فيلم Hunter Gatherer

Hunter Gatherer

Hunter Gatherer is a movie starring Andre Royo, Kellee Stewart, and Jeannetta Arnette. After a 3-year stint in prison, an unreasonably optimistic middle-aged man returns to his stagnant neighborhood to win back his girlfriend only...

Running Time
1 hours 30 minutes
480p, 720p, 1080p, 2K, 4K
Josh Locy
Josh Locy
Larry Flash Jenkins, Kellee Stewart, Jeannetta Arnette, Andre Royo
Audio Languages
اللغة_العربية, English, Deutsch, Français, Italiano, Español, Svenska, Gaeilge, Nederlands
اللغة_العربية, 日本語, Čeština, Tiếng Việt, Português, 한국어, Australia, Filipino, हिन्दी

After a 3-year stint in prison, an unreasonably optimistic middle-aged man returns to his stagnant neighborhood to win back his girlfriend only to find that she and his family have done what they always wanted to do - forget he exists.

Comments about drama «Hunter Gatherer» (21)

Jesse Webb photo
Jesse Webb

I was excited to watch this film because I've loved all of Jim Jarmusch's work and have been a fan of the documentary genre ever since the early eighties. I was not disappointed in this film. Jarmusch does not rely on visuals to carry the film. There are a few scenes that are nicely composed and offer some visual laughs, but the majority of the film is just a collection of his own observations of the world around him. Jarmusch does a good job of making you feel like you are in the life of the characters he follows. In my view, this is one of the best documentaries I've seen in years, and it definitely deserves a place in the pantheon of great cinema.

Philip photo

John Waters and the crew of his cult classic Pink Flamingos tour the Hollywood studios with the intention of producing a movie. The people who made the decision to make a film were extremely proud of the work they were doing and saw the work as a chance to show what they had done. Their biggest problem was that they didn't really know how to direct a film. One problem after another. One night while at the studio they find a leftover camera from a Pink Flamingos concert that was shot by a great crew that was only interested in making the movie. They had to improvise the dialog and improvised the music and some of the dialog. This is where the problems began. They had no idea what to do with the camera and couldn't even use it to put the music together. The film is just a bunch of improvisation. The most famous scene is when John Waters says, "Do you think there's something wrong with this picture?" But then he starts to improvise, with the music from Pink Flamingos, "No, there's something wrong with this picture." That scene is probably the most improvised scene in the film. It's just one of the highlights. A lot of the improv is improvised. I mean they just shot a scene where Waters is talking to a guy and he's improvising. The guy is a complete idiot, and Waters says, "Go away." But he says it anyway. When he said it, I thought, "Why would you say that?" But then I realized that the whole scene is improvised. Waters says it as a joke, and then Waters says it again. The director, Danny Rosado, realizes this and decides to stop the film. This is a terrible decision. The first half of the film is incredibly bad. The second half is awful. The actors are awful. Even the music is awful. I was looking for something good to say about this movie, and I couldn't find it. I watched it just to see what was wrong with it. I don't think that I'll ever watch it again.

Helen B. photo
Helen B.

I was thoroughly impressed by "Finder" at the Toronto International Film Festival. While it wasn't Oscar-worthy material, it's quite engaging and the performances are all very good. I was also very surprised to see the Director's Note that there is an 8-year-old girl in the film. There is nothing in the script that shows this, but that's the director's style and he wanted to use it. He's a master storyteller. The film is set in the 1980's, but it's really about the 1980's. It's a story of a young boy that has seen the world, but never met his grandfather. There are many parallels with "The Polar Express" where the child never knew his grandfather. But that film was a lot more grounded in reality. You could also connect the film with "Lost in Translation" where the child never met his grandfather. And that film was also grounded in reality. You could connect the film with "2001: A Space Odyssey" where the boy never knew his grandfather. But, the resemblance ends there. The main difference is that "Finder" has a younger kid. The other films I've seen that have young children in them are "Lost in Translation" and "The Polar Express". "Finder" is a film that does not have any kind of "hook". If you have any kind of connection with the young boy, you're going to be drawn in, but the viewer is not going to really know the boy at all. This movie is not going to make you want to go out and buy it. But, you will like it and you will think it's a good film. The film is based on a play, but that doesn't mean it's a bad film. The director has really done a nice job and I hope that the rest of the film will be great as well.

Joan Ellis photo
Joan Ellis

What was a fairly interesting film was turned into a poorly executed, tedious, badly acted piece of drivel. What the hell happened to writer/director Andrew Abbot? I'm sure his wife is just as disappointed with the result. I can't imagine that the Academy would be as unkind as they were to this movie. I don't know how anyone could have written the script and made it all that dry and boring. The actors who were in the movie are all pretty good actors and I think they did a pretty good job of their parts. If you have a chance to see this movie, don't. If you're the type of person that would like to see a good movie that's well-acted and has a good storyline, I suggest you don't waste your money on this movie. You're better off watching the whole film for free on a pirate site.

