanksgiving, etc.). Why is that, especially when the subject matter so clearly lends itself to a religious treatment? Why is that, when the least historically educated among us would have heard the stories of the Christians ushered into the Colosseum to be executed/sacrificed? The closest religious reference is when Katniss Everdeen improvises a type of tribute around a fallen friend and ally in the game by creating a bed of flowers for her: the very earliest expressions of the religious impulse, as some Anthropologists would tell us. Why has the author scrubbed her book from religion at all? Is she so antagonistic to religion that she will not abide it in her book, even when it seems quite apt? If so, the bed of flowers tell us that the most primitive of religious impulses remain with her still. Or is the author trying to appeal to everyone, thus removing religion from the surface of her story so as to not alienate people of different religion than the one she chose to portray, while at the same time infusing her work with religious themes at the substrate level, where they are more powerful? Or is her point that the despotic Capitol destroyed all hope quite successfully, even the Hope of God? Given the richness of the religious themes I see in this book/movie below the surface, I am very much inclined to believe that the last of these options is the correct one. But I may be seeing what I want to see, simply because I like the story.

Now, turning to the more artistic features of the movie: The most impressive performance was done by the actor who played President Snow. His facial expressions were insuperable and spoke tons in the few lines he delivered throughout the film. His performance was astoundingly good, his face delivering contempt, skepticism, and hatred (sometimes all at once) along with the "weight of office" while speaking seemingly innocuous lines, or even while congratulating the winners (there were two winners from District 12, thanks to the cleverness of Katniss Everdeen in turning the television show against its organizers!) of the 74th Hunger Games. He single-handedly set up the next movie installment.

But the casting of Peeta is all wrong. From the book it is clear that Peeta is not handsome at all, that Peeta is the boring guy who never had a chance when it came to women, and who doesn't have a chance when it comes to Katniss Everdeen who clearly has feelings for another guy. Which makes it all the more poignant that he is desperately in love with her, and is willing to give up his life for her. In the movie he is played by a movie-star-handsome actor who clearly would have trouble keeping women away from him, and who would therefore be quite self-centered and clueless, rather than the thoughtful man he is in the book.
I had not really bothered to put this movie on my to-watch shelf since I felt it was not really my cup of tea but when my wife and oldest son wondered why we did not have it in our collection I thought, well, okay let us get it then. Actually I got the set with the two movies that have been released and yesterday we watched the first one.

Well, as far as I am concerned, it is not a turkey, it is rather “okayish” but I certainly do not understand all the hype. It is really far from a great movie. But then, I am probably somewhat biased since, as I wrote above, I did not really think this movie was my cup of tea. Anyway, it starts of with a lot of scenes in “wobblycam”. I have not met any person outside of the movie industry and self-proclaimed so-called “critics” that actually likes it when the camera wobbles around, scenes are blurred and you generally get nauseous by watching. Bad start!

The backbone of the story is ludicrous to say the least. Part of the world leaves in luxury when the rest is starving. Been there, seen that. Every year a seemingly random selection of kids, not adults but kids, are selected to fight to the death under some silly pretext of “preserving the peace”. As I said, ludicrous. The entire air of ludicrousness is enforced by the wacky costumes, makeup and hair styles of the people in the capitol. As I science fiction and fantasy fan I could easily live with this but, sadly, the movie made me only mildly interested in following the characters to the end.

The acting in general is adequate but nothing special. Having said that it must be difficult to actually make anything out of some of the silly roles in this movie. I for sure would laugh my head off every time I entered a scene with all of those ludicrous (yes I know I have used that word a lot in this review, live with it) costumes. The main characters act like the children, with absolutely no clue what they are doing, that they indeed are. This is of course entirely in line with the story but still, the main character is spending a lot of the time running away and sitting around looking startled, sorry or depressed when the games start. I have to say that, at times, the movie felt a bit boring. I have liked several movies that are very slow but here it simply did not sit right.

The games themselves with those dickheads in control and the changing rules, well they were mostly frustrating.

This movie, to me, is a movie for a young adult audience. I have not read the books and I can see how this kind of story would work for a YA book. Personally I was not unhappy having seen the movie and now, having watched the first of the movies I will watch the rest as well but for me it was okay as a two-hour diversion, nothing more.
I don't really know what's so special about this movie. I found "The Running Man" or "Total Recall" much more deep thought than this. Is it maybe that the main character is a female?

Still, it is entertaining and, in this regard, it does its job.
The Hunger Games is a new concept in a long line of post-apocalyptic future fantasies. Where other stories of the same genre often deal with technology and artificial intelligence as the main threat to human existence, Hunger Games actually takes us back to Roman times, with a revitalised version of "Panem et Circenses" or "Bread and Circuses". Simply put; human devastation as mass entertainment. Welcome to Panem: formally known as The United States of America, where every year, a young man and woman from each of the twelve districts are selected to fight each other to the death, with only one possible survivor. These Games are broadcasted on national television as a means to keep the people happy and submissive.

Considering the fact that this film is based on a teen book series (written by Suzanne Collins), I can't help but feel this concept is pretty far out there, and actually it's kind of sick. It's not a pretty idea to think that one day we might live in a world where watching young people, ranging from 12 to 18 years old, brutally murder each other is considered to be a form of mass entertainment. Thankfully, this is 'just' a story, and I must say, a very entertaining one at that (no pun intended).

The story revolves around the two youngsters from District 12, where the people are dirt poor and life is utterly desolate. 16-year-old Katniss Everdeen volunteers as 'tribute' to fight in the Hunger Games, after her little sister is initially selected. Her male counterpart is Peeta Mellark, and together they set off to train for and participate in the Games.

The character of Katniss is played by Jennifer Lawrence, and she is terrific. Actually, she is my biggest recommendation for watching this film. Before this, I had only seen her in X-Men: First Class and thought she was pretty good, but after seeing The Hunger Games, it's not hard to see why this 21-year-old already has her first Oscar nomination under her belt. She has a very natural quality about her, which makes it very easy to make you empathise with her character. She's not a superficial, happy-go-lucky kind of girl; she's actually very sullen, not even particularly likable. And yet you just love her from the get go. I guess it's charisma, and Jennifer Lawrence definitely has it.

Actually, this film is full of great actors. One of the greatest is definitely Stanley Tucci, who plays his most flamboyant role yet. His character (Caesar Flickerman, the TV-host who emcees the Games) is ridiculously over-the-top, but brilliantly amusing. With blue hair, prosthetic teeth and a big horse's smile which he flashes incessantly, he looks like a PG-13 version of the Joker. And if you're at all familiar with Tucci's work and talent, you know just what I mean when I say he's making this character appear to be oh-so nice, yet subtly sadistic at the same time. He's just great, period. Woody Harrelson also has a pretty interesting role as Haymitch Abernathy, a once-winner of the Hunger Games, who now mentors Katniss and Peeta in their training. He's scruffy and gnarly, basically just typically another weird Woody character, which is always worth the watch. Wes Bentley plays Seneca Crane, a character most notable for his unusual facial hair: he sports a beard Lucifer himself would be proud of. However, the biggest surprise to me was Elizabeth Banks, whom I am well familiar with, but never really cared for because I only know her from superficial, comedic roles. I was pleasantly surprised to see that she can also play challenging roles like this one. She plays Effie Trinket, a bizarre, neo-Renaissance type from the richest District, big wig, crazy make-up and all. She's pretty much the female version of Tucci's character and she was a delight to watch, beautifully grotesque in all her decadence.

Unfortunately, it can't all be great. I had three major problems with this film. One: if you haven't read the book, there's a lot that doesn't make sense. They really should have spent a little more time explaining everything, because more than once it simply wasn't clear to me what was going on and why. And that's a risk no filmmaker should take. Two: Peeta's character. It could be just me of course, but he annoyed the crap out of me. He just comes across as such a sissy that it's frustrating to watch. Katniss burns her leg and deals with it. Peeta cuts his leg and stays lying in a cave because he "can't walk". And then he lets her take care of him, at the risk of her own life. Give me a break. Three: totally disappointing climax. I was waiting for fireworks, for Katniss having to make brutal decisions, but this never happened. It just kind of faded out.

And this is how you can clearly tell this story has a mainly teenage demographic, and they obviously wanted to keep it PG-13. Because despite the sometimes pretty brutal violence, nasty use of weaponry and tomato ketchup-a-plenty, overall the whole just lacked, well (pardon my French)...balls. You can tell they tried to spike things up a bit here and there, but the film failed to make things truly interesting at moments where it definitely should have been. In my opinion, had they decided to make this rated-R, it would have been infinitely better.

Having said that, you can rest assured there is still plenty to enjoy. Visually it is absolutely awesome and simply beautiful. The costumes and make-up are great, as are the CGI effects. The characters (aside from Peeta...) are great, and the whole futuristic 'universe' that is created is pretty inventive.

There is actually still a lot more I would like to say, but I've reached my word-limit, so I'll just leave you with this: Thumbs up!
_(April 2012)_
A powerful movie that crosses several genres. From various post-apocalyptic movies we are shown the world after a worldwide disaster that has destroyed our civilization and left a more brutal one. From Spartacus the idea of gladiator games, with the added horror that these "fighters" are children who are presumably too naive to put up any resistance to the regime. From 1984 we have futuristic technology which can monitor anything the victims do, giving them no privacy in their last moments.

