The Big City
Life at home changes when a housewife from a middle-class, conservative family in Calcutta gets a job as a salesperson.
|Download||Mahanagar aka The Big City (1963) 720p.BRrip.Sujaidr (pimprg)||BRRip||29||41||1.21 GB|
|Download||The.Big.City.aka.Mahanagar.1963.720p.BluRay.x264-GECKOS [PublicH||BRRip||45||47||4 GB|
|Download||Mahanagar-The Big City (1963)-BDrip-Criterion Collection-AVC.108||BDRip||41||44||4 GB|
|Download||Bengali Movie - Mahanagar ( 1964 ) - Satyajit Ray's Film||Other||30||36||367.05 MB|
|Download||Mahanagar (1963) Bengali_MHCe DVD5_Eng Subs [DDR]||DVDR||44||25||4 GB|
|Download||Mahanagar (1963) Bengali_Xvid 2cd_Eng Subs [DDr]||Other||31||35||1.37 GB|
|Download||The.Big.City.aka.Mahanagar.1963.1080p.BluRay.x264-GECKOS [Public||BRRip||43||38||4 GB|
You may also like
The Big City torrent reviews
Matthew Y (au) wrote: Action Thriller meets family drama... A collision so catastrophic it should never be repeated. Despite the draw of seductively sassy Amber Heard and rising star Hailee Steinfeld, it's the lead Kevin Costner that struggles to shine.
Tristan H (nl) wrote: The water wars was a pretty enlightening movie and made me think about the way that I use water and how it is used throughout the world. It showed that a world water crisis is looming. I had no idea how water was outside of the country and water inside the country. There were several pretty interesting parts about how the US and other countries import and export water, fights over water, and was in which water usage could be fixed in the future. Definitely check the movie out as it presents interesting details and things of that sort in the realm of water.
Dan G (us) wrote: Yeah. Suggestion for you? Before you watch this movie? Do something. Hell, do yourself. But don't watch the movie.
Gustavo M (es) wrote: Very interesting movie about Pakistan after the separation from India and the raise of the fundamentalism of the Islam in that country.
Christopher S (es) wrote: Director James Foley has crafted what is easily the best adaptation of a Jim Thompson novel with this offbeat indie neo-noir. Jason Patrick's twitchy, dazed performance gets old pretty fast, but the rest of the cast - particularly the scene-stealing Bruce Dern - are top-notch. Subtly stylish with an unusual atmosphere and desert setting and genuine suspense and tension. One of the best of its genre.
Paul Z (de) wrote: Film has no real analogy to alphabet or language rules, no ordering system which would conclude how shots should be consecutively connected. Nor is there a counterpart to the purpose of a single shot in a film with that of a word of written or spoken sentence. A single shot can last minutes. In it, dialogue can be said, characters' movements and thus relationships can be shaped, and a physical or historical setting summarized. If there is a linguistic structure of film, it's basically that each shot refers to those on either side of it. As we watch a movie, we frequently hold off on our understanding of one shot until we see the next. Werner Herzog's Where the Green Ants Dream reminds us of all this, by pulling the rug from beneath our feet. Werner Herzog believes in the supernatural power of locations, in the idea that if he shoots a movie in the right place at the right time, the reality of the location itself will bleed into the film and make it more authentic. He has filmed on the slopes of active volcanoes and a thousand miles up the Amazon, and in this occult little movie, he goes to a desolate, sun-blasted expanse of Australian Outback. This is forbidding turf, however it is sacred land to the Aborigines, who believe that this is the place where the green ants go to dream, and that if their dreams are interrupted, unthinkable chaos will hail down on future generations. The Aborigines' belief is not in agreement with a mining company that wants to lance open the soil and scour for uranium. As the movie opens, the company is in the process of triggering explosions