Movie & TV Show HD

   Ride Like a Girl 's retelling of the Michelle Payne story only asks one thing of its audience: that they have no questions at all about why someone would constantly risk their life riding racehorses under bad conditions and with worse pay. While this covers all the main details of the life of the first woman to ride a Melbourne Cup winner – nine siblings, all equally as horse-mad thanks to their single dad (Sam Neill) and their horse farm upbringing, a life-long obsession with riding despite the horse-racing death of one of her sisters and a near-fatal accident herself – the one question it never comes close to answering is the only question that matters: why?  Teresa Palmer as Michelle Payne is always convincing – though not as convincing as Stevie Payne, who plays her brother Stevie Payne – and the story often hits the right notes on a scene-by-scene basis as she battles the odds and entrenched sexism (which this film doesn't dig into as much as y...

I guess Rambo turning into a fully-fledged horror movie monster was only a matter of time. There's really no other way he could operate: he's clearly no longer a realistic threat to any halfway competent bad guy, let alone the entire Mexican Sex Cartel (but more on that in a moment). But as some kind of messed-up Bogeyman, a near-supernatural murder machine driven entirely by the need for vengeance? Yeah, that'll work. It's been however many years it needs to be for the story to work since John Rambo (Sylvester Stallone) came home to the family farm. Now he spends his days training horses and looking on admiringly at his housekeeper's granddaughter Gabrielle (Yvette Monreal) like she was some kind of machete or other instrument of death. Because, just in case the maze of tunnels he's dug under the farm filled with guns didn't give it away, Rambo has Become War and all this family crap is barely keeping a lid on it. Then Gabrielle announces she can't go t...

For a franchise that dominated the box office for years, you sure don't hear much about the Hangover movies these days. What, no reboot? But of course, Hollywood has been rebooting that series for years: change the leads, preferably in a way that makes their one crazy night (or day) seem even more outlandish (20-something white guys going on a bender being pretty much the most predictable storyline ever), and away you go. Here's the good news: Good Boys is actually good. It turns out the big twist you need to breath new life into this genre isn't so much respect for everyone - which made the otherwise entertaining Booksmart feel just a little cloying and preachy at times - as it is a solid comedy contrast. Here it's a trio of basically sweet pre-teen boys trying to navigate a NSFW world; the jokes don't exactly write themselves, but it's a good start. Max (Jacob Tremblay) is a nice kid who's just discovered girls; Thor (Brady Noon) is worried he's gett...

Downton Abbey is the kind of film that's usually described as "a chance to catch up with your favourite characters". One problem: I've never watched the television show this movie is based on. Turns out, that was actually a plus: being aimed entirely at fans, this film had zero interest in explaining who anyone was or what their relationships were to everyone else, which made it - on one level at least - a lot more realistic to watch. These were people in the middle of living their lives, not characters that required clumsy exposition to manouver them into a place where the story could begin. Also; not a lot of story here. The year is 1927, which realistically is about as late as it could be and still be a fairy tale setting; the Great Depression is still a year or two away, the grim 30s come after that and then there's a war and a Labour government who'll establish death duties directly designed to financially cripple these toffs. But for now, the good times...

Splitting Stephen King's novel It into two films always made just enough sense to seem a reasonable move. The book is massive, with a huge cast and a timeline that stretches at least 27 years (if you cut out all the history stuff; if you don't, we're talking a century or more). Obviously if you wanted to tell the story right, you were going to need more time than the bladders of movie-goers would allow; with the cast already going to be played both as kids and world-weary grown-ups, splitting the timeline up into two movies, well... made just enough sense to seem a reasonable move. Unfortunately for anyone hoping King's big statement on horror would turn into a movie with the same kind of impact and resonance, much of what makes King's novel work is the way that it is in large part about the horror of a): being a kid and b): being a grown-up dragged back into the world of being a kid. For this to work, you really need the two playing out side by side; you split th...