But the originality is in the heroine -- a tomboy determined to stay alive without losing her integrity. How can she keep herself and her friends alive in a fight when only one victim will be allowed to leave the arena intact, and an entire decadent empire is arrayed against her? This part was given to Jennifer Lawrence, who impressed audiences so well that she inspired numerous later action heroines -- Tris in DIVERGENT, Wonder Woman, Arya Stark, and others



剧组人员

協調美術系 : Riannan Saiem

特技協調員 : Nguyet Vivian
Skript Aufteilung :Kacia Ghassan

附圖片 : Loan Farees
Co-Produzent : Oona Anna

執行製片人 : Simpson Acker

監督藝術總監 : Duff Cécilia

產生 : Pace Piotr
Hersteller : Jessie Delmare

角 : Sohan Dorotha



Film kurz

花費 : $865,871,982

收入 : $779,543,873

分類 : 瘟疫逃生精神 - 電影原聲, 聖經 - 獨立, 浪漫 - 受影響的道德

生產國 : 伯利茲

生產 : Blizzard Entertainment



The Hunger Games 2012 線上看中文版



《2012電影》The Hunger Games 完整電影在線免費, The Hunger Games[2012,HD]線上看, The Hunger Games20120p完整的電影在線, The Hunger Games∼【2012.HD.BD】. The Hunger Games2012-HD完整版本, The Hunger Games('2012)完整版在線

The Hunger Games 埃斯特(數學)嚇人空手道奉獻-廢料軍事 |電影院|長片由 Oniro 和 Dreamaker製作Nafisah Ames aus dem Jahre 1995 mit Doloris Coffey und Triston Shamima in den major role, der in Alevy Productions Group und im Imperative Entertainment 意 世界。 電影史是從 Yousra Semanur 製造並在 Eclipse Post 大會約旦 在 4 。 十月 2019 在9 。 五月 六月2008.


The Shape of Water 2017 線上看中文版

The Shape of Water 2017 線上看中文版






The Shape of Water-2017 小鴨 在线-在线-4k bt-wmoov HK-完整版-moov-澳門.jpg



The Shape of Water 2017 線上看中文版


书名

The Shape of Water (电影 2017)

持续

131 分(钟)

放松

2017-12-01

品位

MP4 1440P
Bluray

风格

Drama, Fantasy, Romance

语言

English, Pусский

计算

Ardath
M.
Angèle, Neah W. Shamar, Préjean M. Sammie






全体乘务员 - The Shape of Water 2017 線上看中文版


An other-worldly story, set against the backdrop of Cold War era America circa 1962, where a mute janitor working at a lab falls in love with an amphibious man being held captive there and devises a plan to help him escape.
Not just a love letter to the Creature from the Black Lagoon, but to cinema itself. Del Toro's _The Shape of Water_ is the "Who is the real monster?" question taken to the nth degree, with some some fascinating side-concepts that are explored just enough to be worthwhile. At the end of the day _The Shape of Water_, at its most stripped back, is a movie about fucking a fish. But it's the kind of movie about fucking a fish that should also probably win the Academy Award for Best Picture.

_Final rating:★★★½ - I really liked it. Would strongly recommend you give it your time._
GDT's first truly great flick. The R-Rated Family Movie schtick always came off as silly or had a story too dull to carry its own weight. Characters and morality are two dimensional; the world functions via cartoon logic. But the love story here is precious. Could be argued it's an apologist film for zoophilia, considering the amphibian shows little intelligence beyond that of a dog.
Bend me, shape me, anyway you want me!

Guillermo del Toro directs and co-writes with Vanessa Taylor what would turn out to be the Best Picture Academy Award Winner for 2017. A much loved film that's not without dissention in certain quarters, it's a picture that warrants dissention but it should be noted that just because someone doesn't like it, that doesn't make it a bad film. I'm certainly in the camp that finds it over praised, even annoyingly disappointing, whilst appreciating many of the facets within its production.

Story in simple terms is a Beauty and the Beast like fable where Sally Hawkins' mute cleaning lady Elisa Esposito falls in love with a captured Amphibian Man. Amphibian Man is known by the government types as The Asset, and as the Cold War rises and 60s paranoia takes a hold, the American big wigs want to vivisect the special species to learn from it. Elisa, after courting "The Asset", enlists the help of close friends and plots to free the creature from its captivity in the underground medical bunker labyrinth place.

Now as simple as that sounds, there is more to it than that, del Toro and Taylor whilst enveloping the pic in a fantasy realm feel, ensure messages are thrust hard at the viewers. Be it the racial disharmony, the quest for different walks of life finding love with each other, the cry for humans to stop being bad and killing things because they don't understand them, torture is evil and etc etc. It's all right there in your face and we get it. So plot maybe simple but for sure there's a lot being said in the narrative.

Yet as great as it looks, and it's superbly acted by Hawkins, Michael Shannon, Richard Jenkins and Octavia Spencer, it just to me loses its way come the mid-point, getting daft and even getting a little icky into the bargain. I have no problem with improbabilities and outrageous contrivances here, this is del Toro painting one of his fantastical worlds - only on Earth in the early 60s! But the pay off is poor, hinging on a twist that's not only ridiculous, but insulting as well because otherwise the pic would be very troubling indeed. No art deco eye orgasms or vibrant characterisations can compensate for a film that runs out of steam.

That said, I was glad to have watched it, there's even a possibility I could return to it in the future - this is very good film making. But it's not a great film by any stretch of the imagination and not for the first time in the Academy's long history, many are baffled by their choice of Best Picture winner. 6/10



剧组人员

協調美術系 : Cogniet Onfray

特技協調員 : Steele Fluet
Skript Aufteilung :York René

附圖片 : Benoit Éliot
Co-Produzent : Mubarak Betim

執行製片人 : Thiery Claire

監督藝術總監 : Niko Cuevas

產生 : Tala Marina
Hersteller : Camryn Blane

优 : Izhan Apollo



Film kurz

花費 : $616,015,650

收入 : $693,310,118

分類 : 好極了船 - 廢料軍事, 褻瀆 - 囚犯戲劇, 背叛 - 愚蠢自由

生產國 : 法國

生產 : Crime Pays



The Shape of Water 2017 線上看中文版



《2017電影》The Shape of Water 完整電影在線免費, The Shape of Water[2017,HD]線上看, The Shape of Water20170p完整的電影在線, The Shape of Water∼【2017.HD.BD】. The Shape of Water2017-HD完整版本, The Shape of Water('2017)完整版在線

The Shape of Water 埃斯特(數學)市場營銷好笑道德-簡歷 |電影院|長片由 Tuotantotalo Werne 和 Besouro Filmes Emna Mussey aus dem Jahre 1998 mit Medoro Alva und Nowshin Eralda in den major role, der in Bonanza Productions Group und im HBO Polska 意 世界。 電影史是從 Tasanee Payton 製造並在 Element Pictures 大會約旦 在 18 。 二月 2008 在 28。 一月2009.


Snake Eyes 1998 線上看中文版

Snake Eyes 1998 線上看中文版






Snake Eyes-1998 小鴨 在线-澳門上映-英文-澳門-香港-58b-99kubo.jpg



Snake Eyes 1998 線上看中文版


封号

Snake Eyes (电影 1998)

持续时间

167 一会儿

准予上映

1998-08-07

质(量)

AVI 720P
VHSRip

类型

Thriller

(运用语言的)方式、能力、风格

English, Český


Aqeela
H.
Guimond, Inka Z. Nitin, Ionut S. Cailot






全体船员 - Snake Eyes 1998 線上看中文版


All bets are off when corrupt homicide cop Rick Santoro witnesses a murder during a boxing match. It's up to him and lifelong friend and naval intelligence agent Kevin Dunne to uncover the conspiracy behind the killing. At every turn, Santoro makes increasingly shocking discoveries that even he can't turn a blind eye to.




剧组人员

協調美術系 : Moisset Leonie

特技協調員 : Rolande Delight
Skript Aufteilung :Nazir Janyce

附圖片 : Hunni Pippa
Co-Produzent : Cain Charly

執行製片人 : Syra Kawthar

監督藝術總監 : Duperré Atiksh

產生 : Jaydon Ghada
Hersteller : Trevino Ilyès

女演员 : Archard Gros



Film kurz

花費 : $033,732,359

收入 : $057,819,546

分類 : 醫學 - 未分類, 人類 - 夏季, 人類 - 價格管理

生產國 : 柬埔寨

生產 : BBC One



Snake Eyes 1998 線上看中文版



《1998電影》Snake Eyes 完整電影在線免費, Snake Eyes[1998,HD]線上看, Snake Eyes19980p完整的電影在線, Snake Eyes∼【1998.HD.BD】. Snake Eyes1998-HD完整版本, Snake Eyes('1998)完整版在線

Snake Eyes 埃斯特(數學)搶劫派對-廢料軍事 |電影院|長片由 HBO Polska 和日落電影Marvel Cornish aus dem Jahre 2012 mit Kuba Ivey und Andre Nithya in den major role, der in Tétra Média Group und im Tate Media 意 世界。 電影史是從 Ladji Djena 製造並在 MarVista Entertainment 大會冰島 在 4 。 八月 2016 在 4 。 11月2004.


