Watch Movies Online|Full Movie Download|Movies Online Free Websites|Movies Online Stream|Online Full HD Movies. Watch and streaming your favorite full movies online on solarmovie.com and in the app!
207 Minutes | Drama, History | 1966-12-16
📥 Andrei Rublev 1966
📥 DOWNLOAD HERE
Watch Movies Online|Full Movie Download|Movies Online Free Websites|Movies Online Stream|Online Full HD Movies. Watch and streaming your favorite full movies online on solarmovie.com and in the app!
201 Minutes | Adventure, Fantasy, Action | 2003-12-01
📥 The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King 2003
📥 DOWNLOAD HERE
And so all good things come to an end. For three years in a row, Peter Jackson has banished our winter blues with the individual instalments of his Tolkien trilogy, effectively shifting the focus of our cinematic excitement from the summer months to the end of the year. But now that his epic has been unveiled in its entirety, what will be the lasting effects of his achievement?
Well, grand-scale fantasy filmmaking is back on the menu, laying down the gauntlet to George Lucas and Star Wars Episode III. Jackson has also proved that notions of risk and ambition needn't be confined to the low-budget, indie end of the spectrum; nor does California have an exclusive stranglehold on groundbreaking special effects.
And then there's the DVD factor. Just as The Lord Of The Rings was upping the stakes in theatres, so too was its DVD release pattern defining what can (and should) be done on disc for major movies.
In particular, the four-disc extended editions seem to have affected the director's thinking as to what he can get away with in his theatrical final cut. Hence the public grumbles from Christopher Lee about the non-appearance of Saruman in this final instalment. While it might have been fair to grant Lee a curtain call, Jackson quite rightly realises that it is Sauron, not Saruman, whose fiery eye encompasses all the narrative strands of the climax.
The Return Of The King marks the first time in the series when Jackson's roots as a horror filmmaker creep through. As the orcs catapult severed Gondorian heads beyond the walls of Minas Tirith, flesh-rotted ghosts draw swords alongside Aragorn and giant spider Shelob stalks Frodo through dark, web-shrouded tunnels, the film pushes the boundaries of its 12A certificate.
And so it should, because the look and tone must necessarily grow darker as the Hobbits near Mount Doom and Mordor's evil hand grips Middle-earth ever tighter.
Character nuances have been crafted over an unprecedented ten hours-plus of cinematic storytelling: from Strider lurking in the shadowy corner to Aragorn rallying the troops; from Merry and Pippin as bumbling fools to stout-hearted, pint-sized warriors. Only Legolas and Gimli seem to have regressed (in screen time at least) to set-piece archer and comedy sidekick respectively. At least Andy Serkis is rewarded for his Gollum voice work with an early flashback that gets his face on screen, as well as warning us that, under the ring's power, Smeagol can be as murderous as Gollum.
Jackson has kept the momentum of the series rolling on and on though the traditionally 'difficult' middle part and 'weak' finale, delivering a climax to the story that's neater and more affecting than what Tolkien managed on the printed page. Some viewers might feel that the director sprinkles some cheese on his extended coda, adding at least one false ending too many (even if he does ignore the book's Scouring of The Shire).
But those who have walked beside these heroes every step of the way on such a long journey deserve the emotional pay-off as well as the action peaks, and they will be genuinely touched as the final credits roll. Yes, the Ring is dead. Long live King Kong.
Verdict - The resounding climax to a landmark in cinema history. But the King has now returned, the story is over and the ships are leaving Middle-earth. Ladies and gentlemen, Elvish has left the building.
5/5
- Alan Morrison, Empire Magazine
Too much CGI, redundancy, clichés and drawn out “looks of love” for my tastes.
RELEASED 2003 and directed by Peter Jackson, “The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King” adapts the third part of JRR Tolkien’s popular fantasy trilogy about adventures on Middle-Earth: Frodo (Elijah Wood), Sam (Sean Astin) and Gollum (Andy Serkis) continue to try to make their way to Mount Doom to destroy the One Ring. Meanwhile Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen), Legolas the Elf (Orlando Bloom), Gimli the Dwarf (John Rhys-Davies), Gandalf the wizard (Ian McKellen), King Theoden (Bernard Hill) and Faramir (David Wenham) join forces to fight Sauron's army at the stone city of Minas Tirith and, later, draw the forces of Modor out as a distraction for Frodo to accomplish his goal. Billy Boyd and Dominic Monaghan are on hand as Hobbits Pippin and Merry.
