Edo Porn

Edo Porn

The world-famous woodblock artist Hokusai, a widower in need of a steady income, lives with his daughter Oei in the house of his friend Bakin.

(Japanese with English subtitles) Widowed woodblock artist Hokusai meets Onao and falls madly in love with her, but she disappears suddenly. One day, his daughter brings home a young girl ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechersSize
Download   Edo Porn / Hokusai manga (1981)Other53391.46 GB
Download   Hokusai mangaOther36404 GB

Edo Porn torrent reviews

Lafe F (nl) wrote: A weird CGI adventure with a robotic Pinocchio in the future. Cool idea, which all little kids should watch.

Jeremy P (it) wrote: This is a better than average murder mystery

Henry P (au) wrote: Disney, oh Disney, you've had your ups and downs over the 49 movies you made before this. While there was a mid-2000s slump of disappointments, after Pixar became a full member of your family, you began to improve, with exciting adventures like Meet the Robinsons and Bolt, and the traditionally animated Princess and the Frog. With these under your belt thanks to the help of Pixar magic, your first CGI musical proves not to be a let down (like what Rapunzel does with her hair), but a raising of the standards for CGI animation as a whole, especially with Rapunzel's long, long, long, long... long, long hair (thank Disney this movie isn't as long as Rapunzel's hair). Our story opens with Rapunzel's mother being saved by a magic flower that Mother Gothel (Donna Murphy) uses to extend her life and look young. After she accidentally reveals its existence to the guards searching for a cure for the queen, she desperately seeks to get it back somehow, and the queen's daughter (who she was pregnant with when she was sick and cured) showcases magical hair whose abilities are eerily reminiscent of the flower. To get that power, she pulls a reverse-Bryan Mills, and uses her particular set of skills to take the princess, and use her hair as a magical restorative, and raises her as her own, raising her to be completely helpless. Fast Forward 17 or so years, and Rapunzel (Mandy Moore) wakes up to the day before her 18th birthday, and asks to see the lights that always appear on her birthday (which are actually the king and queen sending lanterns into the sky to get the attention of Rapunzel). After being refused, she eventually discovers Flynn Rider (Zachary Levi) in her tower, after he runs in by accident after being chased by the castle soldiers for stealing Rapunzel's crown from when she was a baby. After a hilarious interrogation scene, Rapunzel gets him to take her to the source of the lights in exchange for the crown. She boldly goes where no ludicrously long haired princess has gone before: the outside world, and after a montage of feeling good about abandoning her "mother" and feeling bad about it, she gets to the Snuggly Duckling, where a game of cat-and-mouse between her and Flynn and the guards begins, and continues for a while, culminating in another quality Disney climax. The plot isn't exactly tangled in plot holes, but there is a little more pushing of suspension-of-disbelief than usual. Otherwise, Rapunzel is a great Disney Princess. She may not be as independent and confident as Anna and Elsa proved to be in Frozen, but she adapts eventually (remember she left her tower for the first time ever about 25 minutes in, and only ever had contact with "Mother" Gothel until Flynn arrived, so she was her only positive relationship in her life, and the only other human being she ever had contact with, so it's alright and realistic for Rapunzel in particular to be a little helpless). Her chemistry with everyone in the film from Flynn to the Snuggly Duckling patrons is priceless comedy and an eye-opening experience to her. We've all had eye-opening experiences. All of us have had something happen to us that ripped up what we thought was true and burned the shreds while we're forced to watch. This is Rapunzel seeing that the world is not the hell-hole that her "mother" made it out to be. Flynn is a classic suave, swashbuckling thief with a heart of gold who makes friends and influences people. All the music does its job, whether the characters start singing in the way all Disney characters must sing in this type of movie. Alan Menken provides a satisfying score while the cast provides wonderful songs that (while not the never-ending anthem Let It Go would be three years later) give us insight into the characters' feelings and add a layer of fantastical feel-good. And don't even get me started on the animation. The most expensive animated movie ever made could have just been an awe-inspiring look at how far animation has come since Disney first released Snow White in 1938, but in addition to how far they've come in 50 movies and 72 years (as of Tangled's release), we see an amazing story of an innocent girl meeting the world, and seeing that (while her mother told some truth) everything, like the Weird Al song says, she knew was wrong: the world does have selfish people, but sometimes, the worst-seeming people have dreams too, whether they want to see the floating lights like Rapunzel, or they want to be a concert pianist, mime, or a Pokemon master (last one is my dream, the rest are all from the movie). It actually makes an old Walt Disney quote ring true: "If you can dream it, you can do it." Walt dreamed animation would bring joy to people, and animation in his name brings joy to those who watch to this day. May Disney give us fifty more classics, and many, many more.

