#FUuumovies | All Systems Operational Normally

Watch Tiempo de morir

(481) 7.4 90 min 1966

Tiempo de morir is a movie starring Marga López, Jorge Martínez de Hoyos, and Enrique Rocha. After serving his conviction, a former gunman returns to his town planning to live a quiet life, however, the sons of a man he killed have...

Starring
Enrique Rocha, Marga López, Jorge Martínez de Hoyos, Alfredo Leal
Genres
Western, Drama
Director
Arturo Ripstein

Disclaimer: This site does not store any files.

Product details

Audio English  Deutsch  Italiano  Español  Français  Gaeilge  Svenska  Nederlands
Subtitles 日本語  Čeština  Português  Australia  한국어  Filipino  Tiếng Việt  हिन्दी 
Quality 480p, 720p, 1080p, 2K, 4K
Genres Western, Drama
Director Arturo Ripstein
Writer Carlos Fuentes, Gabriel García Márquez, Gabriel García Márquez
Stars Enrique Rocha, Marga López, Jorge Martínez de Hoyos, Alfredo Leal
Country Mexico
Also Known As Time to Die, Καιρός να πεθάνεις, Zeit des Sterbens, Un temps pour mourir, Tempo de Morrer, Czas umierania
Runtime 1H 30M
Description For killing in a duel, Juan Sayago (Jorge Martínez de Hoyos) is sent to jail, and after serving 18 years of conviction , returns to his hometown, with the intention of living a normal life along Mariana Sampedro (Marga López) but the sons of the man he murdered are bent on revenge.

Top reviews

Sunday, 05 Apr 2020 23:36

The western hero with his death comes with a lot of sense. In spite of the lack of moral standards, the hero finds his way in the world, also with the most comical deaths. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Saturday, 04 Apr 2020 23:34

The first half of Almodovar's film consists of images, imagery, images, which are the dominant energy of the film. In the second half, it becomes an existential drama, a drama of a ghost. It is an excellent film, full of images, but not of the film itself. The image of the film should be as important as the image of the title, the director himself. Almodovar's images, although they are graphic, are not always explicit. His images are complex, but they are not too complicated. Almodovar wants to get a better understanding of a mass of people, or a very large and diverse population. In fact, Almodovar never calls himself an artist, but an artist. There is no essential difference between Almodovar and a video-maker or a painter. They both create images and use them to express some idea. In Almodovar's films, the images are the messages. The film is a battle of images, an image war, a battle of concepts, images of life and death, images of mortality. "Son of the Desert" is a far from conventional Almodovar film. I don't know if it is a good film, or not, and maybe it is a bad film. Maybe it is a good film if you have the desire to watch something different than what you usually see on the screen. Maybe it is a bad film if you don't have the desire to watch something different. I don't know. I don't care. The first half of the film is the same Almodovar we have seen before, with his formal reflections on the nature of violence and death and how that violence is transmitted to the image. Almodovar's images, although they are very graphic, are not always explicit. They have little meanings, or if they have a meaning they are not very clear. Almodovar wants to tell us something about the human life, or he is not clear. The second half of the film is also Almodovar. It is also about human life. It is also about death, it is also about life and death. It is also about images, but it is not clear that these images are just images. Almodovar tells us about death, it is about human life and it is about images. And this is a very complex Almodovar film. But Almodovar's images are also images. They can be translated into one of the terms, "a piece of art", and for this reason Almodovar is an artist. And we can't really take Almodovar's images, which are very graphic, and translate them into another term. We can't translate them into another language. He has only one language, and that language is his images. Sometimes we can translate them into other terms, but they are always images. So that it is a very complex film. The film is not that simple. It is one of the best films of the last decade. But it is not really a Almodovar film. Almodovar is a complex human being. But it is still a very complex human being. Almodovar's image war is not the only thing that is in the film. It is a continuation of Almodovar's own image war, which is not very difficult to imagine. Almodovar says a lot about the nature of violence and death and about human life, and a lot of these things are shown through his images. But the image war is not the only thing in the film. Almodovar's other two major themes are human life and images. Both are used by Almodovar in a very complex way. Almodovar is a person who creates images, and he shows us images. Sometimes he shows us pictures of dead people, sometimes he shows us pictures of scenes in a museum. Sometimes Almodovar shows us pictures of a very large population. But mostly Almodovar shows us images, or the image of a woman, or of a car. In these images we see the faces of the people, and sometimes the faces of his family and his friends. Sometimes the images are violent and the violence is represented by the images. Sometimes the images are sometimes very quiet, and sometimes they are so noisy that you cannot help but to burst out laughing. We have a lot of different emotions in this film. Sometimes we see the violence in the film, sometimes we see the violence in Almodovar's own image war. Sometimes we see the image of the grave, sometimes we see the image of the image of a
Tuesday, 31 Mar 2020 14:04

