A Wife's Heart

A Wife's Heart

Kiyoko (Takamine Hideko) and her husband want to open a coffee shop. She becomes increasingly close to the bank clerk (Mifune Toshiro) she's asked for a loan.

Kiyoko (Takamine Hideko) and her husband want to open a coffee shop. She becomes increasingly close to the bank clerk (Mifune Toshiro) she's asked for a loan. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechers

A Wife's Heart torrent reviews

Stuart K (au) wrote: Written and directed by James Ponsoldt, (Off the Black (2006), The Spectacular Now (2013) and The End of the Tour (2014)), this low budget drama was filmed in 19 days on a shoe-string budget of $500,000. On page, this could have been a depressing and preachy look at how drink makes demons of us all, but there's something human about the film, and it actually finds humour in it's darkness. Elementary teacher Kate Hannah (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) is married to Charlie (Aaron Paul), but she has an alcohol problem, and she has frequently come to work either hungover or still drunk. When she vomits in class, School principal Mrs. Barnes (Megan Mullally) worries for her wellbeing, but Kate lies and says she's pregnant. Her co-worker Dave (Nick Offerman) finds out about Kate's drinking habit, she makes him promise not tell, Dave reluctantly agrees, but only if she goes to AA meetings. There, she meets Jenny (Octavia Spencer), who shows her there's more to life than drink, but Kate has a lot of baggage in life making her drink. Despite being made for nearly next to nothing, it has the appearance of an Oscar contender, as the performances by Winstead and Paul are stunning, and they capture what it's truly like to be drunk. While it looks fun, it takes a serious toll on people. This is a realistic and down to earth look at how people deal with it.

Asia M (kr) wrote: To me spiderman is the best superhero ever to me

Ciaran S (es) wrote: I doubt this boring film

Simon P (ca) wrote: Ultra realistic film performed by non-professional actors, it's like an Israeli version of Gomorrah with a Pulp Fiction style narrative. Very impressive.

Adam S (es) wrote: A great movie with a completely moronic ending. You wind up watching an entire movie that literally has no conclusion so you just waste your entire time watching a movie that ends abruptly without any closure on anything the plot tries to develop. Absolutely stupid.

FilmGrinder S (it) wrote: 72% The type of action movie where guns never run out of ammo. First time I've seen Griffen as a bad guy, a thug no less.

Colton G (ru) wrote: Boring...still...not as bad as the recent decline in LDS cinema has taken us...

David M (de) wrote: The 3rd (of 4) Star Trek films to star The Next Generation crew (i.e Picard and co, rather than Shatner), before the reboot of the JJ Abrams verse, this is the one in which the crew of the Enterprise-E end up acting against orders when those orders are for them to relocate a society from a planet - a planet, that, it transpires, is effectively the space equivalent of the Fountain of Eternal Youth.Personally, I feel that this is not as good as the previous film ('First Contact'), but is better than the succeeding ('Nemesis'), neither of which are as good as the 'reboot' two ('Star Trek' and 'Into Darkness')

Jess L (gb) wrote: Very hit and miss, some scenes were fantastic others I wanted to end fast. McKellen was wonderful fragile and mysterious, Fraser was buff but his Frankenstein silhouette to end the film was laughable. At the core a very interesting story but lacked a certain punch for me.

OliverTodd H (ru) wrote: For an old film, this was pretty good! It remained interesting throughout the film figuring out what are the clues to get them out. Just wish it explained why each character was there a little more and showed a better ending, but I guess the sequel is out to possible answer that.

Will M (nl) wrote: Great, underrated old charmer. Ginger Rogers can be so lovely and tender in comic roles when paired with top talent (see also Monkey Business).

Curtis H (mx) wrote: The very first Martin and Lewis double team has some great moments and is an enjoyable watch. The mishaps of Lewis in his Army trading camp are hilarious and Martin creates a great character as the big man always looking out for Jerry. Laughter abounds.

