Origins of Life
A documentary that explores the natural world of the sea, from the single-celled organism to more complex forms of life, OCEAN ORIGINS was originally filmed in the IMAX large format, which adds a crispness and clarity to the images. This documentary film seeks to examine the process of evolution by looking at the many creatures of the sea that can illustrate the way multi-cellular life emerged over the course of four billion years. OCEAN ORIGINS is a creative film that uses fascinating documentary footage to look at scientific theories and principles in an interesting manner
A documentary that explores the natural world of the sea, from the single-celled organism to more complex forms of life, OCEAN ORIGINS was originally filmed in the IMAX large format, which adds a crispness and clarity to the images. This documentary film seeks to examine the process of evolution by looking at the many creatures of the sea that can illustrate the way multi-cellular life emerged over the course of four billion years. OCEAN ORIGINS is a creative film that uses fascinating documentary footage to look at scientific theories and principles in an interesting manner . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Origins of Life torrent reviews
(mx) wrote: Kids movie all the way with a barely there plot and juvenile gags. six year olds will love it
(ru) wrote: Visually beautiful, and interesting storyline. Recommended to fans of the series!
(it) wrote: Dull and seemingly interminable. Starts slowly, continues going slowly, thinks of speeding up, but then goes slowly, and eventually ends. All this, and the movie didn't really make a point. It is simply one long drifting story.Plus, the whole movie just seems culturally stereotypical and insensitive. Americans, even senior officers in their army, are brash, boorish louts. Japanese women are submissive to the extreme. And don't get me started on Chinese actors/actresses being cast as Japanese...Performances are OK. The standout is probably Susuka Ohgo as the young Chiyo. American characters are not played well at all.
(ca) wrote: Romeo Must Die I love this movie
(fr) wrote: Displaying two great performances from Ian McKellen and Brendan Fraser, director Bill Condon puts in his tender direction to create a heartfelt story of friendship and the effects of war.
(gb) wrote: It could've been much much better.
(mx) wrote: DRACULA in CINEMASCOPE . . . no Peter Cushing except in the pre-credits sequence where the 1:33.1 aspect ratio of the predecessor where Van Helsing literally destroys Count Dracula is surrounded by fog to "extinguish" the dead-space created by the 2:35.1 aspect ratio of the cinema-scope framing. Dracula has only one scene of dialog and grunts and growls whenever he's on screen. The "chaste" woman is bitten and vampirized and that is a little sad for me because she really didn't seem to deserved being turned into a vampiress. . . . its a classic . . . yet it is worse than Horror of Dracula.
(gb) wrote: What a lame sequel to a movie which I thought was really good. I mean, first off ... the fact that the same thing happens (the movie poster gives it away), is just stupid. What happened in the first movie was a freak accident ... and then somehow it happens again? It's just stupid. And the fact that the head is HUGE makes it even more campy. Don't bother with this one.
(it) wrote: I really quite liked it. It's funny and smart, I highly recomend it.
(it) wrote: This falls under the title a good solid family/friends drama.....surprisingly profound with good performances.
(gb) wrote: Should offer insight to a largely unknown part of history but its far too clumsy.
(fr) wrote: Synecdoche, New York [sih NEK duh kee] is a synecdoche of Schenectady, New York; the city where the film begins. This film is thought provoking in a way that first attracted me to independent/Foreign/art-house cinema and has stirred this veteran film enthusiast to sit down and pen his thoughts for the first time in years. For that, I am grateful.First of all, the film is not great, but it does steep the viewer in a dark and gritty alternate reality and leaves a deep impression. The meaning of the film can be summed up in three quotes:"I will be dying and so will you, and so will everyone here. That's what I want to explore. We're all hurtling towards death, yet here we are for the moment, alive. Each of us knowing we're going to die, each of us secretly believing we won't.""What was once before you - an exciting, mysterious future - is now behind you. Lived; understood; disappointing. You realize you are not special. You have struggled into existence, and are now slipping silently out of it. This is everyone's experience. Every single one. The specifics hardly matter. Everyone's everyone. So you are Adele, Hazel, Claire, Olive. You are Ellen. All her meager sadnesses are yours; all her loneliness; the gray, straw-like hair; her red raw hands. It's yours. It is time for you to understand this.""As the people who adore you stop adoring you; as they die; as they move on; as you shed them; as you shed your beauty; your youth; as the world forgets you; as you recognize your transience; as you begin to lose your characteristics one by one; as you learn there is no-one watching you, and there never was, you think only about driving - not coming from any place; not arriving any place. Just driving, counting off time. Now you are here, at 7:43. Now you are here, at 7:44. Now you are..."Kaufman's blend of surrealism and a seemingly 25-to-30-year thread of stream-of consciousness is admirable. As for the surrealism, the film brings to bear the truism that we all see with our emotions. No two people see the same thing the same way. We are, as sentient beings, unable to see purely photographically. In it's surrealism, the film is sometimes comical, sometimes haunting, but always apt. As for the film's attempt at stream-of-consciousness, it lacks sophistication. Considering the film's Demille-esque sized ensemble-cast and the scale of the film's cinematic and rhetorical reach, Kaufman invites comparison with landmark works. And, when compared with the 1927 film Metropolis by Fritz Lang or William Faulkner's novel The Sound and the Fury , Synecdoche, with it's faux-obscurity, simply does not measure up.The dramatic arch of the film effectively supports the premise that "We're all hurtling towards death, yet here we are for the moment, alive." However, when Caden is provided the financial means to build an enormous alternate-reality city/movie-set in a huge abandoned dome in Manhattan though funding from a MacArthur Genius Grant, it is difficult to suspend one's disbelief. The grant pays a whopping $625,000. Nice, for sure, but really? Also, the death of most of the cast at the end, whether real or surreal, does not serve the plot but rather seems like a cheap exit strategy from a movie that would otherwise never end. In all, the film steeps the viewer in a dark and gritty alternate reality and leaves a deep impression. However, the film's cloak of art and intellectualism covers a poorly constructed premise. This may be why I had not heard of it for seven years.