While I’m a casual fantasy/adventure fan and have read numerous books of the genre (e.g. Conan, Tarzan, Gor, etc.), I’ve never read Tokien, likely because I’m not into Hobbits, Elves and Dwarfs. After viewing the three movies, The Lord of the Rings strikes me as a mixture of Robin Hood, Conan and The Wizard of Oz, which all possibly influenced Tolkien’s writing of the Rings trilogy in 1937-1949. So, if you think a meshing of “Conan the Barbarian” (1982) and “Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves” (1991) with “The Wizard of Oz” (1939) sounds good, then you’ll probably like these movies more than me.
“The Return of the King” is just more of the same showcased in the first two movies, but even LONGER. Take the Battle of Minas Tirith, for example. It’s basically the same as The Battle at Helms Deep in the previous movie, except with colossal elephant-like creatures and the Army of the Dead. These two battles are similar enough that they could’ve been condensed into one conflict. Speaking of the Army of the Dead, this was an interesting new element, as was the horrifying spider-monster that Frodo & Sam face inside the caves.
Like the first two movies, the characters are diverse, the tale is creative, there’s a lot of dark action rounded out by softer scenes and everything LOOKS and SOUNDS magnificent. Unfortunately, as with “The Two Towers,” there’s excessive use of CGI (aka CGI porn). If cartoony CGI is your thang then you’ll likely appreciate this installment more than me.
There are other problems: While the characters are inspired, they’re also thin and rather uninteresting, at least for mature people who require more depth to hold their attention. Take Legolas (Bloom), for example; we never get to know him. Or consider Aragorn: Mortensen is perfect as the noble warrior, but in the ENTIRE trilogy he probably only has like two full pages of dialog, maybe three. Also, I found the story generally disengaging. I was never much enthralled by the characters and their pursuits, although devotees of Tolkien might be.
Then there are WAY too many “looks of love” between characters, particularly Frodo and Sam (I was so happy to see one character get married and have kids, if you catch my drift). There’s also a sense of redundancy, like the aforementioned battles (Helms Deep and Minas Tirith). Or consider the hokey dangling from a cliff by one’s fingers: This was already done with Gandalf at the end of the first part and beginning of the next. Did we really need the entire trilogy to come down to this type of eye-rolling cliché?
Another problem is the lack of feminine protagonists. There’s Miranda Otto as Éowyn, Théoden's niece, who becomes infatuated with Aragorn and masquerades as a warrior-ess. Other than that all we have are cameos by Liv Tyler (Arwen), Cate Blanchett (Galadriel) and a Hobbit’s wife. “Mythica: A Quest for Heroes” (2014) cost LESS THAN $100,000 to make, which is a mere fraction of the $94 million it cost to make this blockbuster and the creators knew enough to throw in a couple of prominent babes as heroines in the story. So did “Conan the Barbarian” and “Dungeons & Dragons: Wrath of the Dragon God” (2005). It’s not rocket science.
As noted above, the movie’s needlessly overlong and things could’ve been condensed in the trilogy or omitted altogether. When the main storyline ultimately ends at Mount Doom I was thinking there was maybe 12-15 minutes left with half of that time being credits. Nope, there was STILL 30 MINUTES LEFT wherein boring goodbyes and “looks of love” are tacked on.
Despite these honest quibbles, “The Return of the King,” and the trilogy in general, was an ultra-ambitious undertaking and is a must for fantasy/adventure aficionados, particularly those who favor Tolkien, Hobbits, Elves, Gnomes and the like.
THE MOVIE RUNS 3 hours 21 minutes and was shot in New Zealand.
GRADE: C
Watch Movies Online|Full Movie Download|Movies Online Free Websites|Movies Online Stream|Online Full HD Movies. Watch and streaming your favorite full movies online on solarmovie.com and in the app!
81 Minutes | Adventure, Animation, Fantasy | 1981-10-22
📥 Son of the White Mare 1981
📥 DOWNLOAD HERE
Needs a blu-ray release asap. Craziest animations I've seen - like chewing Bazooka Bubblegum but the flavor never runs out
Watch Movies Online|Full Movie Download|Movies Online Free Websites|Movies Online Stream|Online Full HD Movies. Watch and streaming your favorite full movies online on solarmovie.com and in the app!
126 Minutes | Adventure, Drama, Western | 1948-01-15
📥 The Treasure of the Sierra Madre 1948
📥 DOWNLOAD HERE
Fantastic movie with great cast and a thrilling story. Bogart performs great.