so geologists can listen to the reverberations and select probable mining sites. The Aborigines sit like stones in the way of the explosions, declining to move, ordering that the ants must not be roused. We meet the characters on both sides: the lanky, open-minded mining engineer, the uncompromising tribal leaders, the haughty president of the mining company, and the various weirdos who have been spent on this desert shore. Herzog thinks more in images than ideas. If he can find the right images for a film, he's not worried about its "meaning." In this truly mysterious and eclectic film, his images involve an old woman sitting firmly in the Outback, an opened can of dog food on the ground in front of her, hopefully anticipating her dog, who's been lost in a mine shaft. Then we see a circle of Aborigines sitting in the aisle of a supermarket, on the precise site where the last tree in the village once stood. It was the tree under which the men of the tribe once stood to dream their children before procreating. We also see an uncanny panorama, virtually like another planet in its fruitless isolation. We do not see any ants, but then maybe that is part of Herzog's intention. One of the weirdest elements of this film is that nothing in it is drawn from anthropological fact. The creeds, traditions and etiquette of the Aborigines, for instance, are not based on a study of their real lives but are fabricated by Herzog for his screenplay. The altercation between the mining company and the Aborigines is also not inspired by the front page of the time, but is figurative, staging similar real stories, but in a more dramatized framework. Even the fine points of the life cycles of the ants are contrived. Herzog apparently had no clue if there are actually ants in the Outback, let alone whether or not they dream. I have a fundamental problem with this, frankly, because if he's going to fabricate everything about thoroughly real cultural elements, why not fabricate the cultural elements too? Why not create Aborigine-like natives, set the story in an anonymous landscape depicted by the Australian Outback? All our lives, our world is portrayed to us through stories from every facet of all cultures, not least of which movies. That's not to say that they necessarily document the world, but give us accessible, latent and engaging ways of knowing it, a way of making sense of our society, and sharing it with others. Its collectiveness stresses its inherent in human communication. This is why stories have to tell the truth about their content. Nevertheless, Herzog's movie does indeed brim with the over 500-year-old premise that dreaming presents fundamental proof that the senses we trust to discern between reality and illusion shouldn't be entirely believed, that any state that relies on our senses should at the very least be attentively analyzed and delicately confirmed to decide whether it is in fact reality, something the mining company is nowhere near prepared to do, nor the Aborigines for that matter. Regardless, there is a reality in this strange film, and it emerges from the two interfering ideologies. The Aborigines sit and wait, motivated by fathomless circuits of theological dogma and custom, and the engineers are invariably in motion, certain that success lies in commerce and enterprise. The story can be read as a characterization of the millennia-old philosophical question "What is real?" Why are so many of us incapable of a practical answer? Logically, reality is either what exists, or what we can concur appears to by consensus. The procedure has been branded as when enough people think something is true, which usually conveys little more than what a group or culture chooses to believe, not what they find they have no choice but to believe by living, learning, listening. That tension is everywhere in the world today, and I guess Herzog didn't feel the need to create a wholly fictional or non-fictional universe for it, just to choose the images.