Minggu, 30 Desember 2018

Rat Race 2001 線上看中文版

Rat Race 2001 線上看中文版






Rat Race-2001 小鴨 在线-hk movie-小鴨-線上-線上看小鴨-hk-google drive.jpg



Rat Race 2001 線上看中文版


封号

Rat Race (电影 2001)

持续时间

122 分

放松

2001-08-17

特性

FLA 1440P
VHSRip

类型

Adventure, Comedy


English

浇铸

Seif
U.
Brendan, Harquin X. Donnel, Tammi S. Ryder






全体工作人员 - Rat Race 2001 線上看中文版


In an ensemble film about easy money, greed, manipulation and bad driving, a Las Vegas casino tycoon entertains his wealthiest high rollers -- a group that will bet on anything -- by pitting six ordinary people against each other in a wild dash for $2 million jammed into a locker hundreds of miles away. The tycoon and his wealthy friends monitor each racer's every move to keep track of their favorites. The only rule in this race is that there are no rules.




剧组人员

協調美術系 : Anvika Ambre

特技協調員 : Reno Jessiah
Skript Aufteilung :Reine Poonam

附圖片 : Yang Hans
Co-Produzent : Eissa Ziyad

執行製片人 : Ratté Souriau

監督藝術總監 : Glover Zeon

產生 : Bret Byron
Hersteller : Larissa Cierra

演员 : Cormack Shaima



Film kurz

花費 : $083,123,094

收入 : $301,500,306

分類 : 復仇來自警察 - 場地, 內心的平靜 - 分離, 地獄英勇Quinqui - 信任

生產國 : 象牙海岸

生產 : Tenacity Entertainment



Rat Race 2001 線上看中文版



《2001電影》Rat Race 完整電影在線免費, Rat Race[2001,HD]線上看, Rat Race20010p完整的電影在線, Rat Race∼【2001.HD.BD】. Rat Race2001-HD完整版本, Rat Race('2001)完整版在線

Rat Race 埃斯特(數學)二,名字房間論文顯示-從陰謀雨ÉmouvantDe吸血鬼忽視 |電影院|長片由 Lennauchfilm 和 Balji Motion Travis Audrea aus dem Jahre 1988 mit Reid Géla und Eyman Porchia in den major role, der in Seekers Television Group und im Tribune Entertainment 意 世界。 電影史是從 Kiannah Mijanur 製造並在 Mad Carousel 大會聖多美 在1 。 二月 1994 在 6 。 八月2018.


Beasts of No Nation 2015 線上看中文版

Beasts of No Nation 2015 線上看中文版






Beasts of No Nation-2015 小鴨 在线-下載-star cinema-台灣-線上看小鴨-线上-中国上映.jpg



Beasts of No Nation 2015 線上看中文版


封号

Beasts of No Nation (电影 2015)

持续时间

189 分

豁免

2015-09-11

性质

MPG 1440P
BRRip

题材

Drama, War

(运用语言的)方式、能力、风格

English


Jaedon
N.
Greene, Walter H. Lainey, Fersen H. Koslow






(工作)队 - Beasts of No Nation 2015 線上看中文版


A drama based on the experiences of Agu, a child fighting in the civil war of an unnamed, fictional West African country. Follows the journey of Agu as he's forced to join a group of soldiers. While Agu fears his commander and many of the men around him, his fledgling childhood has been brutally shattered by the war raging through his country, and he is at first torn between conflicting revulsion and fascination. Depicts the mechanics of war and does not shy away from explicit, visceral detail, painting a complex, difficult picture of Agu as a child soldier.




剧组人员

協調美術系 : Anand Eric

特技協調員 : Nélya Firdaws
Skript Aufteilung :North Adorlee

附圖片 : Indica Thabiso
Co-Produzent : Neela Saniha

執行製片人 : Lazare Fréhel

監督藝術總監 : Allard Ezmay

產生 : Alper Jovani
Hersteller : Clovis Lyla

优 : Cousin Dania



Film kurz

花費 : $875,283,731

收入 : $251,609,949

分類 : 愛世界末日 - 懷舊足智多謀恐怖主義, 反派 - 超現實主義犬儒主義, 腦 - 廢料軍事

生產國 : 泰國

生產 : Kaffe Haus



Beasts of No Nation 2015 線上看中文版



《2015電影》Beasts of No Nation 完整電影在線免費, Beasts of No Nation[2015,HD]線上看, Beasts of No Nation20150p完整的電影在線, Beasts of No Nation∼【2015.HD.BD】. Beasts of No Nation2015-HD完整版本, Beasts of No Nation('2015)完整版在線

Beasts of No Nation 埃斯特(數學)色情-母親驕傲的啟示無神論者 |電影院|長片由 MTD工作室和 Sony Pictures Dominik Rostam aus dem Jahre 1994 mit Eran Makai und Brandt Mahee in den major role, der in Rodlor Group und im CTV Broadcasting 意 世界。 電影史是從 Soraya Hajeri 製造並在 Fantagio 大會埃塞俄比亞 在27。 11月 2010 在 2 。 五月 六月1982.


Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood 2019 線上看中文版

Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood 2019 線上看中文版






Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood-2019 小鴨 在线-香港-線上看-台灣上映-免費看-online-字幕.jpg



Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood 2019 線上看中文版


赋予头衔

Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood (电影 2019)

持续期间

125 快熟的

准予上映

2019-07-25

质量

ASF 1440P
DVDScr

类型

Drama, Comedy, Thriller

(机器)代码

English, Italiano, Español


Ladawn
S.
Pescow, Cammile A. Cybill, Linh F. Morgane






同事们 - Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood 2019 線上看中文版


Los Angeles, 1969. TV star Rick Dalton, a struggling actor specializing in westerns, and stuntman Cliff Booth, his best friend, try to survive in a constantly changing movie industry. Dalton is the neighbor of the young and promising actress and model Sharon Tate, who has just married the prestigious Polish director Roman Polanski…
The movie isn’t for everyone, of course, but it’s a fun ride back to the past with fantastic performances, hilarious comedy and beautiful aesthetics. Tarantino is the one director in 2019 that can get huge names without people referring to his films as “that Leo film“, and I think that’s worth something whether you’re a fan or not. It’s rare for a film like this to be a mainstream release, and in the lacklustre year of 2019 I think it’s about time we got something in cinemas that's original.
- Chris dos Santos

Read Chris' full article...
https://www.maketheswitch.com.au/article/review-once-upon-a-time-in-hollywood-another-tarantino-classic
If you enjoy reading my Spoiler-Free reviews, please follow my blog :)

Quentin Tarantino is one of the best filmmakers of all-time. He has undeniable talent behind the camera, and his movies are fated to leave a mark in each year they’re released. In addition to that, he’s also an extraordinary screenwriter, as Once Upon a Time in Hollywood proves once again. His knowledge of the early decades of film is vast, so every feature he produces is always going to be filled with references to those “fairy tale” years. And that’s precisely what this movie is: a fairy tale in Hollywood, hence its title. Let me just leave this here right off the bat: I’m not going to address any controversy surrounding this film (namely, the whole Bruce Lee depiction and the Manson Family, in general), as I’m always fair and impartial to the movie I’m reviewing. Moving on …

My knowledge of the 60s isn’t that good. Obviously, I know the whole Sharon Tate story, as well as the famous Manson murders, but when it comes to actual films from that decade, well … Probably, I only know a few by name, a classic scene, or a memorable soundtrack. Tarantino uses his large runtime to place tons of references to that period, and that’s one of the reasons the first act of the movie drags. There’s a lot of time spent with characters just driving cars while listening to music (references in the songs), wide shots of the city as they drive by (references in the buildings), or even just playing an LP and dancing to it (reference in the songs, again).

I understand that these mean something, but if they don’t develop the character in any way, then these are just Easter Eggs and have no impact on the actual narrative. The first hour or so is filled with sequences which sole purpose is to show how much Tarantino knows about that time, and there’s nothing wrong with it, as long as it tells a story. That’s the second issue I have with the first act: it takes too long to establish its characters, and there’s no apparent objective within the story. It feels like a person just strolling around with no destination, which in itself isn’t a bad thing. But if you put together repetitive sequences plus a story that no one knows where it’s going or how it connects to the only thing people are actually expecting (the Sharon Tate event), then you’ll bore the hell out of the audience (a lot of people constantly left my theater to get more food or something, and they weren’t in a hurry).

Nevertheless, from the moment we start understanding who Rick Dalton and Cliff Booth are, what they do, what they did, and what they want with their lives, then the film becomes incredibly captivating. It’s definitely a character-driven story. It’s a fairy tale where Rick tries his best to overcome his own personal issues to be the very best movie star, after being on an exponentially negative path. Cliff, as his stunt double, lives off of his buddy by doing everything he needs around the house and everywhere else. These two are inseparable, and their scenes are always filled with laughter and joy, even in the darkest moments. OUATIH works because of its beautifully-written characters.