Teresa Richardson photo
Teresa Richardson

I came across this film and a very positive review on IMDb made me decide to watch it. I think the rating is much too low, it's not a comedy or a drama. It's a brilliant drama about the world's response to an elite 'genius' who is so great that he can be trusted to do his own research. So far the whole film is a masterpiece but it becomes even more brilliant when we realize that there is a very cynical man who has a very clear agenda. We feel that he is actually an agent of a vast conspiracy which is very powerful and he wants to destroy the world with his plan to create a new super intelligence. This is a brilliant and very well made movie which deserves a much higher rating. There is not much violence in it, which is really nice, but you have to watch the whole film to understand it. This is a real masterpiece. I loved it. 8/10.

Kathy photo

David Lynch's latest film, The Badlands (the title is a play on the phrase "badlands"), is an unpretentious film that follows two cops investigating the deaths of some Native Americans. It's a film that doesn't really get bogged down in the details of the crimes or the murders, and this is a huge plus. The plot is thin, and when the film doesn't go into the details, it's pretty boring, but it does have a great atmosphere. Lynch is not at his best in this film, but it's well worth a watch. The first half of the film is pretty slow, but once the story picks up, it's a very solid film. The performances are pretty good, with Robert Duvall (in one of his best performances) and Harvey Keitel (his best performance in a while) being the standouts. I really enjoyed this film and I think it's one of Lynch's best. It's certainly not for everyone's tastes, but for Lynch fans, this is a good film to watch. I recommend it to fans of Lynch, and I think it's worth a look.

Philip photo

As I said, I watched the film, and found it well worth the watch. I would highly recommend seeing it, especially if you like movies with an open mind and can watch different genres and perspectives. The main reason for that is because, the film has many ideas and opinions that are not all that well understood, so the filmmaker has to keep pushing the characters forward to show that he is not limiting his audience. I did not find it pretentious or overly-sentimental. I think that the film has a lot of potential to be more than just a one-sided character study, so to speak, but I found that it is not exactly that. I found that it was a good, but not great, movie. However, the movie does have a few surprises that I did not see coming. A few of the ideas that I saw in the film, I didn't see coming at all. This is one of those movies that I will be watching again. I would recommend this movie to people who like independent, but more cinematic films.

Michael photo

I really liked this film. It was set in a rural area of East Texas and it's supposed to be a small town of about 6,000. In my opinion it is actually the town of about 4,000, but not by a long shot. It's a good documentary. It does tell a good story and it's interesting to see what was going on in that community. I'm not sure if it's accurate or not, but I liked it. This is probably one of the better independent film efforts out there and it's definitely worth checking out. 7 out of 10.

Bobby Perry photo
Bobby Perry

On a rainy Sunday evening I had an hour and a half to kill. I wanted to see this film to take a break from my homework, and I thought, why not, as it is a surprisingly good film. And it is a film about teen sexuality that has a number of the actors from the cast of The Rookie. The director, the screenwriter and the producers have worked on the film before and have some pretty good credentials to boot. While the characters may not be the most developed or well-defined, they all act believably, and it is enjoyable to watch them. I am a bit of a jaded person when it comes to movies, and I am not a fan of the teen stuff (the worst offender for me) but the writing and the acting here was so good that I just couldn't resist and watched it. If you like teen movies this is one of the better ones to watch.

Wayne photo

Tarantino's first movie in English is not only a fantastic film, but also a welcome one. A fun, lighthearted movie that gives a positive spin on Vietnam. All of the scenes and ideas in this movie are a clear reference to the Vietnam war. In particular, the scene in which John Mason has to defend his friend's Vietnamese village and his intense battle to take control of the village is a direct reference to the Battle of Khe Sanh. It is a war movie that touches upon the realities of war, with a focus on the Vietnamese people. It is a fun movie, a good one to watch when you want to relax and have a good time. It is very well done.

Tyler M. photo
Tyler M.

I was surprised by this movie. It didn't feel like a typical chick flick. I think that it was a more mature movie, and I think the plot was also more intelligent than most chick flicks. The actors were good, and the directing was great. I hope to see more movies from this director. They have all the makings of a great movie.