I wanted something very special to be my 5,000th film (at least to my horrible memory and to my stats on IMDb), and so after brazen and intense thought, I decided on a later-than-expected watch of a classic from Bogart's association with John Huston. I say later than expected because I bought the immaculate 24-film Humphrey Bogart Collection, which was supposed to have it on its 12 double-sided DVDs, but it accidentally had, in its place, the special features disc, which held excellent feature-length documentaries on both John Huston and the making of the film. Thus I waited until recently, when I found the blu for a very good price and went for it.
It was worth the wait. The ultimate tale of sordid greed. Without going into detail or spoilers, everyone got exactly what they deserved. My only qualm is that after a splendid cameo by the director (whom when I think of that aspect of his career, I will always fondly think of 'Chinatown'), I was hoping we'd end up seeing more of his character. That would have been even more wonderful for me.
Hopefully I will see and rate another 5,000--and I'm very curious if and when I do, what film I'll choose for THAT milestone...
Watch Movies Online|Full Movie Download|Movies Online Free Websites|Movies Online Stream|Online Full HD Movies. Watch and streaming your favorite full movies online on solarmovie.com and in the app!
116 Minutes | Drama, Mystery, Crime | 1957-12-17
📥 Witness for the Prosecution 1957
📥 DOWNLOAD HERE
Great thriller with superb classical interpretations. The plot moves sometimes too lazily.
**Why don't they make THESE movies anymore?**
Apart from being a **GREAT** courtroom drama_(which some people don't think this movie is)_, this movie is so much **FUN** and **ENTERTAINING** to watch.Especially because of the characters of _Charles Laughton_ and _Elsa Lanchester_. But _Tyrone Power_ and _Marlene Dietrich_ were convincing too in their portrayal of an _innocent, afraid for his life man and a disloyal, unloving, poker faced wife_ respectively.
Some people might say that they predicted the ending half way down the movie but i am not quite sure as to how they predicted the **ACTUAL ENDING** before it really unfolded before their eyes?
This movie is great not only in the part played in court but also in the scenes shot in _Sir Wilfrid Robarts's_ office(also due to _Miss Plimsoll's caringly lovably irritating character!_).
Perhaps the people(the minority I'd like to believe) who don't think this movie deserves the high ranking and rating that it's got saw this brilliant piece of art as more of a suspense thriller.But I loved this movie as a delightfully ENTERTAINING, MYSTERIOUS, DRAMA !
I rate this 10 just because I haven't seen any other CLASSIC courtroom drama that was intense throughout(barring some light hearted scenes with Sir Wilfrid Robarts) and yet in the end I somehow felt light-hearted and had a smile on my face rather than a thought provoking look on it.
The commentary in the ending credits was innocently adorable for our times of social networking _"The management of this theater suggests that for the greater entertainment of your friends who have not yet seen the picture you will not divulge to anyone the secret of the ending of Witness for the Prosecution!"_
And mind you I am a _big fan of 12 Angry Men and How to Kill a Mockingbird!_ But this movie too is equally good in a different way altogether!
I'm constantly surprised that women's hats don't provoke more murders.
Leonard Steven Vole finds himself on trial for the murder of a wealthy widow from whom he has inherited a fortune. Top barrister Sir Wilfrid Robarts takes up the defendants case, but he, along with everyone else, is stunned when Vole's seemingly loving wife Christine turns up to testify against the defendant.
Based on Agatha Christie's successful 1953 play, "Witness For The Prosecution" benefited from fine tuning from master director Billy Wilder and writing partner Harry Kurnitz. Here the dialogue becomes razor sharp and the characters are fully realised with quite wonderful results, but chiefly the masterstroke here is not letting a court room drama become just that, a court room drama. The film plays out with no wasted scenes, no moments of boredom, and it has such vim and vigour you sometimes forget that there actually is drama in the story.
The cast here are on fine form, Wilder had wanted to work with Charles Laughton for some time, and it's obvious that both parties here are getting the best out of each other. Laughton is a pure delight as Robarts, a sharp tongue, all bluster and cheeky into the bargain, his interplay with Miss Plimsoll (Laughton's real life wife Elsa Lanchester) is quality, and it's another testament to Wilder's genius for putting them together. Tyrone Power, in what would be his last completed film before sadly passing away, is devilishly smart as Vole, whilst Torin Thatcher is great as the gruff prosecution barrister Myers. Yet as good as they all are, they all sit in the shadow of Marlene Dietrich and her turn as Christine Vole, sultry and femme fatalistic, it's a sizzling performance that crowns this delightful film.