When Elvira (Elena Armendariz) comes back from a mission, she finds her husband and her beloved "buddy" (Elmer Brice) in a kind of strange limbo, together in the cabin in the woods, both dreaming of the supposed death of their child. "Si no eres poco" tells the story of a woman who loses her son, and a few years later becomes obsessed with finding him again. This film is very very good and very stylish. It has a very nice story with wonderful dialogs, and the photography is excellent, without being too abstract or pretentious. The cinematography is great, the script is good and the acting is so-so, as I already said, the cast is very good, the performances are quite natural. But of course, the directing is very impressive and it is very good to watch a good film directed by Rene Goscinny. The direction is very beautiful and the filming is very good, the music is very good and the sound is good. The film has a great story, but it is not as great as I expected it to be. The story is simple and really is not complicated at all. The film has a very good and enjoyable story and I think the first half of the film is good. The story is interesting and the acting is not bad. However, the second half is very disappointing. I think that the second half of the film tries to imitate the first half with some slight changes, but it is still not as good as the first half. So, the film fails to get my attention, because it has too many things in it. I am not saying that it is bad, but I think that it is very overrated. There are some scenes that are very boring and really annoying. The cast is very good, the photography is great and the direction is very good. But the second half is very disappointing. There are a lot of things in the second half that are not very good. I think that the first half is a very good movie and the second half a very good movie. The second half is not very good. 7/10.
Monday, 30 Mar 2020 22:58

People are dying in the old west, but a bounty hunter named Joshu will stop at nothing to get his hands on a gang's cache of gold. He is aided in his efforts by a woman named Rosa, who works as a model for a soap opera, and a religious figure named Pin, whose teachings center on the importance of the free market and individual liberty. Rosa's religious beliefs prove too much for Joshu, however, and he becomes a believer in the teachings of the Pin, who in turn leads him to the town of Kuchum, where the reward for the men who help him is far greater than the amount of gold on the town's premises. Joshu is captured, and after convincing Rosa to tell Pin that he wants to make a deal, he is put in jail, but is rescued by the mysterious life-like-something that Rosa is tending to, and set free, taking with him a bomb. There are two aspects of this film that I enjoyed. First, there was the dynamic between Rosa and Joshu, a dynamic that reflects the tensions in the town of Kuchum. Joshu is much more of a person to Rosa than she is, but it is also the way Joshu responds to her actions that resonates. Second, and most importantly, this is a film that has an interesting political and philosophical subtext. Rosa's teachings are seen in a negative light, and Joshu's motivations are very different from what Rosa sees in him. Rosa's teachings are taken more seriously than Joshu's, and Joshu is seen as a Christian, and Rosa is more of a shaman, who is a great teacher of her faith. It is this element of the film that I enjoyed the most, and I think the film is a great example of the sort of philosophy that is absent in most Western films today. It is worth watching, but I feel as though it would be interesting for someone who does not know Spanish to be able to more fully understand what is going on. A great film, with some good aspects and a bad aspect, but a worthwhile and memorable film.
Sunday, 29 Mar 2020 07:52

