Two close friends, arrogantly and without remorse, kidnap and murder a young boy. They are caught and put to trial where their larger-than-life defense lawyer blames the Establishment for their actions.

. You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


You may also like

Compulsion torrent reviews

Vikas A (gb) wrote: Amazing love legend. YASH CHOPRA's final portrayal of love shows its that he himself is the man who cannot die because of his great love stories. This is what anyone would expect from a romance-drama film. Like true love, YASH CHOPRA will always remain."An ode to love."

Ronald K (fr) wrote: with what started as a manhunt for 4 robbers, CiA turned into a cat-and-mouse game where the cops encounter several incidents all at once. not as adrenaline as the previous shows, this is more of a war movie than a normal PTU flick.interestingly, one of actors for the policemen was actually a mobster in the previous installments. talk about continuity...

Danny G (jp) wrote: worked on it, should be worth a look!!

Arthur J (au) wrote: American Violet is a movie that proves that good things can come from determination and standing up for what's right. This movie is inspired from a true story centering around Dee, a single mother raising four young girls in the projects of Texas. As she struggles with the everyday dealings of life, she is falsely arrested and accused by the District Attorney of selling drugs in a school zone. Dee is pressured into taking either a plea deal or face some prison time. In time she decides to fight back.This movie showcased some very good acting from Nicole Beharie and has a very strong supporting cast, including Alfre Woodard and Michael O'Keefe. I truly enjoyed this movie as it brings out into the forefront that racial profiling is still alive and thriving in our community today.

John B (ag) wrote: this movie and "The Thin Blue Line" are the definitive studies on the unthinkable atrocities of the american judicial system. The unholy combination of misrepresented evidence, sensationalist lawyers, and small town racism combine into one of the most abhorrent abuses of the judicial system in recent memory. While the "Thin Blue Line" is cool , distant and philosophical, the Trials of Darryl Flint packs more heart and manages to speak on a more universal level.

John B (us) wrote: I saw the documentary Dogtown and Z-Boys which was mildly interesting. This drama based on the historical tale doesn't do it for me at all. I found myself utterly bored and wished they could have all been put in military school.

Sylvester K (nl) wrote: Set in a grimmy adult theatre, a teller, a projectionist and a customer begin a friendship. As part of the French extremism, the film was graphic with its depiction of sexual acts. It's quite hilarious at certain times but it feels more like a voyeuristic adventure into the seedy parts of France where no moral boundary is found. I hope this is not an accurate portrayal of real life but I did enjoy the simplicity in the film, although watching a real porn seems more satisfying than watching Glowing Eyes.

Justin T (us) wrote: A clever, fast paced, and stylish action thriller.