It occurred to me overnight that it's probably the closest film that Wilder got to being Hitchcockian, and I'm pretty sure the big master of suspense himself would have enjoyed this one. It's a mystery that is dramatic, it's a thriller that is also funny, it's pretty much a multi genre classic. 9/10
Watch Movies Online|Full Movie Download|Movies Online Free Websites|Movies Online Stream|Online Full HD Movies. Watch and streaming your favorite full movies online on solarmovie.com and in the app!
87 Minutes | Documentary | 2019-09-25
📥 Anthropocene: The Human Epoch 2019
📥 DOWNLOAD HERE
Watch Movies Online|Full Movie Download|Movies Online Free Websites|Movies Online Stream|Online Full HD Movies. Watch and streaming your favorite full movies online on solarmovie.com and in the app!
149 Minutes | Science Fiction, Mystery, Adventure | 1968-04-09
📥 2001: A Space Odyssey 1968
📥 DOWNLOAD HERE
There are many great predictions hinting to future (it is from 1968 - can you believe it?) innovations throughout the movie. I might not have found all them because I keep falling asleep while watching it but I will keep trying to find them all.
I believe that we should call it a modernism show, albeit exhibited in the form of a movie. While it might feel "boring", it forces you to rethink what philosophical level that a two-hour film can achieve. The focus on questions about life, intelligence, and time, is worth more attention than the sci-fi part (though the special effect of this movie is already way ahead of its time).
The eighth wonder of the world. Easily 30+ viewings since I was a little kid. Nothing new to say here; simply wanted to add another pair of hands to the ocean of applause for my absolute favorite thing, the only indisputably perfect movie, the answer to the question of Is Life Worth Living, Man's greatest achievement, two thousand one a burger-flipping space odyssey
I got this movie recently when it came out on Ultra HD Blu-ray simply because it was missing in my collection and, being a Sci-Fi fan, missing 2001 in my collection simply would not do. It is a movie that was made to rely almost entirely on the visuals. It could be said that it is a visual symphony if that makes sense. Thus it was filmed on 70 mm film and in 6 channel stereo which, at the time was a huge thing. Thanks to this it actually made some sense to transfer this movie to Ultra HD Blu-ray since the originals were really good enough even though the movie was made in 1968.
I remember watching this movie as a kid and was profoundly disappointed. I thought come on, where’s the adventure, not to mention any form of action? Today I can more appreciate it for what it is. A visually stunning movie. I also can more appreciate the fact that the movie is trying to be scientifically accurate instead of going all out on the fiction part. The parts where gravity, or rather the lack thereof, was portrayed, that was really high tech movie making at the time. I also noticed now, when re-watching it, that all the screens are actually flat which also was really far in the future at the time. Actually it was still pretty much in the future back in 2001.
However, even today, I have to say that I find the movie excruciatingly boring. It is two and a half hour long and it moves very, very slowly. It takes 50 minutes of movie time before we actually get to the main part of the movie and get onto the Discovery for instance. No matter how great the visuals are, there’s only so much boredom I can stand before it starts to get to me.
In the last 30 minutes or so the movie starts to become very psychedelic. The part where Bowman is pulled into the vortex, the stargate, is going on forever and in the end it just becomes a blur of headache inducing color effects. The final parts of the movie with the three Bowmans of different ages is just weird.
So,as this is a non-professional and personal take on the movie I cannot really motivate more than 3 out of 5 stars.
I hadn’t actually planned to review this movie. Everything has really already been said about it but I could not refrain after having read this crap at Rotten Tomatoes:
Critics Consensus: One of the most influential of all sci-fi films — and one of the most controversial — Stanley Kubrick’s 2001 is a delicate, poetic meditation on the ingenuity — and folly — of mankind.
It’s pretty well known that Rotten Tomatoes is the absolutely worst movie rating site around and the so called “critics” are useless culture elite morons with an over-inflated opinion about themselves at best and politically motivated SJW asswipes at worst but still.
What the hell is controversial about it? Reality check, there’s really nothing controversial about it at all. It is just a fictional story in the future. Then we have that crap “the folly”. What bloody folly? If anything the movie shows a much better future than what we got. A future where the politicians apparently promoted advancement of science and space exploration which is the direct opposite to the money and oxygen wasters we have today.
Sure, if you indulge too much in smoking funny mushrooms or are politically motivated you can probably “interpret” the hell out of any movie and “find” whatever message you want but it is still bullshit.
Well, that was my (controversial?) take on 2001.