Rembrandt

Rembrandt

This character study joins the painter at the height of his fame in 1642, when his adored wife suddenly dies and his work takes a dark, sardonic turn that offends his patrons. By 1656, he is bankrupt but consoles himself with the company of pretty maid Hendrickje, whom he's unable to marry. Their relationship brings ostracism but also some measure of happiness. The final scenes find him in his last year, 1669, physically enfeebled but his spirit undimmed.

  • Rating:
    4.00 out of 5
  • Length:85 minutes
  • Release:1936
  • Language:English
  • Reference:Imdb
  • Keywords:artist,   maid,   dead woman,  

This character study joins the painter at the height of his fame in 1642, when his adored wife suddenly dies and his work takes a dark, sardonic turn that offends his patrons. By 1656, he ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechers

Rembrandt torrent reviews

Byron H (au) wrote: A psychotically sadistic anti-male sexist movie. I seriously wonder if the writers of this movie are going to mass murder a group of men eventually.

Ed C (ag) wrote: One line summary: Blending of science fiction, romantic comedy, and ongoing dysfunction.---------------------------------------- This romantic comedy is set in the near future where technology has advanced considerably. Nothing unexpected there. Supposedly an implant can be attached to a person's body that will count down to the time when the wearer meets their true love. Oona O'Leary is approaching thirty, and her timer has not started its countdown yet. Social convention suggests that couples get together if their counters mark each other. What can Oona do in this situation? In the opening, Oona and Brian meet with Matchmaker Patty after several dates. Brian is from Oklahoma, and has never had a timer. Brian's implant starts showing between two and three years to go. Oona's timer does not start. She's been down this road before. The couple breaks up immediately. As Oona leaves, Matchmaker Patty describes her as a repeat customer. The film has a number of amusing commercials plugging the product. While daydreaming in the checkout line at a store, Oona tunes back in to hear Mikey (checkout person, by day, otherwise a musician) talking to her. Oona's interest is piqued. Oona and half-sister Steph DePaul visit mother Marion DePaul (remarried) for half-brother Jesse's timer install ceremony. They meet the new housekeeper Luz, who speaks next to no English. Jesse gets a target date immediately: in three days plus change. Oona in non-plussed. Steph meets Dan at her first job at the retirement home. Marion advises Oona and Steph how lucky they are. Thanks to the timers, they will miss out on divorce, unrequited love, missed opportunities (not meeting the right one), and STDs. Further, they were so lucky that she broke up with Oona's father and found Paul, and that Paul broke up with Steph's mother. Being happy about two breakups is a bit much, and the overall picture is ridiculously rosy. Do the timers ever fail? Also, how could Marion be so incredibly verbally abusive to her natural daughter? I'm surprised Oona did not hit her upside the head. By this point, about 40 minutes in, the film is almost done exposing ideas. Will Oona get anywhere with Mikey? Will Dan be Steph's match? Will the families accept Jesse and his partner? Will the film illuminate possible variations? Will we meet Oona's father? Will he have any wisdom to impart?-------Scores------- Cinematography: 10/10 No problems. Sound: 10/10 No problems. Acting: 6/10 Emma Caulfield, JoBeth Williams, Tom Irwin, Desmond Harrington, and Muse Watson were fine. The other actors were next to forgettable. I don't remember seeing their work before, and I hope to never see them again. Screenplay: 4/10 A nice 20 minute short stretched to 99. There were zero belly laughs, zero chuckles, zero wry smiles. The film fails as a comedy. Where was the romance? One's significant other is chosen for you by factors you cannot control. What are the non-matches supposed to do? The setup is just an excuse for further discrimination against the unlucky. The film fails in the romantic department. SciFi? It did have one idea. Unfortunately, it was a ridiculous one.