Bruce photo

The plot of this film seems straightforward. We follow a man's descent into a madness. We meet a beautiful young woman (the director, Kim Basinger) and the pain in her life. We meet a younger man (Morgan Freeman) who seems to have a good relationship with his brother (Oscar winner, Philip Seymour Hoffman). They both have their own problems and are seeking ways to solve them. We find out more about the two, who have to deal with their families and their respective problems. I was surprised how the ending of the film was changed. As I mentioned earlier, the director (whose name escapes me) decided that his film was not finished. I found this to be a really good decision. I like the ending. I think the film was well acted. And I liked the music. I have never heard of the director, but he is a good director. My main criticism of this film is that I think there was too much time spent on the brother and the relationship between them. I would have preferred that they spent more time on the mother and her problems. The father's problems were not as important as the brother's. Also, I think the movie did not show the emotions well enough. At times, I was getting bored. This is the main reason I did not like the ending. There were some things I thought were done well, such as the use of music and the film was beautifully shot. But I think a much better director would have made this film. I give it a 7 out of 10. I really liked this film. It was interesting and worth the price of admission. I liked the director's style of telling a story. I think he did a good job. I would recommend this film to anyone who likes psychological thrillers, films that are beautifully shot, or just anyone who likes Kim Basinger. I hope you enjoy the film as much as I did.

Donna Hernandez photo
Donna Hernandez

One of the best looking films i have ever seen. and i have seen a lot. A very good story with well directed scenes and characters. Its a very good film with a lot of interesting plot twists. The actors were all good. One of the best things about the film was the score. The music was very good and fits the film perfectly. Some scenes with the guns and shootouts were very intense. My favorite scene was when Elroy is at the race track and he is in the car with his guns. The action was very well done and there was lots of violence and gunplay in the film. The actors all did a good job with their characters. I was surprised at how good Kiefer Sutherland was as Elroy. I never saw him in anything before and he was excellent as Elroy. He was very convincing in the role. One of my favorite parts of the film was when Elroy is in the bathroom with the dogs and he uses a gun to blow his nose. That was just so cool. I don't know why i didn't like it more. Maybe i was expecting too much. The plot was good, but i don't think it was all that good. I think it was more of a story about a man who really was addicted to gun violence. But the film could have done without some of the other scenes. The storyline was good, but it could have been better. The acting was good, but i think they could have been better. I think Elroy was good, but I never really cared for his character. He was just too one dimensional. The ending was nice but it was not a happy ending. It didn't make me happy. But it was a nice ending and i was happy. I was surprised at the movie but i didn't love it. But i liked it. Overall, the film is a good one and worth watching. I recommend it. 7.5/10

Tammy photo

An ex-policeman's first foray into the world of filmmaking is as interesting as it is visually striking. In this movie, we meet Stan Arden, the protagonist of the story, who is a retired police officer with a promising career ahead of him. When a young girl named Marisa (Olivia Morton) comes to town, she spends a night at Arden's house and invites him to dinner. But Arden has other plans for the night. He approaches Marisa and asks her for a date, and she agrees. But Marisa's father, Frank (Stephen Dillane), won't be satisfied until he gets to know his daughter's past. In the ensuing conversation, Arden discovers that Frank had his daughter killed when she was an infant. The only way Arden can get a good look at Marisa is to set her up with a man. In a surprising turn of events, he finds Marisa's father is in town and wants to meet with him. He arrives at the home, and the man appears to be a friend of Arden's. Arden takes him to his home, and they begin to talk about their past. It turns out that Marisa's father has had several affairs with other women, and Frank has been paying Marisa to have affairs with different men. She accepts the proposition and takes off to her father's house. At this point, Arden begins to learn more about Marisa's past and discovers that Frank is actually a professional gambler and a sexual predator. He wants to meet with Marisa again, but Arden must be careful not to reveal her true identity to her father, who has a drinking problem. Arden soon learns that Frank's life has been so troubled that he is running for office. Although Arden doesn't want to go back to his old life, he cannot bring himself to leave Marisa, who has to be separated from him. The movie ends with a look at the impact of Arden's revelations on the rest of the townspeople, who have also been affected by his professional indiscretions. Although it is not really a true story, the film was actually based on a true story, so it does a good job of bringing it to life. The plot is interesting, and the movie was filmed well. The acting is well done by all the cast members, especially Morton and Dillane. Morton is a fine actress and gives a very realistic performance. Dillane is very good in his role as the villain. This is a strong, well-made film that is worth watching. It is the kind of movie that I would recommend to others, even if it is not a true story. I would give it a 7/10.

Crystal E. photo
Crystal E.

With a lot of issues and many actors that I haven't seen in other movies, it was refreshing to see them in this. What I didn't like about this movie is that I think the first half was really good, but the second half was kind of slow. I'm sure this would have been much better if it had been a little bit longer and the acting was a little bit better. They just didn't cut any corners. It could have been great but I think they didn't really do much to enhance it. It just kind of stayed the same.

