Humble Maria, who outfits top London theater star Ned Kynaston, takes none of the credit for the male actor's success at playing women. And because this is the 17th century, Maria, like other females, is prohibited from pursuing her dream of acting. But when powerful people support her, King Charles II lifts the ban on female stage performers. And just as Maria aided Ned, she needs his help to learn her new profession.
- Stars:Derek Hutchinson, Mark Letheren, Claire Danes, Billy Crudup, Tom Wilkinson, Ben Chaplin, Hugh Bonneville, Jack Kempton, Alice Eve, Fenella Woolgar, David Westhead, Nick Barber, Stephen Marcus, Richard Griffiths, Zoë Tapper, Rupert Everett,
- Country:UK, USA, Germany
- Director:Richard Eyre,
- Writer:Jeffrey Hatcher (play), Jeffrey Hatcher (screenplay)
A female theatre dresser creates a stir and sparks a revolution in seventeenth century London theatre by playing Desdemona in Othello. But what will become of the male actor she once worked for and eventually replaced? . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Stage Beauty torrent reviews
(au) wrote: Elegant heroine, beautiful cuisine..., but it was getting less interesting in latter half as a comedy film.
(it) wrote: A quiet, brooding & disturbing film about losing yourself by way of a brainwashing cult. Olson & Hawkes are riveting. Quite honestly, one of the most haunting films I've ever witnessed. This one stuck with me for days.
(us) wrote: What do you get when you take District 13 and take away the very thing that people loved about the first movie, the parkour-influenced action scenes and in its place you shoehorn in a politically-charged story that nobody could possibly have cared about? Well, you get District 13: Ultimatum. I commend the crew for really trying their hardest to make the film more than just a mindless action movie. But the people that loved the first District 13, the people that wanted to see this film in the first place, really didn't want a story-heavy sequel. It's a gray area because doing exactly what the audience wants can be stifling, creatively. But straying too far away from a very successful formula would drive those very people away. And let me tell you, this politically-charged story isn't exactly subtle. It wears its message right on its sleeve for all to see and, again, I can't complain about the screenwriters trying to do something different with its sequel, instead of repeating what made it hugely successful, but I found the story to be really corny and cheesy. Perhaps, that was the intention. By the end, there's this B-movie charm to the story but it's not like that charm permeated throughout the entire movie, it's just came at the climax and the post-credits scene. For some reason the videogame series Saint's Row came up in my mind after watching the post-credits scene. The film isn't bad, I just wish, similarly to my complaints about the first film, that there had been far more action than there was. But what is there is quite good and fun. I got a Jackie Chan vibe from some of the fight scenes, where Damien would just tie up guys together with their own limbs. In a film where it's all about the athleticism of its two leads, and they definitely do get to showcase it, but it also feels like so much more could've been done with their talents than what they actually did. Still, this film is decent with its action sequences and its cheesy story is somewhat fun. It could've been better, but I've certainly seen worse.
(ca) wrote: I'm a fan of this young director, having seen an earlier work of his. This film is yet another example of his penchant for effortless yet very capable storytelling. Bad is smart, witty, and has its poignant moments, remaining grounded - never over done. Looking forward to watching Setton's career unfold.
(jp) wrote: Not great, a little lacking, but I enjoyed it because of Mr. Isaacs and the wonderful voice of the lead actress.
(mx) wrote: Def. different but I wouldn't necessarily say bad. It was an interesting take on this whole town and all its stories.
(us) wrote: This was wonderful in the theater.
(it) wrote: You cannot Rrrrrrrrrrrun From yer own bunghole.