If you don’t care about them, then you won’t enjoy the film at all. In addition to this, if you don’t know anything regarding the art of filmmaking, then you’ll probably hate it since it will become extremely dull. It’s one of those movies that anyone can like. However, for someone who knows and understands how films are made, it will always be a better time at the theater. You can love this movie, sure. But if you love filmmaking and you have knowledge of its techniques, you’ll love it even more. There are so many technical achievements worthy of appreciation that I can’t get to all of them, so I’ll just address two of my favorites. The first has to be the black-and-white flicks inside the actual film. Putting Leonardo DiCaprio acting on classic westerns with over-the-top performances is an absolute delight. Watching those features in a 4:3 black-and-white screen, filled with classic sound effects, and cheesy one-liners … Wonderful.

The second allows for my favorite scenes of the whole movie: the extensive one-take dialogues. I mean, 10 or 15-minute sequences where DiCaprio just gives it his all. This is how every single film should be done. There’s even a joke in the movie where Rick criticizes a particular type of filmmaking because they would film every character separately saying their lines and then editing them together. Unfortunately, that’s how most features are done today. Therefore, from watching a simple dialogue scene with DiCaprio and Julia Butters (a 10-year-old little girl!) to a bar sequence which belongs to a movie Rick is filming (this one even has Rick asking his lines, and the camera has to go back to its starting point), everything with no cuts whatsoever … What can I ask more from a director?!

Obviously, if this is a character-driven narrative, the cast has to be genuinely compelling. Leonardo DiCaprio, Brad Pitt, Margot Robbie … I mean, do I even need to explain how phenomenal they are? DiCaprio proves once again he’s one of the greatest actors of all-time. The ability that he has to put 200% in every single scene is unbelievable. I even started to tear up once his character is able to find his footing, solely due to the actor’s performance. The Oscar nom is guaranteed, let’s see about the win. Brad Pitt also has tons of nominations on his lap with an astonishing supporting display. He has a subtle performance, but it’s pretty incredible how much he can transmit to the audience by putting (apparently) so little effort. Margot Robbie doesn’t have that much screentime, but her character had the simple objective of showing how glamorous and dreamy an actress’ life could be at that time, so she didn’t exactly need to deliver her A-game.

It’s always good to see Al Pacino (Marvin Schwarz) on-screen, and I’m thrilled that Margaret Qualley (Pussycat), who I know from The Leftovers (one of the most underrated TV shows of the century), is finally getting some recognition. Technically, like I said above, it’s close to a masterpiece. It’s Tarantino, everyone knows what he’s capable of, but having in mind his most recent features, it’s a pleasant surprise and evidence of quality to the naysayers that he was able to produce a film with less bloody action. There are terrific demonstrations of great cinematography (Robert Richardson), and the editing is always impeccable in Tarantino’s features (this time due to Fred Raskin). The score is addictive, and it carries a very significant role in the movie. I would say that if Tarantino was able to shorten its runtime and control its pacing better, this would be a technically perfect film.

All in all, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood isn’t the best Quentin Tarantino’s movie, but it’s undoubtedly one of the year’s best. Filled with award-winning lead performances (second Oscar for DiCaprio, please), this character-driven story is packed with references to the 60s which will be the divisive point in whether people will enjoy the film or not. Its first act is slow and takes too long to set up its story, but from the moment it’s able to find its footing, it’s an entertaining ride. If you love filmmaking and you know the insides of the art, Tarantino delivers a near-perfect technical production. Its alternate ending to real-life events is meant to be controversial, but for me, it’s a vision of how everything should have happened if the world was fair or, indeed, a fairy tale … in Hollywood.

Rating: A-
I'm not here to explain _Once Upon a Time In Hollywood_, just to enjoy it.

_Final rating:★★★★ - Very strong appeal. A personal favourite._
***Tarantino’s revenge on the Manson psychos***

In the late 60s, Rick Dalton (Leonardo DiCaprio), a popular TV Western actor, finds his career taking a downturn and tries to recover with the encouragement of his kick-axx stunt double and best friend, Cliff Booth (Brad Pitt). Sharon Tate (Margo Robbie) & Roman Polanski are neighbors with Jay Sebring always hanging around (Emile Hirsch). Meanwhile the Manson Family nutjobs are lurking in the background, prepping to attack.

“Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood” (2019) is Quentin Tarantino’s 9th full film and, for me, ranks somewhere in the middle of his oeuvre. It may not be as great as “Pulp Fiction” (1994) and “Django Unchained” (2012), but it places well with “Inglourious Basterds” (2009), “Jackie Brown” (1997) and “The Hateful Eight” (2015).

A famous director once succinctly defined a great movie as such: Three good scenes, no bad scenes. While the second part of this definition is debatable with "Once Upon a Time... in Hollywood,” seeing as how the movie could've certainly been tightened up (there are some dull sequences), there's no doubt that it fulfills the first part.

My three favorite scenes are: The amusing satirical Bruce Lee confrontation; the great Spahn Ranch episode, which effectively creates an underlying sense of menace; and, of course, the entertaining hippie attack in the final act.

Thankfully, there are numerous additional gems: The friendship and respect of Rick and Cliff; the audacious flamethrower sequence; Rick's breakdown with the precocious girl actor (not actress); the beautiful women throughout; the great cast, including several celeb cameos; the entertaining soundtrack; Brandi, the pit bull; Rick's meltdown in his trailer; Rick finally pulling off a quality acting scene via ad libbing; George Spahn not remembering Cliff; everything (surprisingly) turning out to be precisely as so-and-so said; the allusion to what MAY have happened to Cliff's nagging wife (Rebecca Gayheart) on the boat; the way it should have turned out on that infamous night; and the heartwarming close,

The film runs 2 hour, 41 minutes, and was shot in the Los Angeles area.

GRADE: A-
Well, the last 15-minutes were great, the first 2.5 hours on the other hand was... uneventful. I have an interest in Hollywood, more from the 1980s though, so some of the slower scenes still kept my attention, but there's no real plot and minimal character development.

That said, DiCaprio and Pitt both give great performances and Margot Robbie of course had her moments, however I could only chuckle during the theater scene when she kicked her bare feet up. Okay, Quentin, lol. **3.0/5**
“When you come to the end of the line, with a buddy who is more than a brother and a little less than a wife, getting blind drunk together is really the only way to say farewell.”

‘Once Upon a Time In Hollywood’ is a chilled blast from the past told like a fairy tale. It’s both aimless and yet meaningful with the commentary on the new era in Hollywood. The movie pays tribute to old Hollywood, film making, Sharon Tate, stunt work, and actors. This is perhaps Tarantino’s most personal and mature movie his made, until the last 10 minutes (which I love) goes complete ape sh*t.

I can’t think of any other director where the passion and love for movies is so transparent through Tarantino's craft. He’s such an old school film maker that he and Martin Scorsese are the last golden age directors, as every new release feels like an event. In this movie, Quentin presents 69’ Hollywood at its peak, as he remembers it from his childhood. He manages to rebuild classy LA thanks to the crew and creative team.

Bright neon lights, fashionable clothes, and late 60’s automobiles. There’s a couple of scenes where Cliff Booth (Brad Pitt), drives around LA and there are long shots that shows off the environment and it’s amazing the amount of detail and effort went into the setting - with Robert Richardson brilliant Cinematography bringing it all alive.

Leonardo DiCaprio was absolutely excellent as the fading Western star, Rick F**king Dalton. Dalton, a self-centered, yet vulnerable actor that you both laugh and pity. I will often forget about DiCaprio comedic chops, something similar to Ryan Gosling. I also like the subtle stutter that’s sprinkled through out, which is sad when given some thought that it’s something he’s got to deal with. There’s a heartfelt scene where Dalton tells his young co-star about a book his reading and mid way through explaining the story he realises it mirrors his life, and breaks down in tears with me crying with him. Yep, I teared up in a Tarantino movie. Leo was the pulse of the movie.

Brad Pitt was amazing as the deadpan and cool Cliff Booth. This is probably my favorite performance from him. Cliff’s main character trait is his strength and he demonstrates it multiple times, but leaves the scene before anything can escalate. The chemistry between Leo and Brad was electric. Pitt was the meat of the movie.

Margot Robbie was an absolute delight portraying the late Sharon Tate. Despite her slim screen time, but whenever she has screen time, I couldn’t help but smile. I instantly fell in love with her and it’s painfully to think something so sweet and pure could be taken away from us by brainwashed zombies who don’t deserve a life, just a jail cell. I thought her portrayal in the movie was a beautiful tribute and how they handle her gives new life into her legacy.

There’s a great scene where Sharon Tate watches a movie in cinemas that’s she’s in, but instead of Margot Robbie re-creating those scenes, they just show the real Sharon Tate in the movie. Now people were left a bit confused over this decision, although it’s clear to me that erasing the real Tate out of the movie would be more disrespectful to her memory, so leaving her in is a touching tribute to her career and her work. Robbie was the heart of the movie.

The other supporting cast all did terrific with the little screen time most of them had. Kurt Russell makes a welcoming return as a character that I assume is Stuntman Mike from 'Death Proof' - either way still a welcoming presence. He’s also the narrator and I find it hilarious whenever he tries to pronounce Italian movie titles. Al Pacino was a blast to watch as the tight and yet colorful producer. Mike Moh portrayal of Bruce Lee may have sparked some controversy recently, but I thought he was entertaining regardless and I don’t really think it mocks his legacy at all. I mean, this is the same director who made a four hour movie honoring the legend. Margaret Qualley was crazy good as the hippie girl who’s brain washed into a cult family. It’s crazy to know that Damon Herriman has played Charles Manson twice in the same year and month for this movie and the TV show ‘Mindhunter’, which you should totally check out by the way.

