Paper Heart (2009) torrents full movies

#

Paper Heart

Charlyne Yi embarks on a quest across America to make a documentary about the one subject she doesn't fully understand: Love.

Paper Heart is a great movie of Nicholas Jasenovec, Charlyne Yi. This movie was introduced in 2009. There are many actors in this movie torrents, such as Charlyne Yi, Michael Cera, Jake Johnson, Gill Summers, Martin Starr, Seth Rogen, Demetri Martin, Luciano Yi, Lydia Yi, Mike Modrak, Bill Hase, Matthew Craig, Donald Skinner-Noble, Derek Waters, Matthew Bass. The kind of movie are Romance. The rating is 6 in www.imdb.com. This is really a good movie torrents. The runtime of this movie are awesome, about 88 minutes. Chich1Phat is interesting uploader, she is very lovely. You should spend more time to watch this movie. If we must use one word to describe about this movies torrent, I think it should be 'Awesome', so what is your thought. Do you know what are visitors? ShinichiKuto is the best. I don't fight my iPhone screen. Enjoy this movies torrent and share to your friends . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

Charlyne Yi embarks on a quest across America to make a documentary about the one subject she doesn't fully understand: Love

Paper Heart torrents

Paper Heart full movie

Paper Heart2009 torrent

Paper Heart torrent, Paper Heart movie torrents, download Paper Heart full movie, Paper Heart2009 torrents, download Paper Heart2009 torrents, watch Paper Heart movie, Paper Heart englishsub, free download Paper Heart movie, movie Paper Heart torrent

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechersSize
Download   Paper Heart.2009.DvdRip.Xvid {1337x}-NoirDVDRip4938700.11 MB
Download   Paper.Heart.LIMITED.BDRip.XviD-SAPHiRE no rarBDRip2637712.96 MB
Download   Paper Heart 2009 720p BluRay x264 DTS-WiKi BOZXBRRip39494 GB
Download   Paper.Heart.BRRIP.MP4.x264.720p-HRBRRip39292.21 GB
Download   Paper.Heart.2009.LiMiTED.SWESUB.DVDRip.XviD-DVD-UploaderDVDRip27491.37 GB
Download   Paper.Heart.2009.LIMITED.BDRip.XviD.SWESUB-KickFootBDRip3334701.29 MB
Download   Paper Heart.2009.DvdRip.Xvid_toAVI-Pt BrDVDRip4940508.35 MB
Download   Paper.Heart.2009.x264.AC3-WAFOther27381.37 GB
Download   Paper.Heart.2009.x264.DTS-WAFOther29401.37 GB

You may also like


Users reviews


Anders A (fr)

Beautiful sword fighting and persisting its mystical thematics, making it a entertaining and worthy classic. Following the demon path, set to walk through hell, towards the path of revenge


Asa B (ca)

A couple of laugh out loud moments don't compensate for a frankly awful movie


bill s (ag)

Politically incorrect,childish gross out romantic comedy,,,,, and I didn't stop laughing even as the credits rolled


Brady S (de)

One of the biggest pieces of shit I've ever seen


Chris M (mx)

agoo may not be my favorite cartoon, but it's leaps and bounds ahead of this idiotic movie!. Mr


danela h (gb)

4 out of 5 stars~ Exactly what I expected when I rented it! This might prove that I'm a little biased and or hypocritical considering I gave the other cheap action movie a lower score, but hey-this is Bruce Campbell we're talking about! Honestly, what do you expect?!?. Pretty much just Bruce meets girl while being a Tornado chaser, girl wants/has to shut down their little operation, Bruce gets girl kinda story. This flick is pretty much a cover story, it doesn't dig deeply into any of the characters or ideas brought up. Cheesy action flick with some Global Warming issues that don't really get dug into


Edith N (ag)