Joanna F (ru) wrote: Great music. May not be quite as good as the first film but much better than most!

Ashley H (de) wrote: Panther is a disappointing film. It is about the story of The Black Panther Party of Self-Defense. Kadeem Hardison and Joe Don Baker give horrible performances. The screenplay is badly written. Mario Van Peebles did a terrible job directing this motion picture. I was not impressed with this motion picture.

Joe M (nl) wrote: This is literally the worst movie I have ever seen. The plot makes enough sense, the dialog is comprehensive, and their are numerous "special" effects, so it is technically a film (not one of those farces like Raiders of Atlantis). Seriously though, Warriors of the Wasteland is SO atrocious it is great! Don't expect much and you will be amazed!

Daniel M (mx) wrote: In the immediate post-war period, British cinema lost a lot of the sparkle and sense of adventure which it had previously embodied. With Alfred Hitchcock now permanently based in America and Powell and Pressburger past their prime, cinema became increasingly populated by American melodramas, jingoistic war films and ropey comedies. It would take something truly momentous to shake cinema out of this stupor: that something was the British New Wave.Beginning with John Osborne(TM)s Look Back in Anger, the New Wave sought to reinvigorate film and theatre, tackling controversial subjects head on and presenting a view of the working classes which was the very opposite of patronising or parochial. In time the genre, with its left-wing undercurrents and subtle emphasis on counter-culture, would come to be epitomised by Lindsay Anderson, the director of If. and This Sporting Life. But well before the latter entered production, Anderson(TM)s colleague Karel Reisz was blazing the cinematic trail with Saturday Night and Sunday Morning.Based upon the novel by Alan Sillitoe, Saturday Night and Sunday Morning is a rich and respectful work which depicts the life of the working man in Nottingham in a completely uncompromising way. Reisz(TM) background in documentary filmmaking makes him a naturally understated director. His camera is always an observer, sitting passively in the corner; it never flinches or mitigates, and it makes no apologies for what occurs on screen.Not only does this approach make the action more realistic, but it helps to convey the message of the film. It allows the characters to speak for themselves, to create and form their own voices and identities, rather than having to conform either to the conventions of Hollywood or to social attitudes of what is considered ~proper(TM). The central line of the film comes towards the end from Albert Finney: whatever people say I am, that(TM)s what I(TM)m not?, from which we get the title of The Arctic Monkeys(TM) debut album.The visuals in Saturday Night reflect this desire for the characters rather than the director to do the talking. The film is shot by Freddie Francis, who also shot The Elephant Man and would work with Reisz again on The French Lieutenant(TM)s Woman. His choice of angles is simple but effective and he never attempts to play up the emotion of a scene by resorting to thriller tropes in the manner of Hitchcock or surreal, dreamlike shifts in the manner of Michael Powell. There are moments of visual exuberance " for instance, the blurring of the footage at the fairground to convey Arthur(TM)s disorientation " but these are only used as occasional devices.Shooting in black-and-white, whether for artistic or budgetary reasons, always seems to give a film a sense of gravitas and ruggedness, something which was comparatively lacking in Technicolor efforts from the same time. Francis(TM) cinematography and Reisz(TM) direction show up unashamedly all the rough edges of working life, from the thundering monotony of the factories to the grimy back streets and beer-drenched pubs. There is an underlying respect for what they document, but they do not glamorise working life to the point of parody, in the manner of Sergei Eisenstein. This might help to explain why the film was awarded an ~X(TM) certificate when first released (it has since been downgraded to a PG).This ruggedness and gravitas is never more noticeable than in the performance of Albert Finney. In only his second film role, he inhabits Arthur Seaton, creating a complex and contradictory character that we spend