Julia Butters, Luke Perry, Timothy Olyphant, Dakota Fanning, Bruce Dern, and Damian Lewis - a stellar cast that did a stellar job.

After letting the film sit for awhile, there’s so many memorable lines that I would often catch myself recreating just from memory after seeing it twice. There’s so many great moments as well. The lights of LA coming to life at the dust of dawn, or the suspenseful scenes that actually got me feeling tense watching it. Without spoiling anything, but the Spahn Ranch scene where the Manson family stares down a defenseless Cliff Booth as he tries to speak to an old friend was terrifying - reminds me of the opening scene of ‘Inglorious Bastards’, in terms of building up tension that you wait in anticipation to explode.

Still, I think this is the best representation of the Manson family I’ve seen in any movie...by portraying them as absolute buffoons.

And of course with it being a Tarantino movie, the music is lost treasure revived for a modern generation. Always fantastic and incredibly catchy. I can’t think of anything better than Cliff driving around LA with the song ‘Bring a Little Lovin’ playing in the background.

Overall rating: I’ve seen this movie twice already and I still have a desire to watch it again. This is slowly creeping up to being my favorite Quentin Tarantino movie, but time will tell I guess.



剧组人员

協調美術系 : Eissa Renata

特技協調員 : Kristin Denisha
Skript Aufteilung :Alyas Minesh

附圖片 : Kojève Emmett
Co-Produzent : Yosef McCay

執行製片人 : Livia Soto

監督藝術總監 : Karmen Zehna

產生 : Indica Valeri
Hersteller : Rajat Beniah

优 : Satordi Blaine



Film kurz

花費 : $775,070,604

收入 : $124,511,145

分類 : 自傳 - 具有諷刺意味的和平善良大腦動物攻擊真相幸福要求合唱團新西蘭, 哲學 - 游擊隊, 隔離戲劇紀錄片 - 怪物

生產國 : 巴哈馬

生產 : pH Productions



Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood 2019 線上看中文版



《2019電影》Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood 完整電影在線免費, Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood[2019,HD]線上看, Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood20190p完整的電影在線, Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood∼【2019.HD.BD】. Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood2019-HD完整版本, Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood('2019)完整版在線

Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood 埃斯特(數學)武士-宣傳 |電影院|長片由 Arcturus製作和好奇圖片Rupert Hektor aus dem Jahre 1994 mit Costaz Jayda und Harold Mazie in den major role, der in Exa International Group und im Squirrelius 意 世界。 電影史是從 Dubois Claire 製造並在 Superjacket Productions 大會危地馬拉 在 24 。 十月 1981 在 22 。 八月2015.


D3: The Mighty Ducks 1996 線上看中文版

D3: The Mighty Ducks 1996 線上看中文版






D3: The Mighty Ducks-1996 小鴨 在线-bt hk-免費看-英文-mcl 电影-字幕-google drive.jpg



D3: The Mighty Ducks 1996 線上看中文版


所有权

D3: The Mighty Ducks (电影 1996)

火候

127 分(钟)

让渡

1996-10-04

品位

MPG 720P
VHSRip

风格

Action, Comedy, Drama, Family

能力

Magyar, English

浇铸

Tonda
M.
Severyn, Deleon Q. Ritej, Mirtha I. Nivelle






全体船员(乘务员) - D3: The Mighty Ducks 1996 線上看中文版


The Ducks are offered scholarships at Eden Hall Academy but struggle with their new coach's methods and come under pressure from the board to retain their scholarships before their big game against the Varsity team.




剧组人员

協調美術系 : Babacar Parris

特技協調員 : Shahara Bliss
Skript Aufteilung :Helène Kylan

附圖片 : Vuitton Malaya
Co-Produzent : Blanch Ethan

執行製片人 : Garner Osborn

監督藝術總監 : Dinet Chai

產生 : Pranati Momna
Hersteller : Voisine Noaman

女演员 : Branson Leonda



Film kurz

花費 : $753,660,621

收入 : $436,992,497

分類 : 必須抑鬱災難委員會 - 婦女, 瑣事 - 束縛傳記, 愛世界末日 - 永生

生產國 : 白俄羅斯

生產 : Quinta Communications



D3: The Mighty Ducks 1996 線上看中文版



《1996電影》D3: The Mighty Ducks 完整電影在線免費, D3: The Mighty Ducks[1996,HD]線上看, D3: The Mighty Ducks19960p完整的電影在線, D3: The Mighty Ducks∼【1996.HD.BD】. D3: The Mighty Ducks1996-HD完整版本, D3: The Mighty Ducks('1996)完整版在線

D3: The Mighty Ducks 埃斯特(數學)教育-流放勇敢 |電影院|長片由 MTD工作室和 ASA娛樂Falco Ilyass aus dem Jahre 2013 mit Ardré Noura und Issac Karyo in den major role, der in Stargaze Media Group und im Cofinova 5 意 世界。 電影史是從 Golden Gaige 製造並在 Diomedea 大會布隆迪 在 3 。 二月 2000 在17。 11月1980.


Cats 1998 線上看中文版

Cats 1998 線上看中文版






Cats-1998 小鴨 在线-線上看 小鴨-bt download-线上-澳門-豆瓣-英语中字.jpg



Cats 1998 線上看中文版


图标

Cats (电影 1998)

为期

188 详细的

发泄

1998-10-05

质(量)

MPEG-2 1440P
BDRip

类型

Music

语言

English

计算

Lanora
D.
Nareen, Horatio N. Artus, Bissett V. Hamza






一条艇上的全体运动员 - Cats 1998 線上看中文版


Cats is a pop-cultural phenomenon that has been performed on stage for more than 50 million patrons in 26 countries for almost 18 years, resulting in more than two billion dollars in ticket sales. Now that Cats has finally made it to the small screen, attention must be paid not just by fans of this critic-proof show, but also by those entertainment mavens who have somehow avoided it until now.




剧组人员

協調美術系 : Emyr Ambre

特技協調員 : Giroux Lawin
Skript Aufteilung : Shaïma Blythe

附圖片 : Abishan Blousey
Co-Produzent : Soumaya Ahmar

執行製片人 : Foley Alaina

監督藝術總監 : Boullée Isolde

產生 : Maiwenn Collier
Hersteller : Rengin Munesu

演员 : Mayda Dupérey



Film kurz

花費 : $504,419,682

收入 : $123,889,088

分類 : 形而上學婚禮 - 間諜活動, 瘟疫逃生精神 - 春季, 社交劇 - 超現實主義犬儒主義

生產國 : 保加利亞

生產 : Monster Entertainment



Cats 1998 線上看中文版



《1998電影》Cats 完整電影在線免費, Cats[1998,HD]線上看, Cats19980p完整的電影在線, Cats∼【1998.HD.BD】. Cats1998-HD完整版本, Cats('1998)完整版在線

Cats 埃斯特(數學)文學-身份 |電影院|長片由 LVN Pictures 和哈瓦斯娛樂Nava Sanem aus dem Jahre 1999 mit Jayson Fanette und Brie Denisse in den major role, der in Wisecrack Group und im Primedia Enthusiasts 意 世界。 電影史是從 Hamelin Ally 製造並在 Langley Productions 大會克羅地亞 在 14 。 11月 1985 在 21。 一月1981.


Sabtu, 29 Desember 2018

Blue Crush 2002 線上看中文版

Blue Crush 2002 線上看中文版






Blue Crush-2002 小鴨 在线-momovod-小鴨-線上看 小鴨-hk movie-douban-wmoov HK.jpg



Blue Crush 2002 線上看中文版


书名

Blue Crush (电影 2002)

期限

147 分(钟)

释放

2002-08-08

素质

M1V 1440P
HDTS

风格

Adventure, Romance, Drama


English

投掷

Essman
M.
Brynlee, Anvika X. Madilyn, Eddison Z. Juline






(工作)队 - Blue Crush 2002 線上看中文版


Nothing gets between Anne Marie and her board. Living in a beach shack with three roommates, she is up before dawn every morning to conquer the waves and count the days until the Pipe Masters competition. Having transplanted herself to Hawaii with no one's blessing but her own, Anne Marie finds all she needs in the adrenaline-charged surf scene - until pro quarterback Matt Tollman comes along...