I will also note that the idea of a pair of college graduates, however young, as "just boys" seems antiquated from at least a criminological perspective. In fact, about the only two things which brought back to me that the movie's set in the '20s were a jarring scene featuring the Charleston and the repeated mention of a Stutz Bearcat. Straus (Louise Lorimer) just seemed to be wearing generic Old Lady Clothes. I honestly can't tell you what the character of Ruth was wearing most of the time, and Mrs. And the women, well, aren't terribly important to the story. Cuffs and lapels and things, but the general design. The clothes, I believe, were correct, but the man's suit hasn't changed terribly in the last hundred years or so, barring outliers like the leisure suit which don't count anyway. I forgot, though, that it was a period piece. The crime, of course, is undeniable. "Crime" and "history," two of our other choices, seem the best bets. True, but we're all duly pretending it isn't. IMDB lists it, among other things, as a biography. It's not suspense, especially for those of us with the knowledge of what we're talking about. It's not a mystery; we know they did it, when, why, and how. I have a certain amount of difficulty in categorizing this film--though, as I've complained about before, it's not my job anymore. I focus on them, incidentally, because I remember the actors. Welles, meanwhile, conveys Wilk's disdain for his clients coupled with his passion for abolishing the death penalty. ) He has a lot deep issues that aren't touched, and everyone around him who's really looking at him seems to know that. (They leave out the psychosexual stuff and really just seem to blame Nietzsche. ) Still, Stockwell does an excellent job of someone trying to be what and who his philosophy tells him he should be. I have chronology issues. (I would like it very much, by the way, if someone explained to me the 1999 Orson Welles version of [i]Moby Dick[/i]. ) And, you know, there's a bit of scenery-chewing from the both of them. Certainly Welles can't make that claim! (Even the number of credits; to be fair, Dean Stockwell got started younger and did a lot of TV. I'm also certainly not going to claim that Dean Stockwell never made a turkey in his almost-200-item career. It may well be one of the best of director Richard Fleischer's works, but since he directed, among other turkeys, [i]Amityville 3D[/i] and the 1980 [i]Jazz Singer[/i], he had a lot to make up for. Not anywhere near as good as [i]Rope[/i]. Not since he'd recently published an autobiography! No. As it happens, his invasion of privacy suit didn't do much better. But he wasn't going to get anywhere claiming that the movie had made him look like a heartless killer. I think the not-quite-rape scene is added, because again, I think the girl is added. On the other hand, it was difficult for him to prove libel, especially given that Welles's closing speech is essentially word-for-word what Darrow said. And with Leopold alive to be aware of the movie, Leopold was alive to sue. I'm pretty sure the Girl (Ruth Evans, played by Diane Varsi) is invented, but clearly, nothing else is. The clues are even the same. You can't pretend that with [i]Compulsion[/i]. The characters are pretty obviously the same, of course, but we can all safely pretend that they are not. There wasn't anything he could have done about Hitchcock's [i]Rope[/i], which really was Not at All, inasmuch as the crimes and timeline are completely different. So why all this "Not at All" business? Well, you see, Leopold was still alive. It is then down to Not at All Clarence Darrow Jonathan Wilk (Welles) to save them from hanging. Only it turns out they really aren't all that much smarter than everyone else, because of course they get caught. Besides, emotions like fear and guilt are for lesser mortals, not for these guys. They'd always know, and they'd always get to be smug about being that much smarter and cooler than everyone else. Oh, sure, there's ransom money involved, but wouldn't it be cool to show that they could commit a murder and just get away with it? I mean, obviously, they wouldn't be showing anyone but themselves, but still. They do this in part because of ridiculous Nietzschean philosophy, which has led them to believe that they are Supermen in the Nietzsche sense--not in the Siegel and Shuster sense. You can tell, because they kill a neighbour named Paulie Kessler, who is Not at All Bobby Franks. They're Leopold and Loeb. No. You can tell, because they, um. Judd Steiner (Dean Stockwell) and Arthur Straus (Bradford Dillman) are Totally Not at All Leopold and Loeb. This is not his best performance, but it's still very good. ) This movie has reminded me, though, as I think I need to be reminded every once in a while, that even cinematography and writing, lighting and sets, would not have been enough had Orson Welles just not have been able to act. Mankiewicz did most of the work. However, I don't know how strong that argument is, and I think his touch in the movie is unmistakable, even if Herman J. (There is a strong argument that Welles didn't actually have as much to do with the script as he claimed he did, that he basically just stole the credit. But even in their Hearst-swelled blindness, the Academy could not but acknowledge the brilliance of that script. ) He should have beaten John Ford for [i]How Green Was My Valley[/i], too. (I'll get back to you on whether he should; I haven't seen [i]Sergeant York[/i] yet. After all, of the three Oscars he was up for in 1941, he didn't win the one for acting. An [i]auteur[/i], if I may be pretentious enough to use the word. However, although Orson Welles did a lot of acting, more acting than anything else, in my head, he's still a director. Oh, Dean Stockwell I don't know if it's just me; maybe it is


Edith N (ca)