the entire film trying to figure out. He is anti-heroic, and largely amoral save when it comes to his own skin. In certain scenes he is borderline sociopathic, like when he takes pot shots at a nosey neighbour with an air rifle. But he remains compelling in his capability to love, to think beyond what we expect of him, and " on occasion " to do the right thing.The most interesting moments of the film, which lift it out of the clich (C)s of what would become kitchen-sink, see Arthur and his colleagues passing the time at weekends fishing or drinking, and discussing what the point of their lives might be. Arthur makes passing comments about a life beyond this, saying that he doesn(TM)t want to get married until he feels ready. His angry voiceovers about the factory and wayward relationships with women reflect a restless attitude towards the limits of the world put before him. He knows what he doesn(TM)t want, but can(TM)t quite communicate anything beyond that.This desire to communicate creates an emotional involvement with Arthur which makes the story gripping and engrossing. Like most kitchen-sink dramas the actual plot is quite slim, and has a number of similarities to A Place in the Sun " the central one being a male protagonist who is torn between two women, and who is threatened with ruin when one of them falls pregnant. But Saturday Night rejects the melodramatic tone of that film, just as Arthur remarks upon living the cinema that he always knew where the film was going.In A Place in the Sun, like so many melodramas, the characters are so clearly drawn that you knew where things were going after about fifteen minutes: Montgomery Clift is bound to fail and make the wrong choices, because that is the archetype into which he fits. In Saturday Night, there are no such guarantees and no stock ending to dampen the mood. Not only do the twists and turns feel more realistic, they carry a greater weight because the various parties do not have to respond in a manner predetermined by genre. Because Arthur is so conflicted, we don(TM)t know what choice he will make and therefore there is no assurance that he will emerge intact.The film deserves further plaudits for sticking to its guns in depicting the darker elements of urban life. It(TM)s one thing to go for realism when things are rosy for the protagonists; it(TM)s quite another to follow through with this and risk the censors(TM) wrath in the process. The film is quite happy to linger on the scenes between Arthur and Doreen, but it is equally candid in the fight between Arthur and the squaddies which leaves the former near-dead. The ending itself is quite ambiguous, as Arthur surveys the housing developments and wonders whether he can change even as the landscape changes around him.If there is a flaw with Saturday Night, it is purely a question of scope. Apart from little details that have dated and any resounding prejudiced surrounding the now-ripe genre of kitchen-sink, the big problem with the film is that it is a little too self-contained. While it captures this particular part of Nottingham exceedingly well, it doesn(TM)t have quite the same general reach as Anderson(TM)s work " it doesn(TM)t reach out beyond its tight-knit community in the manner of This Sporting Life.In spite of this problem, which has prevented it from ageing quite so well, Saturday Night and Sunday Morning remains an important work in British cinema. In the long-term its realistic treatment of ordinary life and uncompromising storylines can be seen in everything from Ken Loach and Mike Leigh to the more recent work of Lynn Ramsey and Andrea Arnold. Reisz directs beautifully, bringing Sillitoe(TM)s novel and screenplay to life through a series of refreshing performances, resulting in a very fine piece of work.

Bill T (it) wrote: If you've seen 'Airplane' a million times like I have, then you'll appreciate what a unintentional hoot this movie is. As a matter of fact, almost whole scenes were taken from this movie. The film follows the Airplane script to a T, the crew and some of the passengers succumb to food poisoning (yes, it's the fish!) it's up to, yes, Striker to fly this plane! Surely you can't be serious! I am serious, no jokes here, but you'll be filling them in as you go along, guaranteed.

Chloe A (ag) wrote: 5 stars! Stunning film! Made me cry a lot and Zac Efron always tops it off! what a beaut!