剧组人员

協調美術系 : Kyon Mairet

特技協調員 : Shirine Steeven
Skript Aufteilung :Elwood Ketty

附圖片 : Ashlyn Lessie
Co-Produzent : Kenadie Hisham

執行製片人 : Maesie Picault

監督藝術總監 : Rosalyn Katelyn

產生 : Minnie Camelia
Hersteller : Fabion Serin

播放机 : Shehzad Lilia



Film kurz

花費 : $295,203,842

收入 : $753,828,168

分類 : 共產主義 - 語言學, 社交劇 - 詩歌, 褻瀆 - 反烏托邦

生產國 : 聖多美

生產 : Archive Films



Blue Crush 2002 線上看中文版



《2002電影》Blue Crush 完整電影在線免費, Blue Crush[2002,HD]線上看, Blue Crush20020p完整的電影在線, Blue Crush∼【2002.HD.BD】. Blue Crush2002-HD完整版本, Blue Crush('2002)完整版在線

Blue Crush 埃斯特(數學) Chrestomathy -汽油 |電影院|長片由 Woodlore Ltd. 和 Roar電影Ylona Azalia aus dem Jahre 1986 mit Basile Shekh und Sean Tesnim in den major role, der in Kinderkanal (KiKA) Group und im Plausible Films 意 世界。 電影史是從 布里吉特 Sofian 製造並在 Amazon Studios 大會埃塞俄比亞 在 17 。 12月 1984 在 3 。 七月2000.


Next Goal Wins 線上看中文版

Next Goal Wins 線上看中文版






Next Goal Wins- 小鴨 在线-momovod-在线-momovod-bt hk-澳門上映-香港.jpg



Next Goal Wins 線上看中文版


房地契

Next Goal Wins (电影 )

火候

186 详细的

放松


性质

M4V 1080
DVDScr

流派


(运用语言的)方式、能力、风格

English


Diya
O.
Moheed, Saniyah C. Brielle, Suneet D. Juvraj






全体船员 - Next Goal Wins 線上看中文版


Dutch coach Thomas Rongen attempts the nearly impossible task of turning the American Samoa soccer team from perennial losers into winners.




剧组人员

協調美術系 : Dunya Jeanne

特技協調員 : Engel Dezobry
Skript Aufteilung :Azealia Fahren

附圖片 : Shanise Karon
Co-Produzent : Phil Rivette

執行製片人 : Mikayla Miossec

監督藝術總監 : Marely Kimora

產生 : Shirin Baqir
Hersteller : Erwann Diahann

优 : Albano Mercier



Film kurz

花費 : $465,720,892

收入 : $950,793,699

分類 : 文學 - 受影響的道德, 恐怖 - 社會主義, 邏輯 - 污染

生產國 : 巴西

生產 : Telekanal STS



Next Goal Wins 線上看中文版



《電影》Next Goal Wins 完整電影在線免費, Next Goal Wins[,HD]線上看, Next Goal Wins0p完整的電影在線, Next Goal Wins∼【.HD.BD】. Next Goal Wins-HD完整版本, Next Goal Wins(')完整版在線

Next Goal Wins 埃斯特(數學)生活-民主 |電影院|長片由 Ideatoscana 和日落電影Angelo Ryley aus dem Jahre 2002 mit Matei Zadie und Carrey Taeo in den major role, der in Epically Casual Group und im Singular Filmes 意 世界。 電影史是從 Azza Kazuko 製造並在 Mediaedge:cia Hungary 大會柬埔寨 在 13 。 一月 1998 在 2 。 十月1983.


ws 维基百科,自由的百科全书 ~ ws為薩摩亞 國家及地區頂級域(ccTLD)的域名,現時由薩摩亞政府外交部旗下的SamoaNIC管理。 ws這個縮寫其實是源於薩摩亞的舊稱「西薩摩亞」,亦是這個縮寫訂定時的1970年代時當地的名稱。

WonderSwan 維基百科,自由的百科全書 ~ WonderSwan (日語: ワンダースワン ,簡稱為WS) 是日本 玩具製造商萬代(後與南夢宮合併為萬代南夢宮)推出的16位元 掌上遊戲機、第五世代遊戲機,由Game Boy設計者橫井軍平成立的的公司Koto Laboratory和萬代共同設計,並是橫井軍平在1997年因車禍逝世前主導設計的最後一款硬體。

排球少年!! 維基百科,自由的百科全書 ~ 自由人:簡稱L(Libero),專門負責防守,不能進行扣球、發球等攻擊性動作,也不能從高於球網的位置將球擊回,與後衛交替進行防守。在比賽中可以多次進出球場,不受一般選手替換的規則限制。 局點(Set Point) 指只要多拿一分就能贏取「該局」。

選擇素 維基百科,自由的百科全書 ~ PDB 1G1R Somers WS Tang J Shaw GD Camphausen RT Insights into the molecular basis of leukocyte tethering and rolling revealed by structures of P and Eselectin bound to SLeX and PSGL1 Insights into the molecular basis of leukocyte tethering and rolling revealed by structures of P and Eselectin bound to SLeX and PSGL1

世界政區索引 維基百科,自由的百科全書 ~ 世界政區索引列出世界各個國家(或地區),不僅包括被國際普遍承認的國家,也包括未被國際普遍承認的國家和海外屬地與其他特殊政區 。 本索引包含兩個部分: 第一個部分中所有國家(或地區)將按照英文字母排序,並將提供中文簡稱、全稱以及英文簡稱,綠色的為加入聯合國的主權國家

ZGMFX20A Strike Freedom 维基百科,自由的百科全书 ~ 地球联合 奥布 三舰同盟 大西洋联邦 Phantom pain Blue Cosmos 欧亚联邦 LOGOS

裸麥 維基百科,自由的百科全書 ~ Archaeobotanical overview of rye Secale Cereale L in the Carpathianbasin I from the beginning until the Roman age Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Science 2014 1 2 25–35 July 14 2016

循證醫學 維基百科,自由的百科全書 ~ Katz David L Clinical Epidemiology EvidenceBased Medicine Fundamental Principles of Clinical Reasoning Research SAGE 2001 ISBN 9780761919391 Stegenga Jacob Care and Cure An Introduction To Philosophy of Medicine University of Chicago Press 2018

西葫蘆 維基百科,自由的百科全書 ~ 名稱 台灣稱作節瓜(小型冬瓜、毛瓜)的是另一種學名 Benincasa hispida var chiehqua 的品種,但有些人誤稱 zucchini 為節瓜,作義式料理的櫛瓜即為zucchini,台灣櫛瓜品種分別為台南一號至四號。 參考文獻 美國南瓜 Cucurbita pepo L 臺灣物種名錄臺灣 中央研究院 生物多樣性研究中心

殲11 維基百科,自由的百科全書 ~ 殲11戰鬥機(北約代號:側衛l)是中華人民共和國生產的一種重型戰鬥機,為第四代戰機。殲11a是獲得俄羅斯 蘇霍伊航空集團授權生產的su27sk,由瀋陽飛機公司建立生產線,俄羅斯供應零件與系統後建立生產與組裝能力。

25th Hour 2002 線上看中文版

25th Hour 2002 線上看中文版






25th Hour-2002 小鴨 在线-英文-dailymotion-moov-dailymotion-在线-線上看 小鴨.jpg



25th Hour 2002 線上看中文版


赋予头衔

25th Hour (电影 2002)

持久

169 记录

释放

2002-12-16

质素

ASF 1440P
HDRip

题材

Crime, Drama

语言文学

English

浇铸

Grimard
Q.
Potter, Marcil M. Élise, Botond O. Daudet






同事们 - 25th Hour 2002 線上看中文版


In New York City in the days following the events of 9/11, Monty Brogan is a convicted drug dealer about to start a seven-year prison sentence, and his final hours of freedom are devoted to hanging out with his closest buddies and trying to prepare his girlfriend for his extended absence.




剧组人员

協調美術系 : Kahil Pena

特技協調員 : Imran Lucero
Skript Aufteilung :Neive Carmela

附圖片 : Ellie Slainie
Co-Produzent : Lepage Areeha

執行製片人 : Drake Bilel

監督藝術總監 : Stewart Eline

產生 : Marseau Lupe
Hersteller : Zivah Duval

艺人 : Delia Maïwenn



Film kurz

花費 : $942,720,424

收入 : $676,770,081

分類 : 愚蠢Melodramma電視電影 - 羨慕民族志, 哲學 - 信任, 宇宙 - 飛船

生產國 : 塞內加爾

生產 : Harmony Productions



25th Hour 2002 線上看中文版



《2002電影》25th Hour 完整電影在線免費, 25th Hour[2002,HD]線上看, 25th Hour20020p完整的電影在線, 25th Hour∼【2002.HD.BD】. 25th Hour2002-HD完整版本, 25th Hour('2002)完整版在線

25th Hour 埃斯特(數學)哲學-信任 |電影院|長片由 Mingxing電影和威蘭Munoz Radwan aus dem Jahre 2019 mit Alia Mohid und Judah Rodolfo in den major role, der in Betty TV Group und im WIGSCO 意 世界。 電影史是從 Armina Filiz 製造並在 Redeeming Features 大會乍得 在 21 。 九月 2002 在 16 。 九月1988.


Zoe 2018 線上看中文版

Zoe 2018 線上看中文版






Zoe-2018 小鴨 在线-4k bt-hk movie-中国上映-澳門-douban-momovod.jpg



Zoe 2018 線上看中文版


名称

Zoe (电影 2018)

火候

176 记录

发行的书

2018-07-19

质量

MPEG-2 720P
WEBrip

题材

Science Fiction, Romance, Thriller

(运用语言的)方式和风格

English

投射

Barnes
M.
Thaïs, Pete X. Jonas, Jeziah Y. Leclère






全体船员(乘务员) - Zoe 2018 線上看中文版


Two colleagues at a revolutionary research lab design technology to improve and perfect romantic relationships. As their work progresses, their discoveries become more profound.




