Belle da morire

Belle da morire

Man seduces woman , chucks her , she commits suicide , then not learning his lesson he continues in his ways , his conquests then start turning up dead and the race to get to the bottom of the mystery begins...

Man seduces woman , chucks her , she commits suicide , then not learning his lesson he continues in his ways , his conquests then start turning up dead and the race to get to the bottom of the mystery begins... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechers

Belle da morire torrent reviews

Andrew W (nl) wrote: Whilst there is a few good jokes in here, ultimately this is a formulaic and often embarrassing story of love and marriage.

Steven A (us) wrote: Unwatchable. Truly! It's the Emperor's New Clothes.

jessica p (ru) wrote: I want to see it because is so fun

Jake H (jp) wrote: One of the most messed up movies I've seen. But thats what made it good. Probably want to see it again.Coach sully is a very good character.

Megan S (kr) wrote: I think we watched like 10 minutes of this movie and then just gave up. Terrible.

Edith N (es) wrote: Confusing and Ultimately Unconvincing It's true that tests have shown that the hair of Napolon Bonaparte (Philippe Torreton) shows evidence of highly elevated arsenic content. However, further tests have shown that pretty much everyone in the era had elevated arsenic content as compared to current levels. As many as a hundred times current normal levels, I've read. The fact is, as is stated in the movie itself, you can build up a resistance to arsenic, and if you absorb a little at a time over a long time, the levels will build up to the point where your body won't even notice levels of arsenic which would kill a person with no resistance. They're actually talking now, I've read, about doing DNA tests on the remains in the tomb to disprove the theory that it isn't Napolon in Napolon's tomb, but all the tests taken at this point have pretty much proven that whoever is interred in that tomb, they didn't die of arsenic poisoning. The framing story takes place in the days when the body of Napolon was returned to Paris and interred in a tomb at Les Invalides. Young Colonel Basil Heathcote (Jay Rodan) had been stationed on Saint Helena during Napolon's imprisonment, and he has come to Paris to see the interment. While there, he sees a woman he thinks is Betsy Balcombe (Siobhan Hewlett), who lived on Saint Helena and was a favourite of the deposed emperor. We see those last days in flashback, when Heathcote was a lieutenant and Hudson Lowe (Richard E. Grant) was governor and the former emperor's jailer. The more Heathcote talks to the people who surrounded the general, the more he begins to think that there was something mysterious in those last days. In those days, Napolon was surrounded by the last of his hangers-on, those who think that perhaps he will escape Saint Helena as he previously escaped Elba. Or, more so, people who hope that he will remember them in his will. The special features talk about the mysteries behind the death of Napolon, and they mention that there are people who believe he had some sort of hormonal imbalance which led to his slowly turning into a woman. Now, I think we can all agree that this is one of the most ridiculous theories out there. As in, that's not actually physically possible. And that's the thing. Filmmaker Antoine de Caunes seems to believe that it isn't all that ridiculous. Weird, but not ridiculous. He seems to be one of those people who believes that it would have been impossible for Napolon Bonaparte to have died a normal death of stomach cancer while in exile. That simply isn't the kind of death such a man would have died. But the fact is, it happens all the time. Great men die prosaic deaths, and prosaic men die heroic deaths. There's no logic behind it. People want there to be, but there really isn't. The saying "there are no coincidences in politics" is a lie, and the idea that there is reason behind everything is a false one. The problem with the structure of the film is that I missed something important to the story's chronology. I thought Cipriani (Bruno Putzulu) had been dead for years by the time Napolon was supposed to have died, which means the story in my head made the story onscreen impossible. I also had a hard time keeping track who most of the people were; there were three or four I knew, but mostly there were "that one French guy" and "that other French guy." Richard E. Grant, I knew, but in my head, he's still Roland from [i]L.A. Story[/i] and has a lot of verve. (Honestly, a little too much for the story.) There are plenty of subplots running through the thing, and perhaps I would have done better if I knew a bit more about Napoleonic history. But I honestly have no idea how many of the characters in this were real and how many were invented for the purpose of the movie. It was disjointed, and it wasn't rendered skillfully enough to let those disconnected bits of story flow together. I'd really like to see a story about the final days of Napolon which didn't delve into conspiracism. It's too easy a crutch. People don't seem to understand how the real world works. Any British officer who let Napolon Bonaparte walk off Saint Helena could have been sentenced with treason, I'm sure, and certainly would have suffered very serious ramifications of some sort. Yes, it seems that Hudson Lowe mistreated Napolon pretty seriously and was generally held responsible for everything that happened, but doesn't that make it even less likely that he would be part of any Napoleonic conspiracy. At least the movie didn't talk about the damned wallpaper, I guess, but there isn't much to be said about the story as presented. Maybe one of these days, I'll actually read some about man and era. I've dabbled a bit, but it's kind of one of the parts of history I skip over. It's important, and it shaped the Civil War--which is one of the parts of history that I know--but I'm still not terribly interested.

Patrick S (ag) wrote: toward Arnold's downfall

Kelly K (jp) wrote: This was a lovely movie. It was completely unrealistic, but lovely nonetheless. I adore Sandra Bullock, so she playing the lonely but charming Lucy won me over right away. Ultimately it was a cute movie for a night in. Worth seeing at least once.

Brian P (br) wrote: Weak movie. VERY WEAK

Donot B (ru) wrote: I normally like films that are out of the conventional... as long as they remain entertaining. "Mr. Nobody" is just 2+ hours of nonsense. I can imagine the director believing that he has created a master piece. There are those who create master pieces and those who believe they are special. Van Dormael is only in the 2nd category. What a huge waste of my time.

Maymay A (au) wrote: Re-watched. Review soon.Previous Rating: 4 Stars"Remember, remember the fifth of November..."V for Vendetta is a dark, mysterious and smart presentation of how the wrongdoings of a few for their own benefits can ruin a man, a family, and even an entire country. Natalie Portman was admirable as well as Hugo Weaving. You won't even feel that this ran for more than two hours. Maybe V for Vendetta is one of the most intelligent films I've ever seen. Overall, this is a well-crafted piece of art.

Jorge V (ag) wrote: wanna see it just because I hate twilight movies, jejeje...

Russ B (ru) wrote: 12/10/2016: A pretty good buddy cop movie. Some good action and comedy throughout.

NaNeeka T (kr) wrote: After all these years, Off the Wall still holds up. Classic album. Great documentary that breaks down all the tracks and chronicles what's to come.