A Doll's House

A Doll's House

Nora Helmer has years earlier committed a forgery in order to save the life of her authoritarian husband Torvald. Now she is being blackmailed lives in fear of her husband's finding out and of the shame such a revelation would bring to his career. But when the truth comes out, Nora is shocked to learn where she really stands in her husband's esteem.

Nora Helmer has years earlier committed a forgery in order to save the life of her authoritarian husband Torvald. Now she is being blackmailed lives in fear of her husband's finding out and... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


A Doll's House torrent reviews

Richie P (es) wrote: Absolutely one of the best Horror sequels I have ever seen. Set In the mood of a "Friday the 13th" type setting, Chromeskull seems to kick it up to a whole other level.

Matthew C (it) wrote: Gimmicky and ultimately quite stupid.

Buggy B (de) wrote: I can see how a lot of people wouldn't like this movie, I didn't think much of it the first time I saw it either, this time around I must have just caught it in the right mood because I really enjoyed it. It is one of the weaker Nicholas Sparks books though-as is this adaption although helped along by some A-list talent in Richard Gere, Diane Lane (and several lesser roles) who do the best they can with a nothing sort of story. I'll just say it, complete chick-flick including one hell of a tear-jerker ending. Both leads do a good job especially in the beginning when we see an intense, angry and frustrated Gere and a frazzled Lane. The romance follows a Doctor travelling to see his estranged son and a woman separated from her wayward husband and managing a North Carolina Inn for her friend. It all comes together when a major storm hits the coast and the two have to hunker down in the wind and dark. The Inn is gorgeous and almost becomes a character within itself -although I had to wonder about the decision to build it so precariously on the beach. I understand it's been destroyed by a real storm since filming, no wonder. 8/28/14

Film C (kr) wrote: It's a provocative and frustratingly told true story. The atrocities that happen and then the exploitation of a weak state is simply hard to fathom when you are part of the peace making process. You feel the leads frustration and emotion at not being able to do anything to help in this politically flawed and corrupt world.

StealthMarketer M (us) wrote: English subtitles. Interesting journey into the Jewish culture. Loved the story.

Jaime V (jp) wrote: Andre 3000 shines, music is good.

Private U (fr) wrote: Great film - Paprika Steen as fabulous as ever.

Joel N (ag) wrote: I can see what they were doing here, but ultimately, this was not my thing. They've copied too many plot points from romantic novels, and the movie has no energy.

Manu G (gb) wrote: True Crime. True Love. True Story.Good Film! There's nothing spectacularly creative about the story here...Excepting it's a pretty spectacular story which actually happened yet most of us, outside of NYC, never heard of. A true story told almost as straightforward as Hollywood can tell anything true which is to say: "sure, it's romanticized, but in a quite palatable way". The fact this is a true story defies all conventional beliefs about The Mob's armor plated invincibility. The real meat of the story is how the blind naivet of a small time kid with criminal tendencies can decimate the entire hierarchy of that famed Sicilian institution, even doing so in an almost comic fashion. Like all organized crime, even if you cut off the head and most of the body there's always those who remain ready to step up. There's the problem and the viewer just knows this really might go on for a short time, but there will be a reckoning to be dealt with. In spite of this predictability It's an entertaining ride with the gore pretty much parked at the door. It simply is a very solid movie that works and isn't in any way "another mob movie". Rob The Mob has a real heart front and center of which Pitt and Arianda are to be commended for. See this one as it is very good. A Queens couple who specialize in robbing mafia social clubs stumble upon a score bigger than they could ever imagine, becoming targets of both the mob and the FBI in the process.

sharon20 r (ca) wrote: Loved the movie from the first time I saw it and have re watched many many times over the years