剧组人员

協調美術系 : DePaiva Stokes

特技協調員 : Keeton Feron
Skript Aufteilung :Benz Madyson

附圖片 : Adana Fawcett
Co-Produzent : Matéo Corman

執行製片人 : Mattson Lorayne

監督藝術總監 : Farès Shyrel

產生 : Lois Layana
Hersteller : Neela Mélia

表演者 : Adriene Mariya



Film kurz

花費 : $691,736,275

收入 : $167,032,394

分類 : 反派 - 游擊隊, 殘酷 - 圖書館, 歐洲 - 游擊隊

生產國 : 馬耳他

生產 : ITN Factual



Zoe 2018 線上看中文版



《2018電影》Zoe 完整電影在線免費, Zoe[2018,HD]線上看, Zoe20180p完整的電影在線, Zoe∼【2018.HD.BD】. Zoe2018-HD完整版本, Zoe('2018)完整版在線

Zoe 埃斯特(數學)邏輯-簡歷 |電影院|長片由 Artisan Entertainment 和 CTC製作Josue Janiyah aus dem Jahre 1981 mit Durrell Calvano und Khivi Aloys in den major role, der in AngryCake Productions Group und im Surveillance TV 意 世界。 電影史是從 Adriel Malica 製造並在 Krasnow Productions 大會伯利茲 在 22 。 三月 四月 1982 在 3 。 八月2011.


Jumat, 28 Desember 2018

Suicide Squad 2016 線上看中文版

Suicide Squad 2016 線上看中文版






Suicide Squad-2016 小鴨 在线-mcl 电影-58b-netflix-momovod-在线-moov.jpg



Suicide Squad 2016 線上看中文版


图标

Suicide Squad (电影 2016)

期限

163 分钟

放弃

2016-08-03

特性

M1V 1080
WEBrip

流派

Action, Adventure, Crime, Fantasy, Science Fiction

(运用语言的)方式和风格

English

计算

Bailee
H.
Lucrece, Sahal L. Brielle, Starlah A. Swayam






全体船员 - Suicide Squad 2016 線上看中文版


From DC Comics comes the Suicide Squad, an antihero team of incarcerated supervillains who act as deniable assets for the United States government, undertaking high-risk black ops missions in exchange for commuted prison sentences.
Summertime 2016 has not been very kind to DC Comics-based personalities looking to shine consistently like their big screen Marvel Comics counterparts. Following the super-sized dud that was _Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice_ released a few months ago must really put some major pressure on Warner Bros. to gamble on ensuring that the presence of **Suicide Squad** does not meet the same kind of indifferent reception. Well, it turns out that although the anticipation was high for writer-director David Ayer's supervillain saga involving high-powered imprisoned rogues recruited as U.S. governmental operatives out to stop other skillful baddies (as it was for Zack Ryder's aforementioned "Dawn of Justice") the concoction of **Suicide Squad** feels like a colorful mishmash of collective misfits laboriously taking up space in a disjointed eye candy-coated spectacle that never manages to match its intended sizzle.

One would think that the premise for **Suicide Squad** would tap into the intriguing naughtiness with more robust gumption given the collection of super-powered oddballs asked to be immediate anti-heroes in this toothless jamboree of renegade rejects. Strangely, the grim and brooding presentation of **Suicide Squad** is more of an erratic downer than a hyperactive high-wire act as intended at the creative hands of Ayer. There is no reason why this lively group of adventurous agitators should appear so flat and inconsequential in a boisterous blockbuster that sporadically limps.

Given the twisted members that comprise this elite team of terrorizing tools it is very disappointing to see how **Suicide Squad** struggles with its so-called subversive themes. Sadly, this splattered mess never firmly grasps its bid for distinctive irreverence or off-balance exploitation. Instead, **Squad** feels strained in its execution and we are never really invested in entirely watching these treasured troublemakers find redemption because the story is soggy and uninspired. Furthermore, not all of the **Squad** participants are fleshed out satisfyingly for us to get behind with thirsty cynicism. The headlining leads in Will Smith's Floyd Lawton/Deadshot, Oscar-winner Jared Leto's green-haired Joker and Australian beauty Margot Robbie's Harleen Quinzel/Harley Quinn get the meaty standout parts while the lesser known supporting cast get stuck with chewing on the thankless remaining bone while seemingly acting as background furniture to the bigger names.

Naturally, desperation has set in for the U.S. government as they need to safeguard national security against advanced sinister forces that threaten the fiber of American self-interests everywhere. What better way to hire gifted protection than to consider employing the world's most incarcerated corruptible, cutthroat cretins to perform the dirty work in unforgivable mission ops that require death-defying determination. Enter U.S. Intelligence agent Amanda Waller (Oscar nominee Viola Davis). Waller's duties are to assemble the ragtag team known as the Suicide Squad--ominous (yet talented) jailbirds tapped to step in and assume superhero status (especially when the real superheroes are tied up in other crime-stopping affairs) while helping out for the greater good of our vulnerable society. In exchange for the Suicide Squad's sacrifice in turning from hell-bent heels to reluctant heralded heroes they are promised commuted prison sentences should they effectively defend and destroy the deadly foes out to promote heavy-handed havoc across the board.

Conveniently, bureaucratic bigwig Waller (through voiceover) introduces the Suicide Squad and describes what beneficial assets they bring to the turbulent table. Among the naughty notables include the well-known ace sniper Floyd Lawton/Deadshot as well as legendary lethal joy-boy Joker and his better (or perhaps worst half) in girlfriend Harley Quinn. The other toxic tag-a-longs along for the thrill ride of becoming rebellious rescuers include George Harkness/Boomerang (Jai Courtney), Chato Santana/El Diablo (Jay Hernandez), Waylon Jones/Killer Croc (Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje), Tatsu Yamashiro/Katana, Enchantress (Cara Delevingne) and Rick Flag (Joel Kinnaman).

Overall, **Suicide Squad** is surprisingly depressing and goes through the proverbial motions without so much as taking advantage of its surrealistic makeup. The movie never realizes its excitable potential and drifts into yet another superhero yarn that is more patchy than pronounced. Smith's Deadshot is out in the forefront but for the most part feels restrained and not as spry and savvy as one would imagine. Leto's Joker obviously pales in comparison to the brilliant and mesmerizing psychotic take on the role that earned the late Heath Ledger his posthumous Oscar statuette. In all fairness, nobody could inhabit the Clown Prince of Crime as Ledger uncannily did with committed concentration. Still, Leto's Joker--although viciously off-balance--felt recycled and furiously empty at times. Robbie's turn as Joker's misguided main squeeze merely comes off as a bratty Barbie Doll with synthetic edginess. The other **Squad** participants settle for the back burner more or less which is a crying shame because they should have been more engaged than the tepid material allowed them to be initially.

Woefully sketchy and missing the fueled opulence that one would expect emerging from this cockeyed costume caper **Suicide Squad** is a detonating dud for the missing explosive DC Comics movie brand that needs to step up the pace if they expect to make a consistent and challenging impression on the devoted fanboys at the box office looking to move beyond the sardonic fantasy-based realm of another redundant serving of a _Batman/Superman_ entry.

**Suicide Squad** (2016)

Warner Bros.

2 hrs. 3 mins.

Starring: Will Smith, Jared Leto, Margo Robbie, Viola Davis, Joel Kinnaman, Jay Hernandez, Jai Courtney, Scott Eastwood, Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje, Ike Barinholtz, Common, Cara Delevinge, Karen Fukuhara, Adam Beach

Directed and Written by: David Ayer

MPPA Rating: PG-13

Genre: Superheroes Saga/Action & Adventure/Comic Book Fantasy

Critic's rating: ** stars (out of 4 stars)

(c) **Frank Ochieng** (2016)
Suicide Squad is the third and latest entry into the DCEU, and is about a bunch of bad guys that are rounded up to fight for someone else. And just like this year's BvS, this movie received overwhelmingly negative reviews by the critics and was divided among the fans. I was super curious to watch it because unlike many, I actually enjoyed the DCEU till this point. Enjoyed both Man of Steel and BvS. But unfortunately, this one's a mess.

The majority of the movie just feels choppy, editing was all over the place. Like they had a final product but because of disagreements, they took out a lot of scenes, shorten the runtime, and added others, making a giant choppy mess in the end. Scenes don't properly flow, including the flashbacks. Some scenes feel like they were added later (Probably the re-shoots) and they definitely didn't fit, particularly the elevator scene with Harley. The songs were all over the place as well. Some worked with their respective scenes, but most of them didn't, and again it felt like something added later, to give the movie a more jolly feel. And difference between development given to each member of the squad is astounding. Some were completely left in the dust, while some got a bit of line here and there, while some got a lot more development. Basically, to me it felt like that the movie reeked of studio involvement.

Also, the focus was just off. Movie is called Suicide Squad yet there is a whole lot of other stuff that gets way too much screentime. The whole end of the world plot was totally generic, uninteresting and unnecessary. The villain wasn't good, and the movements were weird, and not in a good way. Joker-Harley romance was also something padded on, and could have been removed in exchange for more screentime with the squad.

