It Started with a Kiss

It Started with a Kiss

While on leave in New York, a serviceman both weds a chorus girl and wins a red convertible in a charity raffle. Both his wife and the car turn out to be problematic. Comedy.

Air Force Sgt. Joe Fitzpatrick meets and marries a beautiful model, Maggie Putnam, on the eve of being shipped off to Spain. When the new Mrs. Fitzpatrick waits to join her husband, she ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


It Started with a Kiss torrent reviews

Harry W (gb) wrote: Being an Academy Award nominated documentary about the animal agriculture industry, Food Inc. was an essential source of education for me as a vegetarian.If you've seen many documentaries about vegetarianism, you know what to expect from a film like Food Inc. in terms of revealing where meat comes from. But Food Inc. goes beyond that because it does not simply examine where meat comes from, it goes significantly further into the production of meat by examining what happens even before it as well as significantly afterwards. We see the production of corn in massive amounts and learn how it contributes to the mass production of animals, gaining an understanding how just how much farming really goes into meat production. As well as that, we see the animals turned into meat. There is not as much confrontation of seeing animals die on screen, but we see them alive seconds before we see how they are turned into the meat that looks appealing on market shelves. The film really stays true to its title in this sense. There are a lot of facts to take in from Food Inc., and some viewers may find themselves isolated by the abundace of talking and slow pace with somwhat littl sense of emotional drama to support it, but it cannot be denied that Food Inc. is essentially a straightforward checklist of facts about where food comes from, like it or not. And I will admit that there are some strrong emotional moments in the film, even if most of it is about the legal system. Though many films have revealed just how poorly animals are treated as part of animal agriculture, Food Inc. does not hit viewers over the head with that message. It goes beyond that and shows how humans are affected by it, including through the important depiction of how contaminated meat lead to the death of two year old Kevin Kowalcyk. The heart breaking true story behind the fact that a child was killed by a hamburger and the fact that the meat industry could not give less of a crap is intergral to understanding precisely what kind of a disgusting industry it is. If the fact that it tortures animals every day is not enough to hit viewers, then perhaps the fact that it is responsible for the death of an innocent child and potentially many more is enough to make you understand just how harmful the industry is, and perhaps it is parent ho really need to see Food Inc. to be confronted by this.The dramatization in these scenes are great because director Robert Kenner affirms an interview with the mother of the child, Barbara Kowalcyk. Seeing her break down on camera and speak with such a broken heart is a lot to take in, and it is a bold and corageous move which hopefully moves viewers to really take everything from the film in.One thing I really respect about Food Inc. is the fact that it examines how the meat industry and fast food franchises are able to control the world through subsidisation of meat. The fact that it is cheaper to eat something that a Cow has been killed for than a head of Broccolli is ridiculous to think about, but it is simply a fact which is strange. Food Inc. explains the situation while conveying just how strange it is to live in a world where that is a fact of life. Food Inc. does not press that this is ridiculous simply because when you look at the facts, it truly is. We live in a world where a burger costs less than a head of broccolli. Let's all think about that for a second. If you didn't question that before seeing Food Inc., then it is excellent that the film will have you thinking it by some point in the film. Though it is not explored just as much as it could have been in comparison to many other concepts, it is present and it poses a question to viewers.Like I said, there are a lot of politics in Food Inc.. This is where it takes a bit of a downturn, because despite the amount of dedication put into bringing these scenes to the film, there are so many concepts which are touched upon only briefly. All the people affected by the corrupt legal system are given brief bats of screen time without a conveyal of just how powerlessly betrayed they would be feeling by their own country as a result. There is potential there, but it is all a bit scattered in a rush to not really go many places. The first two sections of Food Inc. were a lot more focused and detailed while the third section messes around a bit much even though it dominates a fair quantity of screen time. The balance in Food Inc. is rather thrown off by the way it raps itself up with this, meaning that the final act of the film is its weakest and the most distant from viewers due to the complicated political nature of it. However, Food Inc. does end on a high note which matches the rest of the atmosphere.While many documentaries are nihilistic about the way that humanity approaches animal agriculture even with the intention of changing the world, Food Inc. is actually one which maintains a sense of hope. Due to the thriving with energy for the entire film, Food Inc. matches this in its ending with a message which pushes viewers to really get involved in changing the world by talking about how hope still exists, making it an good-spirited documentary for one with such serious subject matter.So Food Inc. doesnt have the best third act, but the way that it examines just how complicated animal agriculture is from the process of feeding animals to suffering from eating them is really effective and educational while not neglecting a sense of entertainment.

TAMANNA K (ru) wrote: hav seen it more than 10 times..still willing to c it again...just lov dis movie...

Anna B (au) wrote: Showed promise early on, but ended up being grating, and cheesy as fuck.

Annie S (us) wrote: A must watch not for just Cricket fans, but anyone that likes inspirational, feel good movies! Beautiful script, superb acting, and a wonderful wonderful piece of work! One of those movies you can watch over and over again!!!

Daniel S (ca) wrote: A sultry and teasing biopic that builds you up, then tears you down with the brutal subject matter the biography covers.

Deke P (jp) wrote: saw in theater way back then. Barely remember, except that i hated the gratuitous couch F--k scene, and other stuff, language, etc. Also, degrading and depressing. . So i rate it accordingly, and wdn't want to see it again. except, as one reviewer on RT sd, "convincing job of re-creating Los Angeles of 1948" & "reinvents a genre and a bygone era, in this case, Los Angeles circa 1948."! So i'm reconsidering my stars. And its based on a famous detective book series. And also, Denzel, like a lot of famous actors, too often seems like he is playing himself. Or maybe cuz his voice and appearance are so familiar.

Bengel W (es) wrote: Stunning colors and clarity of the picture give this period film an edge that is stunning. Actors dwell in the depth of history giving a luscious emotion of the love being chased. Sir George conveys the music in sharp assistance to the visual adding to the genius of the man portrayed. Each scene is a treasure that can be absorbed again and again. Nibbles: Rheinischer Doppekuchen.

jason c (ag) wrote: Don't take it so serious, sit back and enjoy a slice of good old camp. Good fun!

Michael W (es) wrote: Norris plays an uncharacteristicly vulnerable character as a cop in pursuit of an escaped killer he helped put away. Steve James is largely wasted (again) and killed off prematurely (again). Closing love duet "Two Can Be One" is no way for a Chuck Norris film to finish.

Private U (au) wrote: I saw this film as a young kid and it was great. Any film with the four kings of horror in it has to be seen by everyone.

Sean L (mx) wrote: Sparks fly when a pair of new neighbors fall into a lesbian love affair and scheme to lift a seven-figure sum from an unwitting mafia goon. Written and directed by the Wachowskis, rumor has it that this film gave them enough cred with the studios to turn around and produce The Matrix a few years later. I can see that potential at times, though it's still very rough around the edges. The first act is a real bore, borderline softcore porno that I very nearly shut off and wrote off, but the plot really comes to life at about the forty-minute mark and swiftly ramps up into a rousing, unpredictable little dose of dark suspense. Sadly, no amount of nifty writing and unexpected twists can compensate for Jennifer Tilly's acting. She's Anna Nicole-Smith levels of bad, trying to seem sultry, deep and smart but really just coming across as drug-whipped and out of her depth. Apart from an inspired effort from Joe Pantoliano as the short-fuse mafia fall-guy at the center of it all, though, that's pretty much par for the course. Low-budget but high-intensity, it's always just *this* close to hitting its mark.