Andrew B (mx) wrote: About as interesting as watching a cat decompose

Asif K (br) wrote: not interested in this either

RC K (nl) wrote: At one point (and I may have written this before!) I decided that I needed more Sam Neill films, considering I claim him as my favourite actor. I dug through his filmography and nothing really jumped out, but a person requesting of me a musical piece from the film (likely the chunk of Schumann's "Scenes from Childhood" that is played repeatedly) pushed this one to the forefront, as I learned how well thought of it was, and it's the unusual near-starring role for Neill. I picked it up with another Gillian Armstrong film, Starstruck, which I loved. I've been putting off and putting off watching this one, occasionally attempting to watch it with my parents, but usually ending up watching something else (much like when intending to watch it by myself). I have finally gotten to it, though, and so here we are with my comments on it.Sybylla Melvyn (--whew, lots of y's, though I always like such spellings--Judy Davis) is a young woman in the Australian bush in the late 19th or early 20th century whose family is short on money, but has nothing of interest in it to the independent Sybylla. She wants to be a writer, beginning the film by beginning a novel, promising herself and her readers that she will launch off on her career--wait, no, her brilliant career, she decides. The short funds of her family come into play, though, and she is sent to live with her grandmother (Aileen Britton) and her Aunt Helen (Wendy Hughes). She becomes upset at her "ugliness" while there, with Helen attempting to comfort her as her grandmother attempts a sort of matronly guiding of Sybylla's life, in complete defiance of Sybylla's own wishes for it. Childhood acquaintance Harry Beacham (Neill) stumbles across her picking blooms in a field and makes rather lustful advances, only to have her reject him. Frank Hawdon (Robert Grubb) is also attracted to Sybylla, but maintains airs of his "civilized superiority," of a kind, when referring to her--and even notes that she might as well realize she won't do "better than [him]." Gracious me. Frank Sybylla simply ignores, as a now thoroughly embarrassed Harry (who had no idea who he was hitting on) begins to fall more completely for the willfull Sybylla. A trip with no return visit from Harry leaves Sybylla offended, but when Harry returns he discovers it is not for feeling spurned as a lover but as a friend--she tells Harry that she needs to see something of life before she will marry him, only to find herself trucked off to an indigent family as governess in exchange for payment of a debt.I'd heard this was rather a feminist film--moreso from Armstrong herself as she recounted the angry response of the people who loved that about it when they saw her follow-up Starstruck. I find the wildly-varied-in-definition term "feminism" a bit spiky, though, and was not sure what to expect. On the one hand, we have what was allegedly the original intention--the social vitalization of women, to make them accepted equals of men, and on the other we have strange exaggerated and downplayed definitions anywhere from "maybe a first class instead of second class citizen, but still not equal to men" all the way up to "men are inferior beasts." Gillian's response to the silly anger of people who wanted another period arthouse film of shrugging indifference mixed with offense and a bit of hurt was comforting on this front though. At the least, it was clear that she did not set out for the final definition. What she did do, via the original novel by (Stella Maria Sarah) Miles Franklin and Eleanor Witcombe's screen adaptation, is promote the egalitarian definition (which I'm all for) by asserting the independence of Sybylla.Sybylla, as a character, is a bit irritating, I must admit. This is nothing to do with Davis' performance, which is phenomenal and seems to catch the right elements in the right light to describe and explain this element. She's self-centered, egotistical (she admits this first thing as she begins her novel, saying she will not feel shame for it before declaring her intentions of "brilliant" career for herself), spoiled and ungrateful, but some of this stems from an apparent alienation from the people around her, especially her family. Her mother is exactly the sort of woman she does not want to me--giving birth annually for a working husband, and the rest of her family shares no ambition beyond this. Her grandmother pushes her toward marriage as the crowning achievement of a woman's life, while her aunt, troubled by her own past, tries to spare her the pain of her own secret separation by aiming her toward what she feels is the "right" kind of marriage. On this issue, in a general sense, Sybylla is not out of place in her indignation. Marriage is not and should not be a requirement for the social "citizenship" of any person, nor should it be the only path available without risk of derision and scorn. It's interesting, though, that she seems to actually care more deeply for Harry than she will admit, possibly even to herself, in her stubborn commitment to independence, solitude and her career. It's not without foundation in a society that pre-dates widespread and socially accepted birth control, but it still comes off as just slightly off from what she actually seems to be asking emotionally when she turns Harry away to "soul search."This is addressed, though, which was a surprise to me of the pleasant variety. The more appreciable female authority figure for Sybylla is Aunt Gussie (Patricia Kennedy) with whom she vacations briefly, who is a bit more encouraging, and a bit feisty in her way, openly declaring Sybylla's hair as her best asset, physically speaking. Gussie is the one who tells her that loneliness is quite a price to pay for independence, and suggests (thankfully reminding us that feminine revolutions are about action, not a novel mindset--other generations have felt similar things) that she oughtn't have led Harry on quite so, but does so with the right element of comfort. Curiously, her other supporter is her Uncle "JJ" Julius (Peter Whitford), who holds nothing against her artistic aspirations, despite the recriminations of her grandmother who refuses to hear another word of "the stage" taking any part in her family's life or legacy. It's of course still novel and interesting that this matter of choosing artistic life takes precedent over romance in a film and story filled with it, and it is absolutely respectable in this respect, but the approach of Sybylla, which typically extends to a sort of entitled feeling regarding her artistic aspirations, is grating. She wants to do these things, but balks at the idea of work (in fairness, she's usually balking more at the absence of choice, but it's not as if most people do have choices in such matters when they don't come from families with the social or financial well-being to create them) before them, or at the idea of doing anything else alongside or instead of them, as if for some reason she should be allowed what she wants simply because she wants it.Perhaps it's just the romantic in me, though, that takes offense at the idea that a relationship with someone is inherently limiting--Sybylla repeatedly mentions that she does not want to get "lost in someone else" or be "part of someone else," and other such phrases--none of which have anything to do with her sex or gender, as they're all phrased as mutual states in both parts of such a partnership. Certainly it does make a difference in the options one would have, but suggesting there's an intrinsic defeat and subjugation in the very concept of romance and loving someone is a little bothersome. The social implications of marriage in the time period are, of course, something else entirely, but the discussions are never about that, so it's a bit more difficult to sympathize with this aspect of her personality.None of this takes away from the film itself though, which is absolutely beautiful visually, and manages some of the most atmospherically "right" out-of-doors scenery I've seen yet, even in a landscape as unfamiliar as the bush (which does not much resemble the surroundings of other continents), nor its story, its convention breaking and its choices. Witcombe gives us a tastefully smart screenplay, and Davis' performance with Sam Neill's (which takes on the "feminine" role, in the sort of way you would expect when gender conventions are inverted) lovely one as Harry--going from open lust to embarassment to pleading frustration, confused anger and even quietly shocked hurt--only serve to enhance it under Armstrong's guiding hand. The film deserves its reputation, but I throw in a pinch of salt for a "difficult" main character. Nothing too damning, but enough that I couldn't rate it above its "inferior" follow-up (Starstruck)--which is an absolute joy.

Jacob B (fr) wrote: Such a weird film... maybe it's just cos I'm not a 60's film guy. The pacing is too slow for me however the cinematography is very innovative for it's time and it's protagonist is very relatable.B+

Golia K (de) wrote: If only one character in Stone reacted as someone in his position would to the preposterous situation at hand, the movie would be 15 minutes long