Breaking the Silence
Gong Li stars in this low-key drama about a single mother who will do anything to provide for her son. Sun Liying (Li) struggles to care for her hearing-impaired child Zheng Da (Gao Xin) after her taxi driver husband divorces her. After Zheng Da gets his hearing aid smashed in a fight with classmates, Sun Liying sets out to raise 5,000 yuan (a small fortune) to buy him a replacement. A friend helps her set up an unauthorized bookstall, which soon gets raided by the police. Later she splits her time delivering newspapers and cleaning house for a rich businessman. This film was screened at the 2000 Berlin Film Festival.
- Stars:Li Gong, Xin Gao, Jing-ming Shi, Yue Guan, Xiuqing Yue, Chengru Li, Liping Lü, Kesheng Lei, Qing Lin, Yufeng Zhou,
- Director:Zhou Sun,
- Writer:Heng Liu, Xiaoli Shao, Zhou Sun
Gong Li stars in this low-key drama about a single mother who will do anything to provide for her son. Sun Liying (Li) struggles to care for her hearing-impaired child Zheng Da (Gao Xin) after her taxi driver husband divorces her. After Zheng Da gets his hearing aid smashed in a fight with classmates, Sun Liying sets out to raise 5,000 yuan (a small fortune) to buy him a replacement. A friend helps her set up an unauthorized bookstall, which soon gets raided by the police. Later she splits her time delivering newspapers and cleaning house for a rich businessman. This film was screened at the 2000 Berlin Film Festival. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Breaking the Silence torrent reviews
(gb) wrote: One hell of a ride. It's a little movie that doesn't want to be big.
(es) wrote: I remember Lorenzo from that TV program Renegade clearly he hasn't progressed onto better acting roles.
(es) wrote: Wow this movie was really something. So moving and shocking. To think that this is based on true events is awful to imagine. Its one of those movies that is great in the sense of acting and all that but awful in the sense that this story is real. It was a tad bit slow to begin, but eventually I was very much into it and emotionally connected. The boys in this movie did a fantastic job acting out very difficult subject matters. I'm glad I watched this. What did this movie teach me? Children are some of the best actors we have these days.
(jp) wrote: According to the mythology of Candyman, he can only be killed by the lack of fear of his existence, but with "Candyman: Day Of The Dead" (the 3 is not actually on the title card for the film) its finally proven that poor script work, poor acting, and shoddy film making can't even kill him. With word on the street claiming there to be a fourth film on the way late 2010, it seems even this poor film couldn't kill our rumored slasher ghost. Looks like there's still a little fear that he might be real to keep him ticking on.Caroline has found herself dreaming about the Candyman as of late. It would seem that she is a descendant of the late artistic lover turned ghostly slasher and after saying his name 5 times in the mirror (will they ever learn?) she is now being stalked by the hook handed monstrosity. Her friends and acquaintances are suddenly falling like flies (perhaps bees is a more appropriate insect) and she is being blamed for the deaths. Now she must find a way to prove her innocence and put Candyman to rest before he does it to her.Although the second film tried hard to continue on with some of the more intelligent threads from the impressive first film, "Candyman: Day Of The Dead" turns out to be pretty much a straight on slasher. Like many other smarter slasher films, this one also falls prey to its own continuity errors and new found focus on making deaths rather than intelligent Horror story plot turns. It tries to follow in the footsteps of the series, but fails on most counts creating a clunky paced and rather boring film all considered. Too much focus on making a high body count and tons of pointless nudity take up to much run time that could have been spent on making it more intelligent or building on the Candyman mythology. What elements that the film does try to use to make use of that worked in previous entries seems rather forced. Candyman's short riddle like monologues pop up in random places out of the blue, whenever he appears there is a bright white flash and pop noise that gets annoying very quickly, and the urban setting (graffiti and all) is downplayed far too much. It's as if the writers and makers of this film never even watched the original and just decided to take him and make their own thing of it. For example the entire 'Candyman cult' that worships him filled with Gothic young people seems far to ridiculous for even what this series should have been or even how Candyman is done away with in a sort of Dorian Gray style. The details might be there in sparse moments, but the makers missed the picture with this picture."Candyman: Day Of The Dead" sacrifices most of the intelligent threads about beliefs and the realism of myths in society for a general slasher style that never really raises itself above a straight to DVD quality. The acting is poor most of the time (sans our awesome villain), the dialogue is poorly crafted, the pacing is clunky, and the film focuses on the wrong elements that made "Candyman" such a great film. Count this one as a sequel one could skip and not worry too much about missing anything.BONUS RANT: Nothing against the Hispanic community and how its represented in the film, but why is the Hispanic community one of the back story focuses for this film? It makes sense in the first one for the urban African American community to believe in this ghostly figure or the community in New Orleans to fear in in the second film (since it was his birth place I guess) but why a Hispanic community in LA? The film never tries to explain that, except that we are supposed to gather that he is just hunting his relatives now I guess, but it felt a bit out of the context of the series to have it that way. WHY CAN'T THESE FILMS GET THEIR CONTINUITY RIGHT?!
(ag) wrote: love the movie! paul is so hot!
(fr) wrote: Some unfortunate stylistic choices early on, but turned out to be an underrated heist-revenge film, with an excellent supporting turn by Morgan Freeman and an almost disproportionately good performance from Mickey Rourke. Was surprised to see in the intro credits that Ry Cooder composed the soundtrack. A little 80s, but it has a Cooder flavor to it, and that's fine. John Godey (author of The Taking of Pelham One Two Three) wrote the novel on which Johnny Handsome was based. Nice ending, no punches pulled.
(fr) wrote: More romance than expected. In the end, a vengeance story where no one wins.
(au) wrote: Doesn't reveal its quality until the very end, when all that's on the table so far--friendships and family relationships, debts owed, "business" ambitions, a love affair and more--can't help but be cashed out. And what an ending. Unfortunately, though, after this many years, it kind of feels like an underfunded, underachieved Goodfellas. And if you're a De Niro fan, don't go into this thinking he's the star! I only knew a little about the movie before watching, and it took a while (maybe too long) for me to really invest in Harvey Keitel's character, Charlie, whose movie it actually is--I don't blame the filmmaker or Keitel for that though, that's my fault.
(ca) wrote: Really bizarre and rather ridiculous.
(us) wrote: Oh love this movie so much. One of my childhood's best memory.
(ag) wrote: Fue como ver el video -Tonight- de los Smashing Pumpkins en largometraje. Una sutileza visual y encanto propio de aquellas peliculas antiguas del genero. Cuenta con efectos especiales modestos, pero acordes a la carga ilusoria que intenta expresar la novela de Wells.