Linda B. photo
Linda B.

This is one of those movies that could have been so much more. I am giving it a seven because I thought the casting was pretty good. I think it is definitely worth seeing. But there is a problem with the movie. It starts out with an interesting premise. The basic idea of a girl who's adopted by an old man who raises animals as a hobby. It is an interesting story. And it is almost the only reason that you should see this movie. But the character development is rather bad. I'm not complaining about the story as much as the development of the characters. There are some really strong female characters in the movie. And I have no problem with that. But the main character in this movie is a girl who has the whole movie acting like a boy. The development of the main character is terrible. The acting is bad, the dialogs are bad, the acting is bad. But there is no way that this is good. Because it is not. I really think that the writing is not bad at all. It is just that the story is not very interesting and has the potential to be good, but it is just so much worse than good. The only thing that I really liked was the animal act. That was really good and very important. I really liked that. But the story is just so terrible. I really hope that they will make a good movie with that. And if they do, that is something that I would really like to see.

Cynthia Griffin photo
Cynthia Griffin

Like "Sopranos", "Gatherer" has an interesting premise and casts a fine actor in the lead role, but this is a poor film. The film is about a middle-aged lesbian who is always angry and always feels that she should be able to do something other than bitch about men, and tries to break into the city's major drug-selling operation in order to stop the person who sold her the drugs, so that she can tell him the truth. But when her ex-boyfriend ends up being arrested for a crime he didn't commit, the woman is forced to change her lifestyle and to go into a new phase of life, in order to get to the end of her suffering and get back to the good old days of doing drugs and being a bitch. What happens is that after a lot of periods of time, she finally decides that she should stop being a bitch and just stop being angry. The film is a very interesting and powerful one, but the story is weak and the characters are shallow, and the film is basically about a woman's search for revenge. "Gatherer" is definitely worth a look for fans of the two main stars, but it's not worth watching for the average moviegoer. My rate: 5/10

Alexander photo

This is a clever and extremely well-done film about the interplay between money and freedom, both of which play in a game of poker where the players are pitted against each other for a monetary prize. Some of the characters are also identified as being "power-players," and what I like most about the film is that it is constantly questioning the moral boundaries of its characters and showing how they can and sometimes do act without regard for the consequences of their actions. This is something that some films don't do so well, such as "The Gambler," which is a remarkably heavy-handed film that thinks it is saying something. The film does show how some people can fall into the temptation of using money to get ahead, but that is not the central theme of the film. The film does not really use the form of poker as it was meant to, but rather the form of gambling. I think the film does a good job in showing how, and in some cases, why, people gamble, and what the consequences of gambling are. As a film, this is very clever, and I think the film has a very realistic and compelling feeling. It is a very fun film that is well-acted and well-directed. If you enjoy films with a clever and realistic feel, you should definitely give this film a look.

Ethan Lawrence photo
Ethan Lawrence

Another critic of the movie has commented about the title of the movie, which I think is a little off, as it sounds like the title of the movie is "What Is Wrong With Us?" I think the title is a little far-fetched as it describes what the movie is about. I know that many people have complained about the movie being unrealistic, but I would say that the movie was realistic enough. This movie isn't for everyone. The movie is very realistic and has a lot of heart and feelings and the movie was able to capture some of those feelings. It is not for the movie-goer who has already seen some of the other movies that this one is compared to. This is a movie that people who have seen all of the other movies should watch. They will see something in it that they didn't see in the others. Overall, I think this movie is a very good one and will definitely be recommended to people who have seen all of the other movies it is compared to.

Alan photo

Even though I'm a huge fan of many of the actors in the movie, I found the script to be underwhelming. It was not scary in any sense of the word. It didn't have a good sense of atmosphere. There were parts that were not believable at all. It was a very slow paced movie. I've always found that slow paced movies that seem to be trying to be suspenseful actually make me bored. It was not very scary, the killings were not thrilling, and the characters were not that interesting. The only character that I found interesting was Paul, played by Stephen Lang. I've never been so bored watching a movie before, but I'm sure I'll be watching this again in the future.

Ruth photo

I went to this movie with very low expectations, but was very pleasantly surprised. There was plenty of humor throughout the movie, and there was a good story line and excellent acting. There were also several moments of thought provoking situations that made you think, which is not often in a movie of this kind. I really recommend this movie. I think that it is probably a little different from most movies you will see in the theaters, but I think that it is still worth your time. There were a few parts where it got a little boring, but if you are in the mood to relax and have a good time, then I think you should give this movie a shot.