Even if it's because he was a bad influence on his brother, the law just doesn't work that way. And there's this weird bit where David's brother (Einar Axelsson) kills a guy in a fight but they want to send David to jail for it instead, and I don't understand that at all. It's the kind of behaviour that gives women a bad name when men believe it. Which is all the more ludicrous because she only met him once, and he was horrible to her. Edit keeps going on about how she loves him, and I don't think it's supposed to be Pure Christian Love. His wife made the sensible decision of walking out on him and taking the kids, and she is expected therefore to bear responsibility for everything he did after that, though only by him, so I'm not sure what the author thought on that subject. David Holm was such a cartoon villain that I wasn't interested in seeing him redeemed, because he would have no personality left whatsoever. In the end, the real problem is that I didn't have much sympathy for anyone. Though I'm sure that the budget if they'd continued that level of special effects would have been astronomical, and I guess we're back to what the original book was about, and I haven't read it. I will admit that I don't in general care much for supernatural thrillers, and what I was rather more hoping for was a supernatural drama, but I felt cheated by the morality play. I would have liked to have seen them play with that some more, but instead, there's all that flashback and David's long-suffering wife (Hilda Borgstrm), who doesn't even seem to have her own name. I'm sure part of that is that B&W covers a number of sins that Technicolor does not, but the effect of the carriage is impressive. I've seen special effects that looked more primitive from movies made fifty years later with a sizable budget. Part of why I got so frustrated about the focus on David and Edit's story is that the special effects were really quite impressive, given what the state of the art was at the time. Well, God's protection from tuberculosis is the knowledge of proper sterilization, and she ignored that. She said she didn't care if David's clothes were infected, and I'm sure, if you'd asked her, that her response would have been that God would protect her. I didn't care about Edit, who was frankly getting what she deserved. However, I was hoping that we'd move on to what I thought of as the real story, the story of Death and the carriage and what it's really like to be the driver of that carriage. (Can someone who speaks Swedish tell me if "Salvation Army" is the correct translation of the organization Edit works for?) We are really supposed to be wishing that David would only see the value of Edit's prayers and stop being evil, even though it's quite obvious that he didn't--after all, we're getting the whole story in flashback. Instead, what I got was a morality play. You see, when I read the plot description on the Criterion release, I thought I was going to get an eerie supernatural tale. So Georges (Tore Svennberg), who has been driving Death's carriage for the last year, does his level best to make David understand the suffering he has caused over the last year and before. Only he isn't and doesn't much care. Across town, a woman is dying of tuberculosis that she caught from him; she is Sister Edit (Astrid Holm), and she wants to know that David is living a better life because of her. ) And this year, the man who is last to die is David Holm (Victor Sjstrm), a wicked man. (In a bit of a clever marketing ploy, the film's initial release was on New Year's Day. The driver, you see, is the last person to die each year, whosoever dies on the stroke of midnight, New Year's Eve. For the driver, a day is as a year, and the driver must keep the duty for what then feels like three hundred sixty-five of them (366 in leap year). At least, that's what IMDb tells me, and if I'm going to start disbelieving them now, what's the point? According to legend, Death attends each person's end in a carriage steered by a shadowy driver. But anyway, the movie got made because you didn't dare made Selma Lagerlf mad, and censoring her plot would have done so. Which I suppose is an example of Sweden's being more sensible about such things than the US, given that Joe Breen didn't care who wrote the original book if he thought it was offensive, and his office didn't even have the force of law behind it. However, Selma Lagerlf, author of the original novel, is one of the great lights of Swedish literature, and she was too important to challenge, even in the name of censorship. This is mind-boggling to me, but there is also the slight issue that it means that the film shouldn't have been made at all; no censorship seems enough while still keeping the basic story intact. Bait and Switch Theatre Apparently, the Swedish government at the time had censorship rules that forbid the portrayal of the supernatural onscreen


Greg S (de)

Pretty standard kung fu stuff, distinguished mainly by an unusual amount of nudity. A detective who looks kinda like Bruce Lee tracks a counterfeiting ring in Hong Kong


John A (nl)

A Shame That It Was Not Turned Into A TV Series, If It Was It Would Be Great (On The Cheesey Level). The Hoff Is Great As Fury, But Some Of The Other Parts Are Overacted Especially The Part Of Viper. Very Camp And Very Cheesey, A Good Story Executed Terribly. Goyer (Blade Trilogy & The Dark Knight). Watchable TV Movie From Writter David S