One evening, a woman enters a police station and confesses to having killed her violent husband several years ago. As she listens to her fantastic story, the policewoman is increasingly less inclined to arrest her. Just why is the woman so eager to confess her crime, and why is the policewoman so reluctant to take her into custody?
- Stars:Sophie Marceau, Miou-Miou, Yann Ebonge, Marc Barbé, Valérie Bodson, Arthur Buyssens, Vadim Goudsmits, Claudine Pelletier, Jenny Clève, Roger De Moerloose, Dinara Drukarova, Serge Hollogne, Eric Godon, Frédéric Frenay, Patrick Hastert,
- Director:Jean-Paul Lilienfeld,
- Writer:Jean Teulé (novel), Jean-Paul Lilienfeld (scenario)
Un soir, une femme se rend dans un commissariat pour confesser le meurtre de son mari violent, commis il y a plusieurs années... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Arrest Me torrent reviews
(nl) wrote: ... What the fuck was that?!
(jp) wrote: Funny and sentimental.
(ca) wrote: I think it's funny that critics gave this movie so much shit, because it really isn't THAT bad. The movie is just really, really underrated.
(ag) wrote: this movie is the sequel to one of the greatest animations of the 1980's and i have no idea what the hell went wrong but something did.
(kr) wrote: No thanks - Not interested
(it) wrote: A decent idea is turned into a sub-standard comedy which is ruined mainly by Cedric The Entertainer's limp & confusing cameo. Making it less of an out-&-out comedy & adding more of a crime thriller element, as well as the development between Jones & the cheerleaders being less cheesy would have resulted in a better film.
(de) wrote: Two Gatlin teen boys are adopted by a Chicago couple with the youngest having a hypnotic power over other youth. Has its good points but I'm still not buying into the "he who walks behind the rows" force as a credible premise to build a series on.
(ca) wrote: This is not purely a martial art movie. If you don't want to understand the story, then you cannot enjoy the essence of it.
(es) wrote: Unapologetic Samurai swashbuckling.
(jp) wrote: Thank goodness filmmakers no longer feel the need to bluntly state their lesson right at the beginning of the movie. As shitty as Requiem for a Dream is, imagine how much worse it would be if it opened with a title card that said "Drugs are bad, we hope to teach you that with this story". D.W. Griffith is rarely subtle, and again here's a tale without a shred of nuance, ambiguity, or depth. It's all right there in the open, a morality play based on sexual politics that are now severely outdated. Fucking long, too. Two and a half hours, much of which is taken up by dumb comedy bits involving secondary characters. Things pick up a little at the end, when Lillian Gish FINALLY speaks up for herself and there's an exciting little bit of business. But it didn't really make up for the rest of it, which I found pretty dull. On a technical level, there were just a few poetic shots... the rest of it wasn't bad, but didn't seem terribly impressive even for 1920.