Gobeklitepe: The World's First Temple
While challenging common beliefs on the history of civilization, the film takes the audience back to 12 thousand years ago, to Gobeklitepe, an ancient site recently found in SanliUrfa, Turkiye. With its brilliant graphics and interviews with experts, the film shows how old taboos come tumbling down as we keep scratching the surface.
12.000 years ago there already was a sacred place on Earth. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Gobeklitepe: The World's First Temple torrent reviews
(ca) wrote: the first time i watched this movie i thought it was decent. the second time i thought it was pretty useless. any of the action, fight scenes or war scenes were pointless. there were some cool visuals but other than that i didn't really like this movie (2 viewings)
(ca) wrote: Munger Road lends itself to horror movies of old...using the less is more paradigm. We never see the killer. We never see the bodies. But we do see a scared Rachael at the end, and the police questioning what has happened. Then as we are about to get the answer, the most abrupt ending ever is presented to us.While I totally disliked that abrupt ending, it does work. We are left questioning everything we saw. Who really did the killings? What did Rachael really see?
(nl) wrote: Don't waste your time!
(mx) wrote: Story revolving around a 15 year old girl, living with her parents and in preperation for a big procedure medically. and one great tip here, the less you know, one scene will come out so much better. a interesting atempt to show a child becoming a adult but with circumstances that will change her life forever and take her forward in life.
(nl) wrote: The title of Babel is so fitting for this film, since so many countries and so many languages are represented in it. And yet, despite the fact that war and violence has separated men of different countries and languages from each other since the Biblical (or mythological, depending on your religious views) event what enables tragedy to be averted here is our common thread of humanity, and the human reaction to help those in need.Common threads run through the story here, too. The girl whose father gave away the gun has lost her mother, as the children in America are in danger of losing theirs. Unsupervised children in Morocco are put in risk of their lives, as the improperly supervised American children in Mexico are at risk of theirs. Grief from the death of a family member is tearing apart the family in Japan and America. But the hopeful part is that, thanks to Moroccan villagers, a Japanese policeman, and border patrols, families are re-united again.
(it) wrote: An excellent documentary, funny, beautiful, sad, and so interesting!
(au) wrote: This movie just works. Fun, romantic and a number of credible comedic performances.
(fr) wrote: i watched this because i was bored, and while it's a good time waster, it's just sort of there. nothing special at all.
(us) wrote: Starring Gary Cooper, Julie London and Lee J. Cobb. Very strong, surprisingly violent character study of ex-gang member Cooper torn between his former mentor (the unrelentingly menacing Cobb) and good girl London. This film is best appreciated when scene in the correct CinemaScope aspect ratio. Directed by Anthony Mann.
(gb) wrote: Part one of Charles Chaplin's swan song goes over similar moments in his life that he was experiencing at the time including what his father had similarly experienced. It's about a seemingly-retired/washed-out performer saves a girl from a gassing suicide attempt because she was beginning to feel washed-out. Colvero (Chaplin) went on to inspire her what he'd been through so he can stop her from committing something when there isn't an end to her dream. But as a washed-out performer, he was missing the old days, and now no stage wanted him back. However as he was inspiring the girl Thereza (Claire Boom), it seems he was inspired by himself and realized his dream isn't over yet, and the girl likes to help him out as well.The storyline reflects Chaplin's way of bringing sympathies based on what he'd been through, especially being an unwanted performer who was denied access to the United States. Another story he was telling was his father on being a performer who was losing audiences. His sense of direction never gets old to create sympathy from the viewers, as well his old comedic ways returning to his old personal the Tramp as a talkie with clownish makeup. This is a long treat for those who enjoy the silent comedies staring two of the top three silent comedians, Chaplin and Buster Keaton, with Chaplin the same as ever. Also, hearing him talk is a special treat that'd made his performance solid, next to having his family coming along. (B+)(Full review coming soon)
(ca) wrote: It may be too long and not very original but Clive Owen gives his all to sell this medieval revenge flick.
