This OVA features a somewhat original storyline because it presents the story from Yuria's perspective, spanning from her childhood, including the day she first met Kenshiro, to the conclusion of the previous film, as well as certain scenes from the manga and anime in which Yuria was not present. This story is the most expansive of the series, even covering never before seen events from Yuria's childhood, revealing both her mother and father, as well as her brother Ryuuga during his childhood. It also adds some details that were not in the manga, such as the time and place when Yuria developed her illness, her meeting with Rei (making his only appearance in the series), and her transition to the role of the Nanto General. One of the more notable additions is Yuria's dog Tobi, who serves an important role in the relationship between her and Ken. However, the OVA ends at the death of Souther and does not follow Yuria to the time of her death. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Shin Kyûseishu densetsu Hokuto no Ken - Yuria den
You may also like
Shin Kyûseishu densetsu Hokuto no Ken - Yuria den torrent reviews
Greg P (ag) wrote: I was pleasantly surprised with The Chaperone and, especially, Triple H. This was an enjoyable family movie that teaches some good lessons about how to live your life. It was nice to see Paul Levesque (Triple H) show his softer side with this role as Ray and Ariel Winter did a nice job as his daughter. I always enjoy an on-screen appearance from Kevin Corrigan and this was no different and I didn't even realize it was Annabeth Gish playing Ray's ex until looking up some info during the movie. The story was nothing too new or unpredictable but it was fun and there was decent character development.
Kimberly B (br) wrote: i want to see this :)
Elvira B (fr) wrote: From the beginning we know that Katalin Varga is on to something: after her husband discovers that she was raped 10 years ago and that their child is not really his, she leaves the village in a carriage with her son. She tells him that they're going to visit his grandmother, who is sick. This sounds believable to no one -and it isn't true, either.The film was shot in the breathtaking Carpathians. It has an eerie, fairy tale-like feel to it, beautiful cinematography and sound design that would make Lucrecia Martel proud: everything, even Katalin's desperation, has a distinctive, organic sound. The story itself is not only very well developed, although some consider it slow, it also poses moral dilemmas that left me struggling to find someone to side with: what is really redemption? Who decides that someone has been redeemed? What is really vengeance? Who decides that vengeance is not also a crime to be avenged?Katalin Varga has plenty of emotional force for such a small, quiet film. In fact, it's very aggressive, lurking, threatening; it's a very rare and quite fascinating form of suspense. The real motive for Katalin's journey is revealed towards the middle of the film, but that in no way loosens its grip; on the contrary, Hilda Peter's amazing performance becomes all the more puzzling and complex. Her own character, Katalin, collected yet violent, becomes the maker and at the same time the object of the movie's suspense: will she do what we think she'll do? will she be capable? will she take it back? It's very peculiar when a main character can produce empathy as much as terror.I don't know if Katalin Varga will become many people's favorite film since it is so anguish-inducing. There are literally no bad or good characters: their cruel actions wind up annulling their redeeming qualities. As I said before, it's almost impossible to choose sides, and although this is an admirable achievement for the writers, in my opinion it also makes it very compromising to connect with the story in a positive way... However, that may just be the reason why it's worth seeing, along with its impeccable production and performances.
Will W (es) wrote: Shawn does a pretty good job but the story and pace of the movie is weak and slow. I expected less so this was actually acceptable (given that I haven't read the manga). Otherwise, I believe I would be disappointed.
Hayden H (ru) wrote: the music is amazing. Can't say the same for the rest of it
Alenor L (gb) wrote: I figured out the whole plot in the first 30 minutes
Mike T (mx) wrote: A heartfelt, interesting portrait of one of America's greatest writers. The presence of Bono felt completely out of place and even a bit intrusive, but aside from that I enjoyed everything about this film.
Jeff C (ru) wrote: The town's people of Northfolk prepare to exit their homes and lives to make way for a new dam and the promise of a better life. Left behind (at least for the moment) is Father Harlan, who has bound himself to car for and read to a sickly orphan, Irwin, until the boy can be adopted (iin one way or another). The movie is OK. The scenery was good enough to distract you from the slow (and sometimes boring) story-line. But it's obvious that "Pan's Labyrinth" got it's idea from this movie.
Karsh D (mx) wrote: Sports agent has some moral issues to attend to. Wish Cuba gooding would remember to pick and choose his films better as has appeared in more dross than most.
Leonardo Malacay S (us) wrote: road movie sangrienta y con una direccin de arte hermosa!!!!!
Jonathan I (ru) wrote: Jodie Foster is awesome! And good acting all-around. A bit of 90's corniness in writing, especially romantically. But I did feel.
roger t (nl) wrote: would give it a try.......
Kris W (ca) wrote: Harrison ford cameo.
Jason R (ru) wrote: The most striking thing about this film, as far as I'm concerned, is its narrative insistence on the rule of law. In fact, a character we know to be guilty of murder is allowed to escape because the hero refuses the verdict of a frontier kangaroo court. The style is conventional classical Hollywood, though the landscapes are sensitively rendered and the Technicolor is, as always, beautiful. But this film has me wondering about something else: do we wax nostalgic about this period in American filmmaking because we think its average films--films like "Canyon Passage"--are superior to the average films of other periods? I think this argument is at the heart of the "genius of the system" notion, but I'm not sure I buy it. Is a decent Tourneur picture notably better than a decent Lumet, or Ridley Scott? I suppose there's a certain amount of guaranteed professionalism that lasts from the late 30s through the early 50s in Hollywood, but there's also, perhaps, a greater quantity of mediocrity. After all, what motivation did Hollywood have to make films better? The real genius of the system was to turn a profit, consistently, on disposable products, movies that time forgot almost immediately. "Canyon Passage" is better than that, but it's also firmly in the meaty part of the curve.
Sam A (it) wrote: The Coen Brothers are masters of irony and prime explorers of contingency. As in Burn After Reading, this movie is a fast-acquired taste.
Carolina C (au) wrote: It makes me cry. It's awful what humans can do. Let's #findyourthing.