Isoroku Yamamoto, the Commander-in-Chief of the Combined Fleet
Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto (1884-1943) was the Japanese Naval commander who was given the order to attack Pearl Harbour, an order he was duty bound to obey which went against his own personal beliefs. While this infamous attack is a low point in Japanese and US history it wouldn’t have happened if the Japanese government had listened to Yamamoto in 1939 and searched for a more peaceful way to end their war campaign, proving his many ominous presages of the outcomes of the attack to come true.
- Stars:Kôji Yakusho, Hiroshi Abe, Shûichi Azumaya, Mitsugorô Bandô, Akira Emoto, Yoshihiko Hakamada, Mieko Harada, Masatô Ibu, Shunji Igarashi, Yûsuke Iizuka, Jun Itô, Teruyuki Kagawa, Tôru Masuoka, Nobuko Miyamoto, Takeo Nakahara,
- Director:Izuru Narushima,
- Writer:Yasuo Hasegawa (screenplay), Kenzaburô Iida (screenplay)
Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto (1884-1943) was the Japanese Naval commander who was given the order to attack Pearl Harbour, an order he was duty bound to obey which went against his own personal beliefs. While this infamous attack is a low point in Japanese and US history it wouldn’t have happened if the Japanese government had listened to Yamamoto in 1939 and searched for a more peaceful way to end their war campaign, proving his many ominous presages of the outcomes of the attack to come true. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Isoroku Yamamoto, the Commander-in-Chief of the Combined Fleet torrent reviews
(mx) wrote: agood film dealing with a delicate subject."are all muslims terrorista,or are all terrorists muslim?"
(br) wrote: Interesting...but not a favorite.
(us) wrote: A man with OCD attempts to reconcile with his estranged wife.Why is this film marketed as a comedy? I don't think it funny when a man can't leave the house without going through a complicated routine or sits naked in a kitchen sink scratching the skin off his feet because he trod in shit. Michael Sheen doesn't think it funny either, and that's why he's is fantastic as Mark, a man with OCD and Tourette's. Each of his tics elicits a flash of self-torture that Sheen captures wonderfully, and desperate anxiety coats his more embarrassing compulsions. It's a committed, incredible performance.I also like the visual metaphors in the film - the winding staircase representing Mark's mind and ordered, structured apartment houses in which only someone with OCD could find beauty (or, in Charlotte's words, someone "named Lenin").However, I found it difficult to believe that no one else diagnosed Mark before Charlotte. From the first frame it was clear that Mark had OCD, and the wedding video proves that his symptoms aren't new phenomena. And eventually the film becomes a classic story of a troubled man saved by the love of a good woman, which is one of the most trifling stories ever told.Overall, Michael Sheen is the reason to see this film, and though it's marketed as a comedy, he delivers a dramatic and soul-scathing performance.
(kr) wrote: The words "gritty", "British" and "drama" usually and rightfully condemn a film to the Guy "Windsor" Ritchie hall of excrement . Having seen these terms applied to Oscar contenders like "Goodbye Charlie Bright", "Rancid aluminium" and "Love, honour and obey", I wasn't really expecting much from this film. Saying I was wrong would be a huge understatement. "Nil by Mouth" is an awesome achievement. A razor sharp dissection of a working class south London family that delivers the required punch on so many levels that you need to have a wash after watching it. It covers a vast spectrum of emotions that will see you (especially if you're British) laugh, cry and more often than not, hold your head in despair at witnessing an all too true account of what it is to be at the bottom of the British class system. It is unflinchingly brutal and somewhat depressing, yet at the same time shows how with guts, determination and a healthy sense of humour, people can survive even the most bleak and hopeless of situations. Kathy Burke is outstanding and Ray Winstone is dependable as ever, but Gary Oldman's screenplay and direction are the stars of the show. This script could stand on it's own as a fine social commentary on par, and not dissimilar from John King's "The Football Factory" and "Headhunters". Thankfully Oldman has also realised that in terms of direction, "gritty" does not have to mean the static, cold and quite frankly boring as hell style that so many British films have. The camera moves with a documentary feel energy, yet the slick cinematography keeps it from ever looking cheap. Quite simply one of the greatest British films of all time.
(nl) wrote: Alyssa Millano is hot but the poison ivy series arn't that great
(gb) wrote: An overly melodramatic portrayal of two guatemalan siblings running from their government first to mexico & finally to LA, where the american dream is as fragile as a phone call from a disgruntled coworker for illegal workers.
(au) wrote: Much conversation (it's Rohmer) about sex and relationships which 14 year old Pauline contributes to only occasionally. She wisely listens and observes until finally being sucked into the vortex of games played by the adults. Since it's Rohmer, everyone behaves relatively civilly and everyone emerges intact though a bit more damaged by life than at the start.
(ag) wrote: This movie had potential, but fell through the cracks. To bad.
(br) wrote: Terrible...couldn't even watch it all
(ca) wrote: "If we don't try, we don't do. And if we don't do, why are we here on this Earth?" I'll be brief with this one, not too much to say. Pretty good, no wow factor. It's basically the story of Treebeard haha. Jimmy Stewart was great, as per usual, but some of his supporting cast was bleh in terms of acting. And a couple plot points were a little too unrealistic for my taste. Other than that, I had no big qualms about it. It's not even two hours long. I found this to actually be a plus: too many times a war movie is made under the condition that it must be at least 2.5 hours. It's an enjoyable Civil War flick, since it barely shows the actual battles, and instead focuses on the characters and the events that surround the war.