Rage of Angels
Based on Sidney Sheldon's novel. A young assistant district attorney (Parker) is used by a ruthless attorney (Morell) to get his client off. She is fired and almost disbarred, but fights back to become a top attorney, torn between two lovers: Morell and a married lawyer with political aspirations (Warner).
- Stars:Jaclyn Smith, Ken Howard, Kevin Conway, Ronald Hunter, Armand Assante, Joseph Wiseman, George Coe, Deborah May, Joe Warren, John Glover, Wesley Addy, Bill Cobbs, James Greene, Pauline Flanagan, Lois Smith,
- Director:Buzz Kulik,
- Writer:Sidney Sheldon (novel), Robert L. Joseph (teleplay), Alex Mann (story department)
Based on Sidney Sheldon's novel. A young assistant district attorney (Parker) is used by a ruthless attorney (Morell) to get his client off. She is fired and almost disbarred, but fights ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Rage of Angels torrent reviews
(es) wrote: Vital Signs is a horrible film. It is about medical students in their third year trying to decide what to specialize in. Adrian Pasdar and Diane Lane give good performances despite a terrible script. Marisa Silver did an awful job directing this movie. I was disappointed after watching this motion picture.
(br) wrote: was watching with tears the such pure love and sad story but like it. Zhou Dongyu is the best performer.
(br) wrote: There is no doubt that the traps are cleverly put together as they relate to the characters lessons. They don't dissapoint on the gore either because face it that's what we are here for after the beginning. Apart from that, "SAW VI" take their usual routine of tying loose ends together while inadvertently creating new ones...and hopefully, turn these building blocks to a nervewrecking climax the franchise need. Let the game...continue.
(it) wrote: I love John and Maya and think they play their roles beautifully. Highly recommend.
(au) wrote: These gamers are nuts. It really is crazy how huge these people got in such a small pond. The rise and fall of the arcade was roughly a three year period back in the 80s and these guys still live in that world with their achievements. Its just crazy. Film really shows you this little world.
(gb) wrote: Very good sports drama, based on a true story.
(ag) wrote: Breathtaking animation with a magnificent attention to detail and an imaginative and appropriately dark story are what make Coraline a fantastic animated film.
(kr) wrote: This is just the most perfect description / metaphor for the monotony of office work.
(es) wrote: A mess of a movie with some fun moments of Lithgow hamming it up. The scenes with Frances Sternhagen were fantastic though.
(mx) wrote: Geeks like me will be arguing over a true definition of film noir forever. It's what makes us happy. See, what makes noir so difficult to define is that it was discovered, not attempted. It's not as simple as adding song and dance to a story and calling it a Musical. However, we have generally agreed on the origin of the species (note I did say, genre). Simply put, the discovery of film noir came about when, after being denied to American films during WWII, Europe got a whole bunch of them all at once. The French noticed a decided change in the tone of the pictures, compared to those before the war and, furthermore, saw that this tone was apparent in movies from multiple directors, producers and screenwriters from all of the major studios (not Disney, silly). This last part about the studios is important. During the days of the studio system, each studio had its own character and, while they all produced films from every genre, each had its specialty. MGM made musicals, Warners specialized in gritty realism, Universal did monster movies, etc. So, when the post-war cynicism that played an enormous part in the dark moodiness the French recognized and called film noir bled into the movies themselves, it was bound to effect each studio in a different way, even though no one knew that anything different was even happening. Warner Bros. pioneered the gangster film and had a stable of actors who knew how to bare their souls on screen ferociously, yet with subtlety. The noir mood infiltrated Warners unnoticed. But MGM...how would a very subtle yet definite darkening of the traditional escapist Hollywood philosophy affect the most Hollywood of all studios? I suppose the answer can be found in [i]Tension[/i]. This film was made during the heart of the noir era, but shows that MGM just didn't know what to do with this new style. MGM was no stranger to the crime film, having very successfully porduced the [i]Thin Man[/i] series. But those were detective stories. One of the hallmarks of noir (from what I can tell) is that the film's POV is that of the criminal, and I don't think Leo the Lion new how criminals think. [i]Tension[/i] is undone by its own devices. The film opens with Barry Sullivan telling the audience how he puts pressure on a suspect until the [u]tension[/u] finally breaks them. He even repeatedly stretches out a rubber band during this speech, just in case we don't get his point. Sullivan then disappears for the next 45 minutes or so while Richard Baseheart loses his wife (the deliciously cold Audrey Totter) and his dignity to Lloyd Gough. Baseheart then creates a second identity (named after MGM starlet Ann Sothern) so he can kill Gough, blame Fake Baseheart and go on with his life/wife. Complications arise when Fake Baseheart falls in love with Cyd Charisse. The undoing I mentioned earlier is this: Sullivann narrates the whole picture. So, what we have is a story seen from the POV of the crook, but dictated from the POV of the cop. So, is it noir? How the hell should I know? My best guess is that Sullivan's VO and intro were added to an already completed film. And the VO is used very badly. Was it necessary for Sullivan to tell us he's about to set up Totter about 30 seconds before we watch him do it? It's all too bad, really. The story is very intriguing, the plot twists are mighty entertaining and Baseheart is especially good as the geeky pharmacist driven to murder.
(it) wrote: one of my all time fav Movies , sure its a lil corny & its no Idiana jones but i love it
(au) wrote: Draft day is a sports drama film that will satisfy almost all of of its intended audience despite some glaring holes that most pro football fans can point out. There is a definite sense of implausibility; too many good luck moments for the good guys as well as miracles, for example, the main character being able to swap 3 second round draft picks for a top 10 selection. That simply doesn't happen. Or the dramatization of a player being selected first and being so relieved due to his rough financial situation (thanks to the generous protagonist) instead of falling to the second round, as he fears. Whistle-clean high first round picks don't fall. I do apologize if this review is a bit tedious; its intended for those audience members who follow the draft and can understand my nitpicks.In the acting aspect, Costner fits the bill for a sports GM in a suit, and Jennifer Garner, while capable, is completely unnecessary as his executive/love interest. The entire romance angle is pointless and has no affect on the story.Overall, Draft Day will entertain its audience for sure, as long as they shrug and smile when these moments of disbelief come in. The over-dramatization and feel-good intent was a given, even if it makes the movie feel cheesy.
(nl) wrote: I saw this in the best circumstances: In a packed theater full of screaming people. Bravo, Mr. Peli. Good stuff.