(es) wrote: Old Yeller is a story about a family in the 1800s whose father leaves to go on a cattle drive. The oldest boy Travis is left to take care of his mother and younger brother. They find a dog and decide to keep him to help with things around the house and farm. While there's an outbreak of rabies in the area Old Yeller protects the family from a rabid wolf and contracts rabies and needs to be put down. The plot of the book and movie were set in the 1800s after the civil war. The movie had to get everything correct from that time period, the way people talked and were treated which wasn't an easy take since the movie was released in 1957. Which wasn't a problem with turning the book into a film while just looking a bit more modern than if it were 1957. A noticeable difference i noticed was Old Yeller was different from what they described in the book. It's not a noticeable unless you read the book and remember the description of Old Yeller that was given. He was a big dog with slick hair, a snub tail or short tail, and a chewed ear. While in the movie Old yeller has a long tail and his ear doesn't look chewed. Old Yeller also looks clean for being a dog that just wanders around killing all kinds of animals in the wilderness. A scene that was left out of the movie was a bull fight that happened outside of the house. The fight was focused on for a chapter in the book and i believe it should had been added in the movie. The family hears the bulls in the distance making noises while Travis says what he thinks they could be saying to each other. As bulls make their way to each other the family finds a place outside of the house to sit and relax while watching the bulls fight it out. Things go wrong as the bulls head towards the house and the family creating a very dramatic feeling of what's going to happen. Also bringing in comedy at the end of the pull fight with one of the bulls falling into a cart and rolling down the hill, having no idea what is going on. It would had been a good addition to the movie, making people who haven't read the book on the edge of their seats to see what the result is while also getting a good laugh at the bull. The movie and book come to a similar ending, with a noticeable difference Old Yeller is put down immediately after the fight with the wolf contracting rabies. The family knew he would have rabies and decided to not wait and risk him hurting anyone. While in the movie they waited until he showed effects of rabies then put him down. The ending is the most talked about part of the book and movie. It's talked about so much because no one wanted Old Yeller to die, while being hinted at in the beginning of the book with the setup of having to shoot him. Along with not wanting or even expecting to see such an important character in the book/movie die. Since many of the main characters seem to survive anything they face. Old Yeller makes have to think about life and how it can end at any point, so you should enjoy it every day that you can. Don't take things for granted no matter how small they are. You'll miss whatever that thing is when it is no longer with you even if you didn't like it so much in the beginning. I believe that the film was a very similar to the book, only missing a few details here and there. If you watch the movie with children who don't know about death then you'll should have that conversation or not watch the movie with them. Other than the death of Old Yeller the movie is an enjoyable experience just like reading the book even though a few things are missing. The ending of the book and movie are both tear jerking events, the movie more than the book because you are able to see the emotion in the family instead of just reading and imagining how everyone is feeling. They did a great job turning Old Yeller into a film and getting good actors to play the parts.
(nl) wrote: Enjoyed it. Watchable but was not blown away
(it) wrote: Quando o cinema segue formatos inesperados.
(au) wrote: "Bread Crumbs" is a 2011 horror that goes for broke in an attempt to combine a disturbing horror plot with a classic, often overlooked, disturbing didactic, fairytale of two children left tend to the elements, deep in the woods. "Bread Crumbs" is directed by Mike Nichols and stars Kristina Klebe, Dan Shaked, Marianne Hagan, Zoe Sloane, Alana Curry, Douglas Nyback, Shira Weitz, Steve Carey, and Mike Nichols. The plot follows a porn crew and cast into the woods to shoot a movie. Unfortunately there is a twisted brother, sister duo using the area as their personal killing field. The story is pretty cool with a basic principle of setting the characters up for a kill scene which for the most part work without seeming contrived. The drama and action begin almost instantly and manage to keep a steady, straight forward pace through most of the movie without becoming exhausting. The porn set concept brings plenty of flesh to the screen but in the most censored, conservative manner. Nothing really explicit here (by my standards anyway). However, it is obvious that entwining the "Hansel & Gretel" aspect to the story is very much contrived, playing out more like a bit of stretched, nonsensical moments of weak dialog meant to bring the viewer to the breadcrumbs "table". Still the kids are so d*mn dark and disturbing that it manages to pull off a good concept in a, "middle-of-the-road, mediocre way, but it does get there. The soundtrack and special effects in "Bread Crumbs" really make the film enjoyable for me personally. I can forgive weak dialog, loose story arcs" as long as the effects and sound track hold me to the story and drama unfolding on screen. Nichols does a pretty good job tying it all in to make a fun, standard horror mythos in "Bread Crumbs" with eerie sounds, and a strong attention to practical effects and blood consistency. The film doesn't give us a new look at horror or bring something extraordinary to the genre but it is an entertaining, modern classic that stays true to the roots of the genre. It gave me that 80's feel that I only get with a certain type of horror movie story, I dug the homicidal brother and sister and the unfinished ending is beyond retro! (That is a good thing cause retro is candy for me!)