A Place in the World

A Place in the World

Mario and Ana, in voluntary exile from Buenos Aires, live in a remote Argentine valley with their 12-year-old son Ernesto. Mario runs a school and a wool cooperative; Ana, a doctor, heads a clinic with Nelda, a progressive nun. Into this idealistic family comes Hans, a jaded Spanish geological engineer -- surveying the land for the local patron, to see if it can be dammed for hydro-electric power, which would drive the peasants from the land into the cities.

Mario and Ana, in voluntary exile from Buenos Aires, live in a remote Argentine valley with their 12-year-old son Ernesto. Mario runs a school and a wool cooperative; Ana, a doctor, heads a... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


You may also like

A Place in the World torrent reviews

Peter N (kr) wrote: Thai slapstick cinema at its lowest point.

Garrett S (it) wrote: with larry the cable guy, it's bound to be a disaster

Heather M (fr) wrote: Jackson and Harris were great in this movie. This story was very good and well paced. This movie is definitely worth a watch.

Jack G (es) wrote: Robert Redford has good intentions. To be sure, he is one of "those", the Hollywood liberals that just won't quit no matter what in trying to make films, from time to time, that try and change things. More power to him. But Lions for Lambs wont change anything, except maybe how some fans going into it will view Tom Cruise, if they've only seen his more action-movie heavy stuff. It's a work where the theme of "Iraq war, bad, Afghanistan-war, questionable" is pounded away like a solider's drum. While there is an interesting inter-play quality to the structure- and interplay in the sense of multiple short plays interwoven into a semi-cohesive whole- it never completely works because of the ups and downs that are working here. There is some of the most interesting dialog in a movie this year in Lions for Lambs, and as well some of the worst directing and just storytelling I've seen this year as well. It's a vicious kind of cycle. And, of course, it preaches to the choir.The Iraq war was a mistake- even Senator Jasper Irving admits this, albeit with his blame (rightfully, not so oddly enough) stretching to the media sitting across his desk in the form of a report. This is the bedrock that could've made a better film- or at least a better single play- that has Tom Cruise and Meryl Streep playing off each other for the better part of a third of the film. Watching Cruise play a GOP senator who believes sincerely everything he says, even as he smiles through his double-played teeth, is revelatory; it's arguably one of his best performances, if almost too easy. Who would've thought that he could move over some of the characteristics that critics have chided him for for years (jerky acting, a BS entitlement) and made it work splendidly for such a crazy neo-con? Meanwhile, Streep makes this another cake-walk, with her best moments when she's alone in the taxi leaving the interview with the senator, her reactions telling just as much, if not more so, than during (and enduring) it. The power-play between corrupt, power-hungry politician and the veteran reporter caught in over her head thanks to mass media is captivating.Unfortunately, the rest of the movie is hit or miss, mostly the latter; Redford plays a political science professor who tries to sway a smart-Aleck student who could be in danger of failing to the side of good by telling him about two students of him who were with enough conviction to enlist, and went to Afghanistan to fight despite the professor's protests. This conversation in the professor's office isn't half-bad, but when it switches to the actual battle scenes - which is mostly the two soldiers with broken legs embedded in a snowy Afghan mountain awaiting their doom - it's awful, the kind of 2nd rate World Trade Center maudlin soldier tripe that wouldn't make it past the studio heads had Redford not been at the helm (in fact, the ending, which might not be a shock to those who have seen their share of "valiant soldier" pictures, is especially offensive in how it is shot and edited, in a manner that is of the utmost exploitation of the audience).Ultimately, despite the interest that is there and the fine acting, there ends up being, between the three story lines, too much obvious proselytizing, nothing urgent that SHOULD be brought to the discussion; anyone who might be swayed (i.e., not to be stereotypical, conservatives who will only see the lame-brained Cruise action movie vehicles) won't want to see a movie where Cruise just sits in one room, in a suit, with no guns or action that he participates in. And anyone who's already on a liberal side could potentially see this as not merely the obvious stated again (that Bush sucks and Republicans can be really crazy) but propaganda. It's not badly made at all, and it is a writer's movie above all. I just wish it were better written, for the sake of the top-notch cast and the aspirations of the filmmaker- as earnest as he genuinely is in a time of perpetual cynicism- to make a difference.

Dave J (us) wrote: Tuesday, May 15, 2012 (2005) Raging Sharks SCIENCE FICTION HORROR Extremely low budget and straight to rental with some of the worst production values ever captured on film has orange crystals fall from the sky conveniently into one of the ocean's largest shark population turning them agressive as a result of consuming some of those crystals. The movie also has aliens reclaiming some of the crystals back which is a mixture between "Jaws" and "Deep Sea Blue". Cobin Berstain also stars as the captain of the submarine crew. 1/2 out of 4

Clayton K (ca) wrote: Cinematically beautiful, culturally taut, fairly compelling storyline.

Dammy G (es) wrote: Surprisingly for a direct to video movie, and prequel to The Prince of Egypt, this was better than it needed to be. Hell, I'd say it's one of Dreamworks best movies, and even better than theatrical released films like Shrek 2, or Over the Hedge.

Vi H (es) wrote: A movie for the music of Jimmy Cliff & the comedy of Robin Williams, plus the beauty of the islands. Take your time to appreciate this musical comedy.

Luc L (kr) wrote: A pointless story and not entertaining.

Tim S (kr) wrote: I'll be honest here. This movie is a complete blur to me. I remember a few things, but not enough to put together a storyline in my head that makes me understand it. What's sad about Track of the Moon Beast is that I watched it just recently, and I was quite awake when I watched it. The fact that I can't remember anything about it speaks volumes about its content. It's mainly just a blur of images and some semblance of a story, but none of it is memorable enough and nothing stood out to me. One can only hope that the Mystery Science Theater 3000 crew really stuck it to it, since it was featured on an episode of the show. They can be very good at that when given the right material, and this is right up their alley.

Drew M (nl) wrote: 5 Stars. Such a perfect, beautiful little film.

Private U (us) wrote: Like most early Soviet Propaganda pieces, "Arsenal" is a collage of images with a nearly incoherent plot. Marxist's like their hosts ignorant and impulsive. The anti-German sentiment is fun. The demonic laughter of one German soldier inhaling gas would make Groucho Marx have a field day. Much better than most early soviet propaganda pieces, "Arsenal" is mandatory viewing for anyone that is a fan of film history.

Jay B (kr) wrote: Still campy, but more fun than most. The effects actually hold up really well.

Jude P (br) wrote: High octane suspense.

Chris R (gb) wrote: Gotta love this movie