Psychopathia Sexualis

Psychopathia Sexualis

Multi-narrative adaptation of Richard v. Krafft-Ebing's notorious medico-forensic study of sexual perversity.

  • Rating:
    4.00 out of 5
  • Length:102 minutes
  • Release:2006
  • Language:English
  • Reference:Imdb
  • Keywords:dominatrix,  

Multi-narrative adaptation of Richard v. Krafft-Ebing's notorious medico-forensic study of sexual perversity. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechers

Psychopathia Sexualis torrent reviews

Harry W (de) wrote: With a decent first two entries into the series, I figured that it would do no harm to witness Transporter 3 and see Jason Statham go at it one last time.One of the most common complaints I had with the first film in the Transporter series was that it did not focus enough on what its title promised in that the protagonist Frank Martin was a transporter and that the requirement of tactical driving was key to his success. A friend of mine told me that Transporter 3 was a lot more focused on him in what the title promised. The idea was too good to be true because while Transporter 3 spends a lot more of the time showing Frank Martin as he drives to Budapest with another woman, the excitement value is a lot lesser.The story in Transporter 3 was not great. While the narrative in the first Trasporter film was a very generic action film concept and the one in Transporter 2 at least maintained a lot more compelling elements, Transporter 3 fails to live up to the preceding films mainly because it loses sight of the simplicity which made the first two good. The Transporter films are not meant to be complicated at all, they are meant to be stylish and dumb fun in the form of an action film. With Transporter 3, there is a new director in place of Louis Leterrier. Olivier Megaton is the name, but he is not game. While the language in the dialogue is fine, the premise is a lot more complicated this time which left me with questions that I feld I should not have to answer in a film meant to be simply dumb fun. The premise was somewhat convoluted and took itself a bit too seriously which caused me to give up on it after a while. An action film like this should not be too complicated, but it isn't so complicated that it causes the action iflm to be any less entertaining. The reason that Transporter 3 is problematic is that it is not fun enough. The energy in Transporter 3 is a step down from the preceding two films in the trilogy because the pace is a lot slower and the gimmicks of Frank Martin as a Transporter are not that exciting anymore. While in the first film we saw him establishing his rules and values and in the second we saw a more human side of him, in Transporter 3 we see nothing of him that we have not seen before. The primary thing that has in fact changed is the sense of excitement. The pacing is a lot slower and the quantity of action takes a backseat to the way that the narrative handles itself, although narrative is clearly not the most imporant thing in Transporter 3. What's important is the sense of excitement and fun, but in Transporter 3 there is a lot less than the first two films had. The film does not explore exciting new modes of transportation like Transporter 2 did, and nor does it focus on the simple fun of seeing Jason Statham kick as much ass as he should. Instead, Transporter 3 is left to focus a lot more on the plot and the characters than the action instead of moderating it which means that it comes up short in the action department. And what action there is does not live up to the quality of the first two films because of Olivier Megaton's new visual style. The editing in Transporter 3 makes the film look just like on big music video. Everything suffers from an excessive abundance of quick cuts. I know the editing in the first two Transporter films was really quick and occasionally choppy, and the editing in Transporter 3 still manages to leave some entertaining action scenes for the viewers, but it's an issue because the quantity of action is insufficient and so the flawed quality of the action is a lot more notable and irritating. I still enjoyed the action in Transporter 3 because there was car chases, bike chases and quite a few moments hwere Jason Statham smashes up the enemies with his awesome combat skills. There just wasn't enough of it, and there could have been a few more gunfights along the way. So the visual style of Transporter 3 ends up being its other flaw after the insufficient quantity of action in the film. For an action film, Transporter 3 is fun but it still suffers from Olivier Megaton's inexperienced direction and inability to focus on the most important parts of what made The Transporter series exciting. He does a half-decent job filling in for Louis Leterrier, but the other half is flawed and it ends up taking its toll on the film. On the plus side, his style of filmmaking was yet to hit its worst which would be uncovered when he directed the despicable Taken 2, so by comparison Transporter 3 seems a lot better and shows a more positive step forward for him as a filmmaker.And although the characters are fairly thin in Transporter 3, the cast do a strong effort.Once again, Jason Statham easily takes on the role of Frank Martin. While his character is not so interesting anymore and is not explored in any slightly insightful manner like in The Transporter and Transporter 2, Jason Statham is a genial presence in the role because he brings back the same fearless and single toned line delivery to the part as well as his signature abs and fighting abilities to make the film an exciting action film. Jason Statham is a kickass lead once again in Transporter 3 even though he does not live up to the standard of quality that he set for himself in the preceding two appearances in the role of Frank Martin. Jason Statham is good to see active in the role one more time because he continues to kick ass.Natalya Rudakova did a decent job. Although her character was such a basic and strange seductress figure whose story relevance still puzzles me, she took on the part easily because she was able to play her sex appeal cleverly and share a decent chemistry with Jason Statham. She certainly has more energetic spirit to her than Shu Qi as the damsel in distress in The Transporter, and she knows how to manipulate Frank Martin convincingly. It's also refreshing to see a woman of her appearance in such a major role because heavily freckled actresses are rarely given such a primary part in a film. Natalya Rudakova proves herself beautiful with the look and talented as an actress, and so she justifies her casting easily.Robert Knepper is a genial presence in Transporter 3 considering that he has such a legacy for his role as Theodore "T-Bag" Bagwell in Prison Break, so it is good to see him back doing what he does best at playing the antagonist in such popular entertainment. He is mercilessly quick with his swift line delivery and he develops an antagonistic nature in no time. His intense chemistry with Jason Statham makes the film a little more interesting, but more importantly it is just awesome to see him playing another bad guy because it's what he is best at as he proved in Prison Break, and so Transporter 3 should hopefully please fans of the television series. As one of them, I certainly was.But despite a talented cast and some fun action moments, Transporter 3 suffers from too much focus on story, too little focus on action and editing which pushes the limits of what justifies quality.

