In Imperial Russia, Anna Karenina falls in love with the dashing military officer Count Vronsky and abandons her husband and child to become his mistress.

In Czarist Russia, Anna Karenina falls in love with the dashing military officer Count Vronsky and abandons her husband and child to become Vronsky's mistress. Tragedy ensues when Vronsky ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


Love torrent reviews

Gail S (ru) wrote: I wasn't expecting it to be this good, given the nature of a subject like this. So engaging and informative. You have to think, if it weren't for custom, in what world would we think it's OK to cut off an animal's toes? This movie provides the data we've need to prove that vets committed to "do no harm" won't be able to rationalize doing this any more. .

George M (ag) wrote: "most anticipated film of the summer"... bane might want to know about this

Supratik M (nl) wrote: Ali Zafar as Ali Hasan and Pradhuman Singh as Noora/Osama are very impressive in their debut roles in Tere Bin Laden. The movie has some pretty funny moments too, but it messes it all up in the end with its ridiculous ending. The so called "American" actors are unimpressive with their made up American accents and mediocre acting. Watch this movie if you are an Ali Zafar fan as his performance doesn't disappoint.

Julien A (ru) wrote: Un film profond et magnifique, successivement enthousiasmant, revigorant puis carrement deprimant.Le gros + du film (et aussi son probleme, je vais y venir), c'est la prestation fulgurante de Louis-Do de Lencquesain. Il incarne et porte veritablement le film sur ses epaules pendant ces 2/3. Il degage une enrergie incroyable, et un charisme enivrant.A tel point que lorsque celui ci s'eclipse, le rythme retombe fatalement et on ressent quasi physiquement le depart de son personnage.Il s'agit du 2eme film de Mia Hansen-Love (qui a un an de moins que moi), grand talent a suivre.

Chris J (jp) wrote: Cranston is as Cranston does. Triumphant in his portrayal.

Joe C (mx) wrote: Water boarding, should we or shouldn't we? This movie does take a position. This movie did have an interesting way to tell the story. I think they could have done more with the talent that they had.

John S (jp) wrote: I lived in Japan for a few years and came not to expect much when it comes to Japanese movie story lines and directors, with exceptions made of course for Akira Kurosawa and Hayao Miyazaki, and this film doesn't come close to the quality of the two talents mentioned above. The story may seem lame compared to the original Japanese TV series (Sukeban Deka) from the '80s (or even the manga) but this movie works well for me thanks to the presence of my favorite J-Pop singer Aya Matsuura. The special FX are also a treat and are a step up from what I'm used to seeing from a Japanese studio. I just wish there had been an explosion as big as there was on the box art. So the breakdown goes something like this: Story: thumbs down Actress: thumbs up SFX: thumbs up That would put it at around 66% but since I can only rate in round numbers I'll give it an extra 4% just for putting Aya-chan in a mini-skirt school uniform and then giving the original Sukeban Deka actress a cameo at the end as the mother.

Shane H (gb) wrote: This takes you into a fantasy of martial arts and stunning visual effects. I watched this movie 5 times in 2 days before I had to return it and I rented it again.

Megan R (jp) wrote: As patient as I can be, this movie is so slow and so intent on being in-depth that it loses pace.

letha w (ru) wrote: Iloved this movie. Some of Jon best work and the story it's self was the star of the movie.

Ashley S (it) wrote: i like this one too!

Darcy S (au) wrote: I only want to see it because it has Dean Stockwell in it.

Keith K (nl) wrote: i am the fans of stephen chow

Sarfara A (kr) wrote: Ghost Dad I had watched as when I was a small then, unable to think about reviewing it one day, enjoyed it then due to its entertaining plot, however on my second view of it I found it lacking in dialogues, performance and lame direction (although Sidney Poitier the director of the film is genius filmmaker as well as an actor). I sometimes feel very moderate about this film's plot.

Brandon M (kr) wrote: i have NO idea why it's called Medusa. She doesn't appear in the movie, there's no mention of her, and it's not even one of those cheesy things like "cat on a hot tin roof" where they use her name in a metaphor one time. they NEVER mention her or allude to her. EVER. if you name a movie "Medusa", then it better FRIGGIN HAVE MEDUSA IN IT! but enough of that, how's the actual movie? well it comes in the chilling movie 50 pack, and that's probably the only reason anybody would see this stinker. and it has a problem a lot of the other movies do. number 1. it's not a horror movie and therefore does not belong in a horror set. number 2. it's boring. BORING BORING BORING. God how do all these 70's movies keep getting more and more boring? but OK. lets discuss plot. Guy (Hamilton) needs to find the new will to destroy it so he and his sis can get all the inheritance money so he can pay off the mob. along the way people die. why? i'm not sure. there's really no justification of WHY these people are dying, they just kind of are. This movie was actually incredibly hard to follow. There were several characters doing things that i didn't know what they were doing and i didn't really care. this movie made me stop several times to take breaks. and as a film lover. i hate doing that. i despise stopping movies and taking breaks. i saw epic movie in one sitting. i should be able to sit through anything. But not Medusa, oh no. you have to break this crap up. Even the kills are dull as dirt in this movie. there's a lot of strangulations and offscreen deaths with no tension because i couldn't tell who was dying half the time because of oh yeah. the lighting! This movie must have a hard on for night shots because over half of this movie is filmed like someone forgot to bring a flashlight on their camping trip. The picture gets so dark you can't see who's doing what or what's going on. it's confusing and stupid. The payoff (if you can call it that) isn't really a payoff because the beginning of the movie shows you what happens at the end. so it's not really a payoff. Unless you want to see all 50 movies in your box set, (in which case know you're in for a boring one here) for the love of GOD do not search for this movie by itself, but if you HAVE to sit through it, just know you're in for a snoozer. Medusa gets a 10%. and that's almost a gift

William W (kr) wrote: Over the years, I have really enjoyed Smith's comic book writing, but this is the only film so far I have seen him direct. My cinephilic friends tend to dismiss his recent works, but this was very enjoyable. I like the influence he has had on independent cinema. 1994 certainly proved to be an important year for it, with the smash successes that independent studios had with 'Clerks' and 'Pulp Fiction'. I hope he sticks to directing films that he himself writes. I have the feeling he wants to expand his horizons but isn't quite sure how to go about it without alienating his huge fanbase. I have great confidence in him, and feel that if he puts his heart into it, he can be a great filmmaker, instead of a good one. I think for him to do so, he could do himself a great service and read a few less comic books and watch a lot more movies, particularly by the Hollywood greats from the Golden Age, such as Sir Alfred Hitchcock, Howard Hawks, Raoul Walsh and John Ford. It would be quite exciting to see what he comes up with, once his creative juices are recharged.

Jayakrishnan R (us) wrote: 74%Saw this on 3/1/14Cypher starts off bad, it's blandly acted for most of it's duration, especially from Jeremy Norton and Lucy Liu. It's efforts on cinematography and direction are dubious. But what saves it is it's story which kicks into pace after it's slow first 30 minutes. It has some good twists and applaudable story arc.