Michael Strogoff

Michael Strogoff

After the death of his wife and his son, Michael, an intrepid Russian imperial army officer, lost the joy of living. His family has been the victim of an attack by the commander Ogareff Tartar troops, operating in the eastern DRC. When Tsar commissioned him to cross the dangerous mission across Siberia to restore communications troops sabotaged by Ogareff, the young officer does not hesitate to accept.

In 19th century Russia a Tartar rebellion led by Feofar Khan separates mainland Russia from the Russian far east.The Tsar's brother isolated and surrounded in Siberia is making a last stand... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


Michael Strogoff torrent reviews

Alex H (gb) wrote: Not much of an improvement over Tim Burton's 2001 remake, Rise of the Planet of the Apes uses distracting CGI monkeys to tell a contrived and silly reimagining of the Planet of the Apes mythos.

Caio C (nl) wrote: If you like sigur ros at all, you owe it to yourself to check it out.

Phil T (jp) wrote: Only a very basic shadow of a plot, puffed out by blink-and-you'll-miss-it fight scenes, montages and a lot of bad acting.

Chloe A (jp) wrote: 5 stars! This movie is the cutest ever. Drew Barrymore plays a girl who has never been kissed and seeks true love by going back to high school! It's a great film!

Bill R (ru) wrote: Holy cow, this was terrible. There are good B movies that just go bad and end up good but this just lingers on the bad side and doesn't waver at all. For a sequel for a good first this is awful.

Gordon R (us) wrote: Biographical tale about the Medgar Evers assassination that plays like a made for tv movie.

Lee M (jp) wrote: A wonderful tribute to filmmaking that could only be made in France, it has delightful performances and a low-budget style -- like the film it parodies -- which work beautifully.

Christopher B (ru) wrote: An amazing biopic reminiscent of Dali's cinematography. A short film, I am still thinking about what it means.

Greg W (jp) wrote: run of the mill WWII drama post WWII

Robert H (br) wrote: I knew this moment would come, and that I'd eventually find a Hitchcock film that I didn't care for too much. TORN CURTAIN, while certainly topical in its examination of Cold War politics, nuclear secrets and double agents, largely fails to do what every other Hitchcock picture I've seen so far has done, i.e., be entertaining. Granted, there are a few sequences that recall classic Hitch, but they are barely enough to distract from how dull this was to get through at times. In what would be his last usage of "marquee" talent, Paul Newman and Julie Andrews star as a couple of scientists who publicly defect to East Germany at the height of the Cold War in order to gain access to an important formula or nuclear secret. Honestly, as the film's MacGuffin, this piece of information doesn't really matter (to the audience, at least). And that's fine. However, matters aren't helped by having such weak characters despite being capably played such talented actors and Newman and Andrews. Even the chemistry between them was barely better than Connery and Hedren in MARNIE. There was also no memorable villain. Still, at the risk of beating down too much on the film, there were a few sequences that I will probably remember for while. The best of these happens close to halfway in, and involves a tense brawl between Newman and an East German agent who has gotten onto his secret plans. It plays out sans score, and was incredibly tense. Towards the end, there was also a bus-riding sequence and a scene in a theater that recalled the climax to THE MAN WHO KNEW TOO MUCH. It wasn't as good as the former, but still stood out. If there's one thing that's sorely missed, it's Bernard Herrmann as composer, here replaced by John Addison. I did like a number of the cues, but I can only imagine that Herrmann's score would have been much better. Even so, I liked the jazz-inflected touch that Addison brought to the material. Ultimately, though, TORN CURTAIN suffers by having terrible pacing and taking too long to really kick into gear. The last 40-45 minutes, minus a pointless semi-comic detour, is able to salvage some of what came before, but the film is still overall kind of boring.

Simon R (ru) wrote: not as good as the first and quite slow

Grant H (mx) wrote: Excellent film. Breathtaking look at the terrible time period, and the terrible area during the terrible time period, and excellent performances from its two leads, as well as the supporting class.

Simon D (fr) wrote: A western with an 80's cast which I expected to be pretty poor. It wasn't, it was pretty entertaining and well made. Kevin Costner doesn't have such a big role either, whcih is another plus point.

Sally L (de) wrote: it was actually 1974 the film, I remember seeing it as an 11 year old, good kids film

Javier S (gb) wrote: Cuando haces una pelcula por que estas desesperado por pagar tus impuestos se nota, no es terriblemente mala sino indiferente como para ponerla en la lista de pelculas que pones de fondo mientras checas tu Facebook