David B (ru) wrote: When the decision was taken in 2005 to press the reset button on the Bond series I was not surprised, this cinematic institution had back itself into a wall, the previous instalment in 2002 was a typical globe trotting gadgets laden farce of a film and subsequently current Bond Pierce Brosnan's final mission in the role. The film celebrated the films 40th anniversary with all the subtlety of a sledgehammer but it was the C.G.I para-surfing and invisible car that showed that time needed to be called on this type of thing.Back in 1999 Barbara Broccoli and her step brother Michael G Wilson had finally secured the filming rights to Ian Fleming's first Bond novel Casino Royale, Having settle a rights dispute the film was now in a position to be made by EON productions the official Bond film production company run by Brocoli and Wilson. The book had been previously filmed back in 1967 directed by a total of 6 people including John Huston at one point, the film has gained cult status over the years but bears no relation to the original series or Fleming's novel for that matter. This being Fleming's first Bond story the makers needed to make a decision would they retool this to fit an older more experienced 007 or was it time to let the current actor go and search for new talent to take on the role.While the idea of rebooting a series may sound common place now back in 2005 it had been attempted rarely but the idea was on the radar especially as Warner Brothers had rather successfully relaunched the Batman franchise earlier that year. The film while not a monster (that would be its sequel) was a big enough success to secure the opportunity for more, it stole the thunder that summer from George Lucas' final Star Wars prequel Revenge Of The Sith but more importantly appeared to wipe the memory of the hole that Joel Schumacher had dug for the series back in 1997 with the atrocious Batman & Robin. This is not to say that Brosnan final film had been a disaster it was clearly liked by the public having been at that point the most lucrative film of the series. Though the reboot option was one way to start again plus the advent of the Bourne films had changed audiences expectations of what to expect from the spy genre and also 9/11's impact can not be underestimated as a factor into why films took a darker direction in the 21st century. Back in 1995 it seemed that EON had tried to change things with Goldeneye the film did seem different to what had previously been but it was business as usual when Brosnan returned 2 years later in Tomorrow Never Dies, it was like Roger Moore never left (this is not a compliment), The series had been ridiculed by the likes of the Austin Powers franchise and the next three entries starring the Irish man seemed to be completely oblivious to this, appearing as farcical as those parodies. Could a noughties audience really take this version of the character serious again? If James Bond was to appear relevant again he would need a serious remodelling so when Broccoli and wilson announced in 2005 that they'd found their new Bond and that they would be bring Fleming's celebrated first Bond novel to the screen with Goldeneye director Martin Campbell returning to take the helm with the reset button pressed, the expectation was huge and things didn't begin too successfully to start with.Daniel Craig a critically acclaimed stage and screen actor who had been bought to the public's attention in 1996 when he appeared in the BBC adaptation of Peter Flannery's masterful Our Friends In The North alongside future Doctor Who Christopher Eccleston and rising star Mark Strong. Craig then settled into a series of roles in acclaimed drama appearing alongside Derek Jacobi's Francis Bacon in Love and the Devil, Roger Mitchel's controversial The Mother and playing Ted Hughes alongside Gwyneth Paltrow in Sylvia. Craig also flirted with blockbusters with a supporting role alongside Angelina Jolie in the first Tomb Raider movie. Although it was been cast in Mathew Vaughn's gangster flick Layer Cake that brought him to a bigger audience and also caught the attention of Brocoli who believed she'd found her Bond. Craig's announcement wasn't received that favourably, the brick bats were out pretty quickly, the tabloids voiced their disapproval and a web site craigsnotbond was set up where Bond fans could voice their concern of his appointment, too short, too ugly and too blonde were comments that were bandied about at the time. Craig certainly wasn't typical of what had previously been seen in the role, his looks while to some immediately set up as a global sex symbol were to some just not good enough to play their super spy (incidentally many of these were male). Although what Craig did have was a strong dramatic background. EON wanted to dispense with what had gone before and felt for their new Bond they needed something far more serious that what had gone before, the attempt to make Bond more likes Fleming's character with Timothy Dalton in 1987-89 had not gone down well with the public despite Dalton's terrific but brief time in the role, the time hadn't been right for a gritty Bond. EON felt now in the 21st century some 17 years later that now they would be.The thing that strikes you about Casino Royale is that