Harry W (ca) wrote: I had no idea what to expect from Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?, but considering that it was the winner of multiple Academy Awards, it would most likely be a good film.Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? does not deviate far from its stage roots at all. It maintains the appropriate dramatisation of the material and keeps it within a small scale. Everything feels like a stage production but has the credibility and technical qualities of a film.To simplify what I'm saying, Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? feels like a stage production because it takes place within few sets and locations which feel genuine and embody the theatrical style of the original play at the same time. Also, the cinematography tends to film things from the audience's perspective which allows a third person view of things, and a lot of the shots are long ones instead of quick ones combined with a lot of editing. The scenery in the film is great and the cinematography captures every inch of it at a nice slow moving pace. The cinematography shifts its focus at a nice speed as well and it constantly keeps things at an interesting perspective.And as well as capturing the appropriate theatrical style of the film from a technical perspective, it does it from a storytelling perspective just as well because director Mike Nichols ensures that the dramatisation of the story stays true to its roots and that the actors follow on with the same dramatic style, and it is fairly impressive to say that this is his debut as a director of films.Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? has a simple story full of a lot of complex characters attempting to deal with a changing world and the drama that causes them to slowly disintegrate, and thanks to Mike Nichols' handling of the material it proves to be a well paced dramatic feature which harnesses all of his potential and serves as a strong adaptation of the play. Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? finds the fine line between being a cinematic piece and a stage production thanks to his careful direction, and the dramatic effect of the story ends up remaining as strong as the script and renders Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? a strong dramatic experience which is very character-oriented while keeping its focus very broad.As a largely theatrical film, the importance in Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? mostly rests on the performances of the cast which are excellent, particularly the Academy Award winning performance of legendary actress Elizabeth Taylor.Elizabeth Taylor is unrecognisable for her role in Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?. As she gained 30 pounds for the role and reinvented her look, she doesn't embody the woman deemed the most beautiful woman in the world at the time of the film and instead adopts the look of a simple attractive woman of age, an everywoman. She is recognisable for her role as an actress in the film because her dramatic strength as an actress just steals the screen. Her sharp and dramatic line delivery is matched only by the way she keeps her physicality in tune with her and expresses a lot of her emotions through her facial gestures. She is simply a screen-stealer in Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?, and it is a role significantly different to many others she has taken on. Yet it is one of the greatest of her career, and her strength as a lead actress has done nothing but grow over the years. The genuine way she interacts with the surrounding cast members is incredible, particularly with Richard Burton as their chemistry feels genuine. It is likely that this is true because of the fact that the two shared a complicated relationship in real life, and when it transitions onto the film screen the result is impeccable. Despite looking a lot different in Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?, Elizabeth Taylor is as beautiful as ever and stronger as an actress for taking an Oscar winning lead in the film.Richard Burton also gives a strong performance. As Elizabeth Taylor is the one dominating the screen in Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?, Richard Burton has a hell of a platform to step up to. Yet with his immense skill as an actor, he manages to do it. Richard Burton stays on the wrong end of all Martha's criticisms without ever breaking characters as George, and you can see the small elements of his character changing gradually as he develops over the course of the film while the drama unfolds. His line delivery is fierce, and when he sees fit he manages to grab the screen and grip the drama of the film in his hand with an undeniable tenacity. Richard Burton proves what makes him a great actor in Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?, and his lead performance is one of the most tense and powerful efforts of his entire career with an undeniable dramatic effect as the result.George Segal's supporting performance is an effective one as well because you can see how he lets his character develop over the course of the film as the dramatic situations grow in intensity, and his facial expressions and line delivery become more and more sharp as things happen which gives the story a good sense of movement.Lastly, Sandy Dennis' performance as Sunny was a nice touch to the cast as well, and her chemistry with George Segal was very effective. Similarly, you can see the drama of the film gradually taking its toll on her as it develops affects the viewers, making the experience of Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? well acted from every contributing cast member.So Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? is a bit of an old film and doesn't break its cinematic roots too much, but the power of the story's dramatic impact and the excellent lead performance from Elizabeth Taylor gives it more than enough credibility to succeed as a memorable feature.