The Spanish Civil War was one of the most brutal episodes of the 20th Century. The movie focuses on the struggle for independence between the Catalan rebel army and the republican army of Spain. For me, it is a combination of "Fantasy of death" with "Tierra de las manos" (The Monte Cristo). The movie is set in 1871 in a small coastal town in Spain called Catalunya. The movie is based on the novel by Gerardo Hernandez, and is based on the true story of Llopis Muelen, a peasant-soldier who lost all of his friends in the uprising. His wife, Isabel, is a sheiress to a large textile mill and her father has died in a battle. Isabel takes the new heir to the mill, Francisco, and leaves Llopis's life behind. To make a living, she works as a prostitute and dreams of a prosperous, idyllic life, when the war breaks out and the republicans are victorious. She wants to join a guerrilla army and fight for the independence of the country. She encounters a young man from the town, and we follow her on a journey of discovery. In the end, the revolutionary leader of the republic, Josep Bosch, persuades her to join the republican army, and the rest is history. In the end, the movie is one of those rare and interesting gems where the Spanish Civil War may have actually been a more powerful force than the war itself. After the movie was over, I was happy to find out that I had never heard about it before. I should have taken a second look. The acting was spectacular, as always. Helen Mirren was especially great as the woman who has to choose between her love and her ideals.
Saturday, 28 Mar 2020 16:49

I enjoyed this film, but I don't understand the overwhelming negative reviews. I think those who were disappointed in it were really disappointed in the fact that they didn't get what they wanted. Yes, it's about a Native American hunt party and the clash of cultures between them and the whites, but it was all in the name of authenticity. In order to give their viewers what they wanted, they had to make a movie that didn't follow the fiction of the book. Why? Well, I suppose the people who didn't like it didn't like the fact that they had to suspend their disbelief, or that they were fooled by the artistic credentials of the film. But, I think the movie failed as a whole. The movie was too long and clunky. The cast was good, but there wasn't anything spectacular about it. The story was a long drawn out sequence of vignettes where everybody had to tell some story about who they were, what they were, how they came to be, etc. At the end, they all just sort of woke up and said, "We can't just walk away from this. We're not going to live in obscurity forever. We have to be part of something." It was a shame because there was a lot of information there that was very interesting, if you could get past the main story and the lack of characters. I think this would have made a much better movie, if it had been shorter, because it would have made it a more interesting story. The biggest flaw is the lack of character development. None of the characters are developed at all, and it seems that they were chosen because they looked "realistic" or because they were the only person who was a native American. There are also plenty of scenes that are simply unnecessary, or seem to be a waste of time. I don't know, maybe it's a character flaw, but I was sorry to see that they left that out. Overall, I recommend this movie. I think it's an interesting and interesting story, and I think that it's a real shame that people are so uninterested in seeing a movie like that. I hope that people learn that they don't need to be perfect to be watched and be respected. I'd love to see this movie again someday. I think that it would be a shame not to, since I think it is very creative and interesting. As for the cast, I think that the actors did a good job with what they had, but the story itself is too clunky and to me boring.
Thursday, 19 Mar 2020 05:32

I watched this film on a rainy Saturday afternoon, and was surprised to find that my wife and I laughed out loud. Most of the time we have watched a film that makes us feel sad. But this one kept us laughing out loud. The atmosphere was really great. The different parts of the film had a great feeling of being alive. I also liked the fact that there were no long shots or long-shots. And you could really see the actors reactions. It was very realistic and you could feel what the actors were feeling. I was very impressed with how they filmed the entire film. They made the actors and actors in the film seem like people who lived like that at the time. It was the same for the townspeople. The shooting of the film was also very well done. We got to see how they were facing their issues and how they dealt with them. It was great. The characters were very well written. I also liked the fact that the director was able to make us feel like we were in the village when it happened. There were some parts of the film that were very disturbing, but for the most part, we were able to handle it. I believe that the most important thing to me was the fact that we were able to feel what the characters were feeling. This is something that we usually don't really get a chance to experience in films. The story was great. It was very realistic, as we usually don't get to see in films. But it was also very good. The pacing was good and the performances were great. I highly recommend this film to anyone who is interested in being involved in something that is well done.


Write a review