Alma Mahler's affair with the young architect Walter Gropius sets in motion a marital drama that forces her husband Gustav Mahler to seek advice from Sigmund Freud. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Mahler on the Couch
Alma Mahler's affair with the young architect Walter Gropius sets in motion a marital drama that forces her husband Gustav Mahler to seek advice from Sigmund Freud.
You may also like
Mahler on the Couch torrent reviews
Drew N (br) wrote: While presented in a conventional manner, this has an unconventional and creative premise that keeps you on the edge of your seat with suspense. Overall it is a very effective thriller. There are moments where the story feels a bit artificial and contrived, but if we suspend disbelief we are faced with complex themes of ambiguous morality. Most of all, this very engaging film is carried by superb directing and acting.
Greg R (ag) wrote: Damn tough to sit through. Sit through it anyway.
Noah F (au) wrote: X-Men: Days of Future Past hits marks based on visual appearance, but mostly its interesting and emotional narrative, supported yet again by its great ensemble cast.
Jacob L (es) wrote: If you've played the game(s), you may recognized one or two clich moments, but that's where the similarities end. I think some random encounters would have livened the movie up quite a bit. As it is, I'm surprised the "hero" didn't die from a paper cut before reaching the boss.
leah f (gb) wrote: So contrived, it hurts. The reason this movie doesn't work AT ALL is because the comics, despite some lore here and there, are grounded in reality! The whole concept of Garfield is that he is the average house cat with a full understanding of his surroundings and is critical of those surroundings. Also, he doesn't freaking talk! The way the treat this story with a typical "being a cartoon comic cat is a 9 to 5 job hurr, durr" is as boring, predictable, and unfunny as a adaptation could possibly get. Fourth-wall breaks are not always funny, you know! Also, WTF is up with Arlene in these fucking movies!? I'm sick of her being flanderized into some whiny and underdeveloped bitch! Once again, fuck everyone involved!
John A (fr) wrote: Another good reason to hate big business and the politicians that sleep with them
Chischilly 1 (mx) wrote: this is a gerat movie, if you like Crash, you enjoy this movie.
Senh D (de) wrote: Cold Mountain - It's a well made film with good acting and cinematography. It's not my type of movie, but since it was nominated for a bunch of Academy Awards and did nearly $100M at the box office, I wanted to see it. It's a love story set during the Civil War. Jude Law plays a Confederate deserter who must travel through a long distance to return to his love (played by Nicole Kidman) while being persued by Confederate soldiers. Because he's Jude Law, he has to push away advances from various hotties (including Natalie Portman) during his journey. What's interesting and great is the way the love story is told so convincingly despite Jude Law's character being is a man of few words. Renee Zellweger's character also brought some fun to the straight-forward love story. Red Trousers - Robin Shou's documentary about Hong Kong stuntmen is kinda interesting - although a lot of the stuff seem like something I've already seen or heard from other documentaries on Hong Kong films. The film within the documentary is also really, really bad; the fight choreography is not bad tho. I'm glad it's only used to illustrate the stunts. Still, it kinda feels like the documentary is an after-thought - as if he realized how incredibly bad his film was during shooting so he just kept the behind the scene stuff, added some interviews with a couple high profile stuntmen (Sammo, the Leung family), and turned it into a documentary. Jackie Chan: My Stunts - Since I reviewed Red Trousers, I might as well review this documentary on the stuntwork on Jackie's films as a comparison. I saw this several years ago. It's simply the best documentary ever made about Hong Kong stuntwork and fight choreography. It's as if you have Jackie Chan, the man responsible for changing the way Hong Kong action films were made, unveiling the magic behind his films. Oh wait, that is Jackie Chan! He not only shows you how some of the stunts in his films were done, but he also shows you how it was edited and where the camera was placed. With Jackie, you get it from different perspectives - as stuntman, director, and editor. As far as documentaries go, this is one of the greats. It's too bad Documentaries weren't that popular then, because this would have scored really well with critics - even though the appeal may not be too wide.
Shuu (br) wrote: worst AngeLina's movie!!
FRITZ S (jp) wrote: Add a review (optional)...
Ed C (ru) wrote: Better than the remake, which I saw first. The remake was more about the kills, the original is more about bittersweet revenge. The slow pace also makes everything feel more gruesome and disturbing but the payoff was great.
Oscar H (mx) wrote: Peter Graves upp till kamp mot ckligt onda utomjordingar med pingisbollar till gon. P deras hemplanet r det mrkt, drav de tilltagna gonmtten. Det hr r s mycket lgbudget att man knappt tror att det r sant, framfrallt i det hysteriska antiklimaxet i slutscenen. Men titeln r det tminstone vrldsklass p.
Rob P (jp) wrote: Definitely a tear jerker! A bit too long and a somewhat preachy, but also a really good story with great values. Every father should watch this movie!
Nathaniel M (es) wrote: Some day Billy Bob will make a good movie.