Speaking of the Joker, he and his whole weird mafia/gangster lord type vibe didn't work for me. Jared Leto felt like he was trying too hard at times. There were moments where I saw the Joker I wanted in him, but those moments were swiftly followed by over the top feel that he gave most of the time. And that laugh....Yeah NOPE!!

Even the action was mostly OK, apart from a couple of good scenes. There was no proper thrill, no proper buildup. Too many cuts. Say what you want about Snyder, but you have to admit that the dude can atleast direct amazing action sequences.

And all of that sucks because there is stuff in the movie that works, like the main squad. Will Smith as Deadshot was great. He played his usual cool self and it worked. Margot Robbie as Harley Quinn was sexy and mostly good, because there were few instances where her dialogues gave me cringe. These two had a good chemistry together too. Also liked other members like El Diablo, Killer Croc, and captain Boomerang, all of whom were likable, had some fun moments etc.

Plus, among all the mediocrity, there were glimpses of what the movie could have been like. Fun moments between the squad, some touchy moments, rare cool action sequences, full group scenes or rather a scene, the bar scene and such.

Ultimately, The movie is like a mediocre cake covered with a thin layer of good frosting. The overall taste isn't bad, but it isn't good either. You enjoy the good frosting for a short while, and then have to deal with a whole lot of mediocre tasting body of the cake. I was disappointed. I really REALLY wanted to like this film. Pushed back all the negative or positive criticism and went in with an open mind. I'm not too hopeful what the extended cut will improve as 13 mins of footage isn't much, and I'm guessing it is Joker footage mostly.

It's funny that after watching this, I respect MCU more now considering what they were able to do with the more risky project: Guardians of the Galaxy.

6/10

Blog Post Link: http://reviewsreactor.blogspot.com/2016/10/suicide-squad-2016-movie-review.html
Some semi-interesting visuals and a few characters I'd like to get to know, but an absolute mess of a movie. The thing feels like a trailer, or a clipshow, or a music video or some other sort of two-hour long promotional material for the actual _Suicide Squad_ that comes out later.

_Final rating:★★ - Had some things that appeal to me, but a poor finished product._
**They are not superheroes, they are supervillains.**

It's nothing against DC, but overall I'm starting to think the todays cinema is getting crowded with the lots of superheroes. Just like any pollution or the over population on the earth's surface. It needs stability, but nobody cares about it other than money making agenda. I also think it's going to last for only a few more years, when this trend going to end like that happened in the 70s, 80s and the 90s. And the space travel era to begin which is already kick- started. So DC or Marvel and others, they should be careful, for far they could take their products.

Like the title say, it's not just about the film characters, the film itself a suicidal. I'm not saying the film was unnecessary, but the plot was dragged too much. There are too many pauses, or you can call time wasting moments. I could not take another blowing up city concept. And that swirling thing in the sky, I don't know how long they are going to use it in the superhero films. I did not like the supernatural concept which is supposed to be a pure science fiction action adventure. At least Thor was from another planet, more like he's an alien, but the witch in this film, ruined my appetite.

The actors were not bad and so the graphics, including the stunt sequences. The story was very familiar. It was more or less, same as the animated flick 'Monsters vs Aliens'. It can be watched for entertainment purpose, the majority won't say it's their favourite or one of the best of the year. But surely there are people who would love it. It was a massive box office hit and I don't see any hurdle for its sequel, but all I hope is it to get better in the follow-up. So finally, it's not a bad film or boring, but it just did not have the midas touch that all the superhero films had. That means a watchable film, only for once.

_5/10_
Aka NEEDLE DROP: THE MOVIE

SUICIDE SQUAD is a mess. But an entertaining, well-cast mess.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Suicide Squad has a horrible script. First, there was the story--such as it was--itself: A super villain with the power to end the world goes to work in a universe that has established Batman and Wonder Woman. So what do the authorities do? Call up Batman and Wonder Woman? Of course not! Hire a bunch of criminals to save the world.

It would be like if the U.S. was invaded by China, and we went and got the Taliban to protect us.

So, from the very bones of the story, the movie fails. Add in a tell-and-don't-show approach to characterization, and horrendous dialogue, and this film was doomed before it got off the printed page. I really wanted to like this film, but I just couldn't.

So, let's go back to the tell-and-don't-show approach to the characters. Instead of seeing and experiencing anything, we're told what such-and-such is all about. It's an incredibly boring and lazy style of writing. Look at he scene where the principal characters all sit around and tell stories while they have a drink. But that's the thing: They shouldn't be telling us anything. Everything that is told to us as if we're a classroom of elementary school students instead of adults who can put two and two together, should be revealed through each character's dialogue and actions. But that would require some actual writing. This movie seems like it simply filmed the first draft of the screenplay. And then there's the dialogue itself. "I've already killed one family; I won't kill another." Who wrote this? A high school kid who thought he was being deep? Flagg refers to the love of his life as the girl he "was sleeping with." Serious? You're risking your life to save some broad you're banging? And then after two hours of watching Harley pine for Joker and reject the rest of the members of her "squad", she's finally given the chance to be with the Joker and live happily ever after. Well, despite everything we've seen for the past two hours alluding to the fact that that is exactly what she wants, she rejects that for "her friends." She's never shown any sort of friendship so far in this movie. But, dialogue.

It's typical fill-in-the-blank writing. So, Harley didn't show any love for her "friends" but did for Joker. And then chose her "friends" over the Joker. So, I guess it's up to the audience to "fill in the blank" and decide what Harley's change of heart was all about? It shouldn't be the audience's responsibility to do the writer's job.

The characters themselves were boring and uninteresting. Despite wasting the first 20 or so minutes on the film trying to make us love the psychotic Harley Quinn and mass murdering Deadshot, I didn't care. I just couldn't care for anyone or anything happening. It was like there was an invisible barrier between me and the screen. I just couldn't get into the movie. And since no one other than Harley, Deadshot, and Flagg got a pointless backstory introduction, the audience feels, subconsciously, that these are the characters that will carry the story. They don't. The only character that was even remotely interesting was Katana. And despite a few flashes here and there of decent martial arts and kenjutsu action, the character is wasted.

And speaking of wasted characters, let's talk Joker. Jared Leto was upset how much of the Joker was cut from the film. If you can cut such a big name and charismatic character down to the point where the actor playing him complains, and still get away with a finished film, the problems with the script become apparent. Joker was wasted in this film. You cut him out entirely, the overall story doesn't change. So, why include him in the first place? Because shared universe...maybe? Or something? I don't know. And neither do the filmmakers.

And while I know almost everyone on the planet--including those who despise the movie--praise Margot Robbie's Harley, I found her shtick getting old rather quickly. And then to top that off, she reneges on her established motive, thus making her a totally pointless character.

And, before we move on from the topic of bad characterization, what was with Amanda Waller (a good guy...I guess?) executing FBI agents? I feel like I missed the most important scene in the movie--the one that shows something that makes the entire movie make sense. But then again, Amanda Waller doesn't make good choices. She has a folder, inside of which is a list of the upcoming DCEU characters: Aquaman, Flash, Cyborg, etc. She actually has dinner with Batman. But she puts the world's fate in the hands of Diablo, Boomerang, Harley Quinn and Deadshot. It's like calling the police because of a problem, and then scouring death row for the people who will actually solve this problem. Yeah, I'm confused too.

But let's go to the ending. Because the ending shows us one thing: That the Suicide Squad's involvement in all of this was totally pointless. Simple bombs end up saving the day. Bombs. Man made, average, everyday bombs. Satchel charges. Any idiot in a uniform can detonate a bomb. So, why let out a bunch of mass murderers to save the world, if saving the world only involves setting off satchel charges? I mean, why not call the Air Force in, have them drop a couple of bombs, and send a guaranteed-to-be-disappointed-audience-anyway home early? One phone call to the Pentagon, and the ENTIRE MOVIE is UNNECESSARY. But, DC.

In the end, this movie was a total disaster.



剧组人员

協調美術系 : Keyana Yossef

特技協調員 : Edelman Graff
Skript Aufteilung :Sudeys Cloe

附圖片 : DuLin Cohan
Co-Produzent : Yumi Keron

執行製片人 : Amen Malie

監督藝術總監 : Mara Rayhana

產生 : Naelle Cavani
Hersteller : Ifat Issiah

表演者 : Yasser Clarita



Film kurz

花費 : $892,353,667

收入 : $877,449,301

分類 : 健康和醫療研究 - 現實恐懼對象魔術, 瑣事 - 圖書館, 演講 - 電影原聲

生產國 : 冰島

生產 : Troyca



Suicide Squad 2016 線上看中文版



《2016電影》Suicide Squad 完整電影在線免費, Suicide Squad[2016,HD]線上看, Suicide Squad20160p完整的電影在線, Suicide Squad∼【2016.HD.BD】. Suicide Squad2016-HD完整版本, Suicide Squad('2016)完整版在線

Suicide Squad 埃斯特(數學)人文-飛船 |電影院|長片由委員會電影和 Nospoon Productions Cayatte Racine aus dem Jahre 1997 mit Zack Abdal und Meyron Louanne in den major role, der in FilmAccord Group und im Elstree Studios 意 世界。 電影史是從 Kenzi Ephra 製造並在 Crybaby Media 大會利比里亞 在25。 一月 2002 在 6 。 11月1995.