it feels like a proper film, not some cookie cutter entry in an on going series with the usual tick the box antics that audiences had just come to expect, no sense of drama or thrill it was obvious Bond was going to get out of whatever predicament he was in. Royale presented Bond as a newly minted 00 who in the pre title sequence of the film in monochrome black and white (a series first) in Prague would be introduced performing his second kill to earn his status while we flash back to him performing the first one, Craig's Bond informs Dryden (Malcolm Sinclair) a corrupt government official who seems unruffled until he realises Bond is cementing his 00 credentials as him as his second kill as he intones nervously "made you feel it did he?" Cutting back to Bond in a brutal punch up in a bathroom with an assailant. The scene switches back as Dryden says " ...you needn't worry. The second is-- " Craig cutting Dryden sentence short with a single silenced gun shot followed with a witty quip, " Yes Considerably" Craig immediately announcing his presence in the role. We cut back to the bathroom as the assailant goes to shoot Bond as we get the camera view of him looking straight at us and shooting his target as the scene dissolves into a familiar sight as the colour bleeds in as the opening credits begin.The producers choosing wisely not to begin traditionally as all the Bond films since 1962's Dr No with the gun barrel sequence as we are clearly witnessing Bond begins, instead having Daniel Kleinman incorporate into the titles a redesigned gun barrel, kleinman having grabbed the baton with aplomb back in 1995 from series titles legend the late great Maurice Binder, here Kleinman delivers his best and most striking titles to date using the card theme of the story. Soundgarden's Chris Cornell and David Arnold co written title song "You Know My Name" while not being a instant classic is definitely the best since Bono and the Edge penned Goldeneye theme sung by Tina Turner, the title of the song announcing the arrival of the new Bond with a real fan fare. The second half of the film would pretty much be a straight adaptation of Fleming's novel, the first half being original material written by Bond regulars Neil Purvis and Robert Wade with some polish been applied by Oscar winning director and writer Paul Haggis. We have brief introduction to our villian Le Chiffre (Mads Mikkelsen) as well as shadowy operative from an unknown organisation Mr White (Jesper Christensen) as details of a sinister stock market transaction are revealed, then we fling into a break neck pursuit sequence in Madagascar (actually Abandoned Motel, Coral Harbour, New Providence Island, Bahamas) with Craig's Bond pursuing a terrorist bomb maker Mollka, real life Parkour expert Sebastian Foucan, Foucan's skill adding an extra dimension to the chase sequence. After witnessing a Bond who for most of the time can't get around without the help of some gadget or other it refreshing to see Craig's Bond go at full throttle, the new post 9/11 007 a real physical presence if not a tad reckless. This new Bond is not the Bond we all know and love just yet, the idea that Purvis and Wade would introduce him as not quite the finished article, even Arnold's score would tease small amounts of the Bond theme (although not played in full till the end) to signify each time he Bond earned one of his stripes. Craig's Bond would appear impulsive and after being told by M (a returning Judi Dench) to go and bury his head after his altercation with Moloka ending in a hasty execution which unfortunately for M & Bond his documented by the worlds press. This being Bond never one to fade into the background with the Intel he acquires heads to The Bahamas.The idea of Bond's actions causing a scandal the Bond of old would seem to cause havoc with no real accountability, the writers inserting somewhat of a more real world feel than previous instalments. Craig said he watched all the previous entries for preparation for the role and then promptly forgot them. Although he presents a new interpretation of the character, there are little subtle nods to Connery and even Moore. Bond using the opportunity of been mistaken for a valet at his hotel in the Bahamas to obtain surveillance to further his investigations has more than a hint of Sean and when he says to the receptionist " What if I felt compelled to" echoes a touch of Sir Roger. Arnold teases a little of the theme out as Bond wins a vintage Aston Martin DB5 from the next suspect on his list Dimitrios (Simon Abkarian). Purvis and Wade's script touches on the literary Bond's penchant for married women, the ease of the seduction of Dimitrios' wife Solange (Caterina Murino). The film offering a welcome touch of dialogue and intrigue before Bond ends up in Miami foiling the destruction of the Skyfleet airliner in an action packed chase sequence, setting up Le Chiffre's being forced to set up a high stakes poker game to retain the money of the client he has just lost on his rather risky venture foiled by Bond. Setting up the events that would pick up Fleming's novel for the duration of the film.Murino's Solange is more typical Bond girl material although Vesper Lynd is probably the most significant female in Bond's life and evolution. Eva Green