(ca) wrote: Deep down, I wanted to like this movie, and I wanted it to be good. I wanted to like it in general, but also because this film has an infamous reputation for being terrible. I thought that it couldn't be that bad, and that it had to have at least one redeeming value or two. Well, it turns out that both I and the reputation are correct.This movie does suck..a lot. But it does have some interesting and quirky performances. However, all the absurdity in the world can't make up for the fact that this story and script are muddled, incoherent, and a rambling, random mess. I'm sure everyone had fun making this film, and I do appreciate nuttiness, but c'mon, what the hell even happens in this movie?I like the idea of a nice hippie with freaky oversized thumbs hitchhiking her way across the country. The idea of a bunch of raunchy cowgirls on a ranch is cool too. None of this comes together and really gels though. I like the cast. They are a large and diverse group of interesting characters. However, not all of the performances are all that great, and many of the characters are just goofy, shallow caricatures with little to no development. That said, they all try to put out a bit of effort at the very least. I do like John Hurt, though. In fact, he may be the highlight. He's a scream to watch run around in drag being flamboyant. This is probably one of his more brave, interesting, and eyebrow raising roles. I think a good way to describe this mostly, but not quite irredeemable failure is that it is kind of like a light and slightly sanitized version of a John Waters film...maybe. It's probably best as a campy cult classic midnight movie. I've never heard it get that status though. Everyone instead just seems to hate it. As camp, it is sometimes fun, but somehow this manages to be boring, even during some of the odder and more absurd moments. So yeah, this isn't a complete waste, but it is close.
(br) wrote: As a friend noted when it was first released "If the point of that thing is to show that we are just as boring as straight people then they succeeded". Hiller has never been a particularly interesting filmmaker, and the leads are TV drama dull, though pretty. After it flopped, and AIDS devastated the gay population of this country, there would not be another major gay film for years. Very disappointing.
(fr) wrote: Mill Creek's 50 Movie Pack: Chilling Classics Reviews MEDUSA : In Ancient Greek Mythology, the Medusa was one of the deadliest creatures. For accusing the Goddess Athena (the patron Goddess of the city of Athens) of jealousy over her beauty, Medusa was punished for such a claim. Athena's punishment was to turn Medusa's hair into snakes and making her such a monstrosity that any mortal that had the misfortune to lay their eyes upon her would turn into stone. So the thought of the creature of the Medusa in a Fantasy -Horror would make a brilliant movie monster. In fact it is no surprise that the creature would appear in a film of stop motion animator legend Ray Harryhausen, in the 1981 film CLASH OF THE TITANS. So with a film titled simply MEDUSA from 1973 (eight years prior to the Harryhausen classic) on MILL CREEK'S 50 CHILLING CLASSICS Movie Pack; well guess what instead of expecting a tacky , low-budget , obscure , 1970's horror film with a campy looking Medusa terrorising a bunch of people, dam it I've been mislead yet again! Starring the always brilliant cult movie legend Cameron Mitchell (BLOOD AND BLACK LACE ) in a film called MEDUSA where the bloody creature NEVER appears. This film is actually a low-budget Greek Tragedy, Gangster film. Even though Gangster films are always enjoyable, this film is just bland as anything. The plot sees a Rhodes based American gangster get into trouble with the local mob. Narrated in flashback upon his death, the gangster explains how he was the cause of his and his sisters' demise. THOUGHTS: Ok I'm well aware that this is a Gangster-Greek Tragedy but was it necessary to call the film MEDUSA? Even in its supposed metaphorical meaning doesn't make much sense. Yeah sure the parallel between the Gangster incurring the wrath of the Mob, can be view as similar, Medusa's insult incurring the wrath of the goddess Athena. However considering (and sorry for the spoilers) the death of the Brother and sister was caused by their own hand; the parallel is pretty much destroyed considering the Mob doesn't get the privilege of shooting the rouge gangster. Despite missed potential in this film at least the viewer has the treat of seeing Mitchell playing a rival Mobster. 30%.
(jp) wrote: Ahh Horror films and the seventys
(nl) wrote: Gripping and powerful story of Gis holding a hill against Chinese forces in Korea. Peck is at his typical best. Quite good!
(ru) wrote: Punisher War Zonewell at least some action scene are better than the previous Punisher movie
(mx) wrote: Made far enough away from Hollywood to come across as real.
(jp) wrote: I have seen this movie with all my friends to the Bar Mitzva party.We were the only audience at the hall, like "private" showing
(kr) wrote: It a one smart classical comedy