Harry W (br) wrote: Winning the Academy Award for Best Picture and led by a performance from Morgan Freeman, Driving Miss Daisy sounded like an entertaining romp.The central problem in Driving Miss Daisy is the fact that the story development, or lack thereof, is really poor. There is no real consistency in the narrative as the story unfolds without much of a direct path, opting instead to go into a series of vignettes built on characterizing the relationship between Hoke Colburn and Daisy Werthan without much consistency with story development. Driving Miss Daisy is not a film about story, it is one about characters. As the relationship between them is explained and they personally develop through all the banter that they share there is a constant sense of comic charm while the drama in the film takes a back seat to it, but it just doesn't seem like enough. The film is all about the main two characters who are both stereotypes which means that the precise level of meaningfulness in them is limited primarily to the comedic gimmick. Because of this, when Driving Miss Daisy makes its half-assed attempts to be dramatic, all it does is clash with the comic themes of the film. The problem I found with Driving Miss Daisy was that it played it too safe with its racial themes and turned them simply into an overly tame sense of comedy. It is a very light film which ignores most of the dramatic material, so the fact that it even bothers with it is puzzling to me. Driving Miss Daisy is a very simple film, mostly a comedy but with subtle elements of drama which it failed to capitalise on, and I can deal with that. But my expectations for it were too high. Why? Because Driving Miss Daisy won the Academy Award for Best Picture, among three others. I don't think it is too much to ask that a film which receives such acclaim and recognition to be insightful or well structured, but that is simply not the case. Driving Miss Daisy lies mainly in the heart of two characters who change as their relationship develops, but the story does not develops with it and instead cuts between several periods of time without much in the way of a valid transition. The film is poorly structured, and despite the screenplay being rich with intelligent banter and some funny moments, it comes up short in the story department. I really didn't learn anything I didn't already know from Driving Miss Daisy, it simply took elements that I had seen in other films and churned them out for comic benefit. It succeeded at that, but only to a very tame extent while ignoring its dramatic potential or going to any sort of edgy extent.The humour in Driving Miss Daisy is built on the clash of character stereotypes: the grouchy old Caucasian woman and somewhat uneducated yet wise African-American man. The banter they go through as a certain distinctive charm to it, but the PG rating of the film limits its ability to really capitalise on many themes of racism in a humourous manner that much of the time, instead paving the way to do it in a strictly dramatic one. It does so in an effective way, but since Driving Miss Daisy wants to be a warm film which balances both comedy and drama, the fact that the comedy in the film failed to take advantage of its potential made it a rather tame film in parts. It is mostly well scripted, but it truly had the potential to be so much more. The fact that it didn't reach the heights it could have yet still went on to win so many awards really puzzles me. If anything, Driving Miss Daisy just feels dated now and is clearly not going to touch viewers today in the same way that it did once upon a time. But still, there is no denying that Driving Miss Daisy is a stylish film which is good looking and acted excellently.Although the character Morgan Freeman portrays in Driving Miss Daisy has moments of going into very racially stereotypical territory, as a whole he makes a likable presence as the lead in Driving Miss Daisy. He makes use of that stereotypical element as a way of projecting the lack of education that Hoke Colburn has received while also using his wisdom, honesty and charisma to project a sense of likability. He genuinely makes a strong character out of the stereotype by putting genuine spirit into the role and interacting with the surrounding cast with a real sense of energy, making the film worth the viewing.Jessica Tandy also makes an interesting lead. Taking on the archetype of the bitter old Caucasian woman, Jessica Tandy gradually breaks free of the limitations put in place by that and develops in the part. Jessica Tandy is always a fairly funny figure in her role as the titular Miss Daisy, and she gradually puts more meaning into the part as it progresses. She becomes more likable and adds a stronger touching sentiment to the film as it goes through the themes of racism in the tale. She really plays the part with a sense of determination because the elements of grouchiness in her character and her interactions with Morgan Freeman really come off as strong. Her dedication to the role comes off successfully, and so she makes a strong duo with Morgan Freeman.Dan Akroyd also delivers a nice supporting effort, playing a likable role as the disgruntled son of Daisy Werthan who has to put up with all of her annoying banter in a funny and entertaining fashion.So Driving Miss Daisy is a somewhat funny film with strong performances from Morgan Freeman and Jessica Tandy who share a strong chemistry as their archetypes clash on screen, but the humour is as tame as the drama while the story has no development and is poorly structured, making the entire feature feel rather dated. Winning the Academy Award for Best Picture and led by a performance from Morgan