charged with the job of bringing to life on the screen establishing her relationship with Bond with a rather spiky introduction, her obvious cynicism in Bond's mission. A credit to the writers and director Campbell as the rather mundane idea of a poker match is made a tense experience interspersed with some drama and a brutal hand to hand combat. Craig and Mikkelsen spark off each other with a game of one-upmanship leading to the famous torture sequence detailed in Fleming's novel, apart from some black humour inserted this is pretty much to the letter of the book with some minor adjustments. The events of the conclusion of the book are played down with Vesper's fate but it would be churlish to expect EON to go the same route with their climax, the sinking house sequence has caused much division among fans and critics. I for one are more of a fan of this than the watered down Raiders of The Lost Ark truck sequence in the Miami segment of the film. It was always going to be the case that this moment was never going to as subtle as the book, the series was being relaunched and this was supposed to be the most significant moment that starts to mould the new Bond into the fully formed 007 and the big emotional climax was the way to go. These films are not made for a small percentage of fan boys who's wet dream scenario's would most likely have no bearing on the general public, these films are made for a mass audience and they weren't going to let their re-booted franchise go out on a whimper. It is also an imaginative sequence that also incorporates a big emotional and significant climax for Bond.Of course thing were not going to end with Bond down and out and the epilogue see's a suited and booted Daniel Craig finally get to utter the famous line in a brief but big moment with Arnold letting rip finally with the fully fledged Bond theme to close proceedings which also sets up the first full blooded sequel of the series history as the sign off tantalises of what is to come. Casino Royale is not perfect no Bond film is, the Miami sequence of the film could have been handled with something more than a generic chase sequence, it seems a little pale after the inventive parkour pursuit. Like most Bond films the script is not perfect (although better than anything seen in the series for decades), yes there are clunkers, an unforgivable piece of blatant product placement in the Bond/Vesper introduction which brings an otherwise great scene to a halt. Despite some attempt to include some subtle dry wit for the most part the little finger line would be more welcome in a Carry On flick and is as juvenile as the puerile lines in the Moore and Brosnan era. It's unclear who's to blame while Purvis and Wade had their critics and are no script writing gods it's possible Haggis is responsible although he probably lent the film the dramatic weight it needed. This David Arnold's fourth score, while most likely the best work he's produced to this point it still feels wanting, he makes good use of alternative arrangements of his and Cornell's title theme, he creates an emotional Vesper theme and seems to cope enough without having his usual safety net of the JB theme to lean on. Although at times his score just seems to be just pounding percussion with no melody and we hit an all time low when he lets loose with the blaring brass that would be more welcome in the Austin Powers franchise when the Skyfleet plane is unveiled in the Miami sequence, marring an already problem sequence of the film. Would this film have been better with a John Barry score? Of course it would, when you consider the substandard entries that Connery and Moore were afforded Barry musical gold and Daniel Craig gives more to the role than any actor in the series history and he's rewarded with Mr Arnold trying. These things aside this arguably the best entry since 1969's On Her Majesty Secret Service, choosing Martin Campbell to helm once again after he successfully did in 1995 this time getting a proper actor rather the then TV actor Brosnan. In Daniel Craig we have found an actor who has added dramatic weight unlike Pierce he approaches the role with no awe or fan boy wonder, just wanting to do an impressive job, never raising to any of the criticism flying around while this was being filmed just quietly getting on with the job and spectacularly proving people wrong who questioned his appointment a year before. He also cuts an impressive figure filling out the tux like no other actor since Sean Connery and getting as close to that panther strut that personified the Scots man in 1962. While his critics will baulk he hasn't the confidence of Connery's 007, at this point he's not supposed to . This a newly introduced Bond the films have never approached the character from this point before, it's always been an established agent, with this re-boot option we are getting to see Bond earn his stripes and although we are seeing this here it's obvious this Bond is still learning. While Connery's 007 in 1963 From Russia With Love set the bench mark for the definitive fully fledged Bond, Craig's is the most impressive all out performance of any actor in the series to date and hints at a bright future for this enduring character.
Jesper J (de) wrote: A bit too slow and complex for me