Douglas L (ag) wrote: Harsh Times was a pretty heavy film to watch because you constantly felt that things were going to get worse and worse from the very beginning. There was a constant raise of tension that was very well kept through the performances and the editing. I have to give them credit for that. The film was completely character driven and I liked that. It spent time where it should and didn't deter into things that were not relevant. Our two leads, Bale and Rodriguez really worked well together. I felt that they were genuine friends. All in all the best part of the film for me was seeing Christian Bale give another really exciting performance. He did a great job in this film. He can truly be diversified. Very impressive.

John C (mx) wrote: [font=Arial]Set in mid-19th century [/font][font=Arial]Japan[/font][font=Arial], ?The Sea is Watching? tells the story of two Japanese prostitutes working in a village brothel. In Japanese society, as well as most societies, prostitutes are virtually the lowest workers on the social ladder. The two women dream of better lives (one more idealistically than the other) but due to the Japanese cast system they are almost doomed from the start. The main character, O-Shin, routinely falls in love with her clients, perhaps dreaming of the life that they can make for her. She is almost always disappointed (especially when a young samurai stumbles into the brothel and befriends O-Shin) but still she remains optimistic. The other main character, Kikuno, is a little to more wise to the world but instead of dreaming of a better life, instead conjures up a fantasy life in which she attempts to convince others is reality. Needless to say a truly happy ending is not in the cards here, but the both characters are left to realize their destines at the end of the film. [/font][font=Arial] [/font][font=Arial]I can?t say that this film was great but it wasn?t bad either. The film was well acted and the it was beautifully shot. But I couldn?t help but wonder if the movie could have been better written and the story lines made a little crisper. Also, the pace of the movie could have been better ? it was a little slow at points. Not bad but not great.[/font]

James H (us) wrote: BIZARRE CRIME COMEDY, SOME GOOD LAUGHS BECAUSE OF ITS ABSURDNESS. OFF THE WALLS WEIRD AT TIMES, BUT ODDLY LIKEABLE.

familiar s (de) wrote: Not a joy ride. Void of creepers unless you count the one in the title. Don't get on board unless you can't find nothing else to entertain you.

Danny R (ru) wrote: Abel Ferrara's bleak cult-classic is a deeply disturbing character study of a corrupt self-destructive twenty-year veteran police detective, played by Harvey Keitel in a powerhouse star performance, who has a serious drug and gambling addiction, he also is a sexual deviant who cavorts with hookers and takes gross advantage of teenage girls. Now this amoral police detective is investigating a shocking case of a young beautiful Catholic nun that was brutally raped and mutilated by two low-life youths, the nun has said that she forgives her attackers. This case affects The Lieutenant who is filled with Catholic guilt, he goes on a violent rampage to find the two young rapists, at the same time he is spiraling out-of-control and his of a collision course to disaster. Astute direction by Ferrara, with solid supporting performances by victor Argo, Paul Calderon, Leonard L. Thomas, Robin Burrows, and Paul Hipp, but its Keitel's impassioned highly impressive turn that dominates this intense nightmarish motion picture. Highly Recommended.

Matthew D (de) wrote: A Burton film which elicits empathy and suspense is rare, as is the (occasional) feeling it's actually about something; sometimes the plight of the mentally and physically disabled, sometimes a modern retelling of Frankenstein. If only it could have built on these a little better if could have been more than the charming, if unremarkable, modern fairytale it is.

Ian P (us) wrote: Fantastic comedy with a great performance by Peter O Toole.

Par P (ag) wrote: I saw this movie when I was about 10 and still enjoyed it now. It has all the classic 60's spy movie traits. James Bond like hero, sexy women, a good story, and some real suspense at times.

Darlene M (ca) wrote: The fact that they presented this movie in a serious tone just cemented my love for its innate campiness. The blend of history & fantasy, plus sharp visuals was very entertaining, even if the whole thing was a bit ridiculous...

Michael R (de) wrote: The Tv Series Was Amazing, This Shat Nope....

Marty B (au) wrote: While it doesn't seem to do anything that feels incredibly new, it works very well for entertainment and action that feels brisk and fun.