Freeman, Driving Miss Daisy sounded like an entertaining romp.The central problem in Driving Miss Daisy is the fact that the story development, or lack thereof, is really poor. There is no real consistency in the narrative as the story unfolds without much of a direct path, opting instead to go into a series of vignettes built on characterizing the relationship between Hoke Colburn and Daisy Werthan without much consistency with story development. Driving Miss Daisy is not a film about story, it is one about characters. As the relationship between them is explained and they personally develop through all the banter that they share there is a constant sense of comic charm while the drama in the film takes a back seat to it, but it just doesn't seem like enough. The film is all about the main two characters who are both stereotypes which means that the precise level of meaningfulness in them is limited primarily to the comedic gimmick. Because of this, when Driving Miss Daisy makes its half-assed attempts to be dramatic, all it does is clash with the comic themes of the film. The problem I found with Driving Miss Daisy was that it played it too safe with its racial themes and turned them simply into an overly tame sense of comedy. It is a very light film which ignores most of the dramatic material, so the fact that it even bothers with it is puzzling to me. Driving Miss Daisy is a very simple film, mostly a comedy but with subtle elements of drama which it failed to capitalise on, and I can deal with that. But my expectations for it were too high. Why? Because Driving Miss Daisy won the Academy Award for Best Picture, among three others. I don't think it is too much to ask that a film which receives such acclaim and recognition to be insightful or well structured, but that is simply not the case. Driving Miss Daisy lies mainly in the heart of two characters who change as their relationship develops, but the story does not develops with it and instead cuts between several periods of time without much in the way of a valid transition. The film is poorly structured, and despite the screenplay being rich with intelligent banter and some funny moments, it comes up short in the story department. I really didn't learn anything I didn't already know from Driving Miss Daisy, it simply took elements that I had seen in other films and churned them out for comic benefit. It succeeded at that, but only to a very tame extent while ignoring its dramatic potential or going to any sort of edgy extent.The humour in Driving Miss Daisy is built on the clash of character stereotypes: the grouchy old Caucasian woman and somewhat uneducated yet wise African-American man. The banter they go through as a certain distinctive charm to it, but the PG rating of the film limits its ability to really capitalise on many themes of racism in a humourous manner that much of the time, instead paving the way to do it in a strictly dramatic one. It does so in an effective way, but since Driving Miss Daisy wants to be a warm film which balances both comedy and drama, the fact that the comedy in the film failed to take advantage of its potential made it a rather tame film in parts. It is mostly well scripted, but it truly had the potential to be so much more. The fact that it didn't reach the heights it could have yet still went on to win so many awards really puzzles me. If anything, Driving Miss Daisy just feels dated now and is clearly not going to touch viewers today in the same way that it did once upon a time. But still, there is no denying that Driving Miss Daisy is a stylish film which is good looking and acted excellently.Although the character Morgan Freeman portrays in Driving Miss Daisy has moments of going into very racially stereotypical territory, as a whole he makes a likable presence as the lead in Driving Miss Daisy. He makes use of that stereotypical element as a way of projecting the lack of education that Hoke Colburn has received while also using his wisdom, honesty and charisma to project a sense of likability. He genuinely makes a strong character out of the stereotype by putting genuine spirit into the role and interacting with the surrounding cast with a real sense of energy, making the film worth the viewing.Jessica Tandy also makes an interesting lead. Taking on the archetype of the bitter old Caucasian woman, Jessica Tandy gradually breaks free of the limitations put in place by that and develops in the part. Jessica Tandy is always a fairly funny figure in her role as the titular Miss Daisy, and she gradually puts more meaning into the part as it progresses. She becomes more likable and adds a stronger touching sentiment to the film as it goes through the themes of racism in the tale. She really plays the part with a sense of determination because the elements of grouchiness in her character and her interactions with Morgan Freeman really come off as strong. Her dedication to the role comes off successfully, and so she makes a strong duo with Morgan Freeman.Dan Akroyd also delivers a nice supporting effort, playing a likable role as the disgruntled son of Daisy Werthan who has to put up with all of her annoying banter in a funny and entertaining fashion.So Driving Miss Daisy is a somewhat funny film with strong performances from Morgan Freeman and Jessica Tandy who share a strong chemistry as their archetypes clash on screen, but the humour is as tame as the drama while the story has no development and is poorly structured, making the entire feature feel rather dated.

Naranek K (es) wrote: a almost perfect film. think about this : What will George R R Martin do if he found out that all the characters he killed ( in Game of Thrones ) were real ?