juveria k (au) wrote: the blockbuster of 2007 its very funny.each and every scene is so funny not even 1 scene is without comedy

Philip E (de) wrote: Was younger and working at a restaurant when I saw this and that made this movie a lot of fun.

Eolapaloe Z (ca) wrote: jangan anggap enteng film ini,,walaupun hanya mendapat rating 3 bintang,,,akan tetapi tema cerita yg di angkat sangat mengena..,, memadukan 2 ras tertindas sebagai center utama film..,,di kemasnya pun tidak seperti drama "strongly moving"...film ini lebih dekat dengan keceriaan,,,... film ini mengingatkanku dengan film "billy elliot",,dmana sang karakter mengejar impiannya tanpa harus peduli dengan lingkungan sekitarnya..,,

Anna N (jp) wrote: Mikkelsen = Want to see it.

Frdric H (gb) wrote: Lake placid is fun and a nice watch with a huge crocodile killing everything it can attack.

Jackie M (ag) wrote: Just a tad over the top in believability but all in all was pretty good in the suspense factor.

Camille L (mx) wrote: Le Cercle des Potes Disparus reste dans l'imaginaire populaire comme un des meilleurs rles de Robin Williams, l o son personnage n'est pas si loign que celui d'Awakenings ou plus tard de Will Hunting. Toujours est-il que le film de Peter Weir est plutt russi, avec son groupe d'tudiants attachants qui se voient enseigner la posie par un professeur diffrent. Il est malheureux que le film se concentre plus sur eux que sur Robin Williams, justement, qui n'est jamais aussi bon que lorsqu'il est canalis. On retrouve d'ailleurs Ethan Hawke, Robert Sean Leonard ou Josh Charles dans le groupe des tudiants, qui taient alors vraiment prometteurs. Mais Le Cercle des Potes Disparus est un peu trop long pour ce qu'il a vraiment raconter et la dernire demi-heure semble presque manipulatrice plus qu'une consquence logique. Finalement dcevant.

Private U (jp) wrote: It wasn't great but I wasn't bad either. I'd watch it again.

Gary S (ru) wrote: A good idea at the time and even now still quite funny. A compilation of some of the worst films of all time. Different genres consisted of sci fi films (where aliens tend to say variations of, "Resistance is useless!") and 1950's youth culture films. The rock n' roll generation of the 1950's were a crazy bunch of cats!

Grant S (au) wrote: Great movie. Interesting, thought-provoking and emotional plot. A bit idealistic though. Also has some dead end sub-plots. Ending is a bit abrupt and could have done with some polishing. Still the original teacher-gets-through-to-some-unteachable-kids movie though.Superb performance by Sidney Poitier in the lead role. Good support from a cast of mostly unknowns. The theme song (by Lulu, who also stars in the movie) is excellent too. (The cover version, live, by 10,000 Maniacs and Michael Stipe is even better)

Nathan C (us) wrote: This is a bad original, Not Scary, Just a place of my boredom.It was shocking, Not Nice, Hellish, Crude, Stupid, Unpredictable and sad.I don't know why directors have the ability to seek in a movie with an original saying it does well, It's Completely unnecessary.Not Good Soundtrack and Awful Script.Chloe Grace Mortez's acting in other movies are way and far off better than what she did in this. Julianne moore is played by the Bitch nut job mom that Sadly she does well in, This is worse than Total Recall, Now I hate Remakes.Score: 3.5/10

Ryan R (fr) wrote: Highly recommend this doc, exceptionally well made & informative... very entertaining

Guna A (kr) wrote: It has potentials, but it wasnt executed well. I couldnt tell if this is a hollywood production or local production house :D

Josh S (kr) wrote: Robin Williams my man.

John K (ag) wrote: Katherine Heigl has finally found her calling. She couldn't make it in Comedy or Action movies (she played all those characters like a wooden stick), and she seems to fade in to the background of her movies. But in this Melodramatic role, she does much better. Grace Gummer is the only bright spot in the entire film. Too bad Grace is limited to a small supporting role.