Ryan A (us) wrote: What I got to say about "The Grand Budapest Hotel" is such a wonderful film. "It's stunning, funny, really vibrant, imaginative and very fast paced of a movie for my opinion." The performances by the cast is really good. The directing and screenplay by Wes Anderson is good. The cinematography is gorgeous to look at. The score by Alexandre Desplat is perfect. "I personally love the sound, it's good music to my ears!" Finally, the effects is good as well. "I have to report that "The Grand Budapest Hotel" is a refreshing movie of the year of 2014."
Sean F (es) wrote: Kid goes from stereotypical goy introvert to John Wick out of nowhere. You can't just drop that in without setup...unless I missed the scene where his dad wakes him up at 4 am to practice assaulting the homeless.
forcebucket B (mx) wrote: Despite poor direction, ah-nold makes this very watchable, even re-watchable.
Robert B (au) wrote: Summer Lovers (Randal Kleiser, 1982)Back in the dark ages, when we had just moved (I can't remember where we had moved from or moved to; we did a lot of that sort of thing in the early eighties), my parents got this amazing new technology called cable television, and as a side perk they got a pay service called Home Box Office, which at the time was still a relatively young upstart. To say my preteen world was instantly changed would be an understatement. Those first few months with HBO changed the way I looked at the world of film (and the way I consumed film; I lost count within a week or two of the number of times I watched Hangar 18 and The Return). I, a suburban pre-teen who was absurdly grateful to have been able to catch such seemingly-obscure movies as Phantasm and Deathsport at the local multiplex just a few years before, was suddenly introduced to a whole world of foreign films, obscure classics, B movies... and sex films. Not in the sense of porn, or in the sense of softcore (a subgenre which I am convinced sprung up solely to serve the pay movie channel market), but movies that had sex as a main theme. Talk about horizon-broadening for someone who grew up in a sexually repressed household. When the parents were asleep, I'd sneak down to the living room and catch late-night screenings of movies like Personal Best and Making Love. Eventually, of course, the parents caught on and stopped me from doing such things, but I could still read the movie descriptions in the guide and fantasize. Summer Lovers hit HBO right around that time, and when you're thirteen years old and popping with hormonal activity, reading a movie description about a Greek vacation that involves a guy and two lovely ladies getting up to all kinds of wicked fun was fodder for years of fantasies. When I finally got a chance to watch the movie, thirty years had passed. To say my fantasies had done it better was an understatement on a level of magnitude I'm not sure I can put into words.Plot: Michael Pappas (sex, lies, and videotape's Peter Gallagher in his second feature) and his nave-but-horny girlfriend Cathy Featherstone (Daryl Hannah, who also appeared in Bladerunner the same year) head to Greece, Michael's homeland, for a summer vacation filled with nude beaches, liquor, and badly-played acoustic guitar. All is going well until Michael becomes obsessed with Lina (Bolero's Valrie Quennessen in her final feature), a French archaeologist on the island for the summer to assist in a local dig. Needless to say in the pre-AIDS world of casual encounters, Michael and Lina wind up in bed, there is some hair-tearing by both Michael and Cathy when he confesses, and she decides to play the open relationship game as well. But none of the island guys, all of whom come off as brash (though beautifully tanned, natch), do it for her. And she winds up confronting Lina...The first, and biggest, complaint I have: all of this is set to one of the worst soundtracks I have come across in recent memory, all awful treacly American pop I can't imagine the native folk on a small island in a country famous for its music would allow anywhere near its borders (we're talking about the worst excesses of Chicago, the Pointer Sisters, etc.). I have read a review or two that calls the soundtrack "intrusive". I commend the reviewers on their restraint. When you get to the final scene and see what Kleiser does with the music there, you will find yourself with the conflicting urges to vomit and laugh hysterically. Don't do both simultaneously, that could be fatal.Second: for a movie that put itself out there as transgressive, not that anyone had heard that term in 1982 but it fits, it's almost unbearably restrained. Most notably, while it is implied during the first couple of meetings between Cathy and Lina that the two of them have jumped into bed at least once, every time there is some sort of contact that would seem to naturally involve all three of them, Kleiser (who also wrote the script) shies away, instead having two of our participants kick things off while the third watches (with Michael always being one of the two)-and while I could understand and forgive this based on the mores of Hollywood at the time were Kleiser to even feint in the direction of "we gave you a polyamorous relationship, we'll at least give you leads towards imagining these folks in a threesome", nope, we never get it. None of the relationship movies any of our three principals makes in the movie makes a damn bit of sense, not only as realistic life choices, but more confusingly, even as the fevered imaginations of a teenaged boy (or a middle-aged scriptwriter)! All that said, there are a few scenes here that, while not making the movie worth watching, are arresting in some way, either visually (Michael's first visit to a nude beach with Lena, where he not-so-idly pours a trail of sand and gravel from her navel to her breasts in delicious close-up) or conceptually (Cathy's mother and her best friend pay a surprise visit to the island and try to process everything they witness with highly amusing results). If you stumble onto the movie and decide to watch it, these are what you will take away with you... which is a far cry from what you probably think you will take away with you. * 1/2