You may also like
Klopka torrent reviews
Rhonda L (de) wrote: Cute movie about a Dog named 'Freeway' and the relationships in the lives on his owners while they try to found him when he gets lost in the mountains.
Barry T (au) wrote: Mary Harron is usually so good and this is poor for her standards its too pedestriain. Lily cole is creepy enough but thats it no one else is really developed.Avoid - there is not alot going for this
Irvin C (jp) wrote: A woman in the early 20th century with a drunk, abusive husband finds solace and happiness in photography. I have to say that this film feels kind of old-fashioned. The film has the look and feel of a period European film from the 70's and 80's, you know, the type that stereotypically gets nominated and win Foreign Film Oscars. It's not a bad thing at all though. The film is quite lovely with nice performances. Didn't blow me away but it's a well-made film for what it is.
Josh G (jp) wrote: I've probably spent less than a half hour with any of the kids who are being interviewed in Michael Apted's Up series, and yet I already feel as though I know them intimately. Of course, that's part of the idea - the quote at the beginning and end of each of the films: "Give me a child and I will give you the man." You are expected to watch the snippets of these kids' lives and draw conclusions from it. You are supposed to watch how they change or don't change over the years and think about how their environment affected them, how their age has affected them, how their knowledge of being the subject of a cultural experiment has affected them. 21 Up is an hour and forty minutes long, but if you watch it with friends you'll be lucky to finish it in two hours. Because it's such a thought-provoking experience. You do draw conclusions, you do have epiphanies. You have to pause the show and discuss theories that you have about this or that, or the meaning of a sentence that one of the kids said (will I stop calling them kids when they are older than I am?), or simply to extend your thoughts on the questions asked. As in the previous two films, the questions asked are piercing and divisive. The rich kids, who because of their wealth were afforded a better education, are aware of the way that the documentary series has shown them in a negative light. What they don't seem to get, though, is that the films have shown an unflinching eye toward each of its subjects. The three middle-class girls feel that they have to defend their life choices, but it's an unconscious defense. They don't get that the questions are leading them to passionate answers, to justify themselves. Likewise, the rich kids are just as unaware that there's more to the story than just making them mad. Maybe some do. Maybe they'll understand better at age 28, or after they've seen themselves in this installment. Of course, I know that there are those who will opt out of the series in future installments. The children are growing up. 14 Up improved on the original film by providing a little bit of background, so that the viewer could compare the person at one age to the same person at a different age. The stakes are raised once again in this third film, as we the audience can compare the subjects through three separate stages of their lives. And now, the children are even more thoughtful human beings. They have more capacity to think critically about themselves than they did even at age fourteen. Which occasionally leads to some pretty profound statements, e.g. the idea that maybe who a person seems to be at age seven is not who they really are, yet who they really are has been hidden beneath all the while - like one of those Russian nesting dolls, only getting bigger as time passes instead of smaller. It's not hard to see that in some of the kids. The jockey, although cut loose from his childhood career goals, does not seem much further from who he was at age seven. Others have changed dramatically: one child who was pretty emo at age fourteen has turned into a surprisingly masculine man at age twenty-one. It's a fascinating, incredible film. I am still eager to see the next installment of the series. The Up series leads one to be more contemplative and thoughtful, which is an extraordinarily enjoyable sensation. There is nothing more exciting than feeling a concept click in your mind, and 21 Up is nothing but. It's just great. P.S. I know that there are those who get annoyed by the flashbacks that are employed throughout the series. It's true that this film would have been a lot shorter without them, and since I've seen the first films without much downtime, I am seeing a lot of the same images. However, there are always things that you miss out on the first time you watch the film. Carefully chosen clips from the previous films are wonderful for adding new dimensions to the current footage. For instance, would you connect the fact that one of the kids is currently a bricklayer to his having pretended to build a house at age seven without these useful flashbacks? I, for one, find them more helpful than annoying.
Goekhan B (fr) wrote: Even though the film suffers from its incoherent, very confusing, and especially implausible storyline; it was still deliciously entertaining for me. I loved the vibrant visuals, and the wonderful costumes of the Belle Epoque were just charming. Too bad that the film did not make full use of its underlying material.
Jordan S (ru) wrote: Such a weird film...even for a video game film.
Tanner B (gb) wrote: Gladiator (2000) C-154m. ??? D: Ridley Scott. Russell Crowe, Joaquin Phoenix, Connie Nielsen, Oliver Reed. Dynamite sword and sandals epic, with Roman general Crowe returning to his country as a gladiator to seek revenge on corrupt leader Phoenix after his betrayal and family's death. Crowe's bravura, Oscar-winning performance makes up for narrative's ramblings. Film, Costumes, Sound, and Special/Visual Effects also won Academy Awards. Reed's final film. Extended version runs 171 minutes. Panavision.