A Perfect Stranger

A Perfect Stranger

A television movie based on "A Perfect Stranger," Danielle Steel's novel about an attorney who falls in love with the young wife of a wealthy man who is dying.

Robert Urich as a lawyer in love with a woman who's married to a dying millionaire. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechers

A Perfect Stranger torrent reviews

Charles C (es) wrote: C'est un excellent film historique de gens de par chez nous :) j'ai bien appr (C)ci (C)

JJ J (es) wrote: Lots of kick ass transporting.

Alexandre B (es) wrote: Completement con. MAIS je me suis bien marre, un bon navet quoi.

Blake P (au) wrote: "Men learn to love the person they're attracted to, and women become more and more attracted to the person that they love," Graham Dalton (James Spader) says. He's heard the quote somewhere in the past, but he can't quite recall its origin. Was it from a misty romantic comedy? A philosophical book? Who cares: the characters in "sex, lies, and videotape" have certainly not been lucky enough in life to make that romantic sounding sentiment a reality, spending the next 99 minutes exploring differing levels of sexual dissatisfaction. Most famous for starting the independent film movement back in 1989, "sex, lies, and videotape" is possibly one of those movies that thrives on its buzz but, as a standalone film, is underwhelming. Perhaps I am expecting too much. Should I not? The release poster flaunts an imposing amount of enticing quotes from glowing critical reviews, calling it things like "an edgy, intense comedy!" or "the season's smartest and funniest film!" Considering every headline ends in an exclamation point and uses labels like "comedy" and "funniest" for description, I guess I anticipated a callously absurd dialogue driven film, a "Cat on a Hot Tin Roof" for the next generation. "sex, lies, and videotape" turned out to be none of the things I thought it would be. To be fair, I should not be letting my expectations get in the way of my critique, but like the release of a new Prince album, there is an unavoidable hope that something game changing will be at store. But sometimes, hope isn't as strong as you'd like it to be, and the film, dare I say it, is overrated. It's intrigued with dialogue and likes to play with it, not quite unsentimental and not quite stilted. The film has the talky honesty of an Off-Broadway play that quakes in the escalating importance of conversation - but it doesn't tremble in the same way "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?" did, which had such boiling dialogue that the characters became more interesting than any sort of story. "sex, lies, and videotape" analyzes the sex lives of four characters: John (Peter Gallagher), his wife Ann (Andie MacDowell), her sister Cynthia (Laura San Giacomo), and John's old college friend, Graham. John is a fruitful yuppie who disrespects his marriage by sleeping with the abrasive Cynthia, who is irritated by her sister's lifelong, despicable goody-two-shoes personality. Ann takes comfort in the financially stable confines of her union; she has lost interest in sex, believing it to be unimportant in comparison to other types of human interaction. Graham, coming into town nine years after his last encounter with John, is impotent, receiving his erotic kicks by recording women talk about sex in front of a low-budgeted camera. By the end of the film, Cynthia and Ann will have partaken in Graham's eccentric means of arousal, changing their lives for the better. Writing reviews for films like "sex, lies, and videotape" are the hardest kinds of reviews to write; the dialogue is good, the direction is good, the acting is good, the editing is good, etc., etc., etc., the only flaw lying in the fact that I plain and simply did not connect with the film emotionally. Many laud it for the same reasons that I didn't much enjoy it; the slice-of-life earnestness felt anticlimactic to me, while others appreciated its realism. I never felt like I knew Ann and Graham well enough to sympathize with their paralleling frigidity; their personal hardships didn't leave me feeling, well, anything. But if I didn't savor "sex, lies, and videotape" as much as I would have liked to, there is still plenty of things it does well. Soderbergh's handling of the direction and screenplay is methodical and gradual, hugely mature for a filmmaker who was only 26 at the time. The voyeuristic attitude of the film is uncomfortable but perfectly watchable, the sexual issues between the characters contrasting with complementary dysfunction; the acting is similarly balanced, the actors all subtle but well-cast. "sex, lies, and videotape" makes for a number of firsts. It was Steven Soderbergh's first feature in a versatile and impressive career. It was the first time the actors had been able to strut their acting abilities with such unbridled intensity. It was the film that made the independent film industry a force to be reckoned with. I didn't love it, but you might.

Jens T (kr) wrote: The Laurel and Hardy classic Sons of the Desert is how embarrassing it might sound is my first Laurel and Hardy film, and to be honest this might not be my cup of tea. I rather think it's kind of childish, and that the characters are kind of to dumb. So I ask my inner child and asked him if he liked it, and he said yes, they are playful and have the right amount of charm, specially when Hardy's life gets mad, is probably the funniest parts of the film. So for that I give it a thumbs up after all.

Kyle K (jp) wrote: Val kilmer is hilarious in this movie

Rangan R (de) wrote: Ending up solving mysteries between two people risking his own family.The film was based on the book named 'Manhattan Nocturne'. Excellently made film, it's the director's first feature film as well. He did not get the top actors, but these actors were the good ones. Adrien Brody and Yvonne Strahovski were amazing their respective roles. It was not a detective story, but very close to being one. So if you love crime-mysteries, then you should try this. The tone of the film makes very interesting. It's not about the question of story prediction, but how cleverly it was advanced like the characters were transformed compared to the opening and the conclusion.Some films open strongly, but ends poorly. In this case, the opening was average, but ended on a high. The main reason is the middle parts, keeping all contents together and developing some suspense with a couple of quick twists made this film to reach the expectation made by its viewers. It was a tale of a recently famed reporter finds an affair with a young widow, despite he's married with a child. Soon, he discovers some mysterious men are watching him, who threatening his family as well. How he gets out of that trouble by finding reasons behind it is what the rest of the film narrates.It looked a lot like a television film. Not because of the production quality, actually the production was top class, but the story and its narration felt kind of like a mini-series type. I don't know how many books are there, but I want this to continue, at least as a television film series. One of the best of its kind, I almost liked everything about the film. But I still feel I underrated it, at the end I'm satisfied with what I gave. Definitely, I recommend it.7/10