The Dinner

The Dinner

Two brothers and their wives meet up at a haute-cuisine restaurant to discuss what to do about a horrific crime that their sons committed together. As the quartet debate their options, the conversation reopens old wounds between the siblings.

A former history teacher and his wife Claire meet at a fancy restaurant with his elder brother, a prominent politician and his wife Babette. The plan is to discuss over dinner how to handle a crime committed by their teenage sons. The violent act of the two boys had been filmed by a security camera and shown on TV, but, so far, they have not been identified. The parents have to decide on what to do. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


The Dinner torrent reviews

Rangan R (it) wrote: Curiosity led them to involve in a greater danger.It was the other Zack Galifianakis film that I watched back to back. 'Mastermind' was a fun crime film based on the true event, but this one was purely fictional action-comedy. Once again the casting looked so good. Particularly Gal Gadot, her involving in it after becoming Wonder Woman is a hype. So anyone to anticipating some great action sequences is normal, but it was average on that section.First of all, it is nothing to do with the 2009 film 'The Jonese'. The characters seem quite resembling, like between and about the neighbors, but totally different plot. When a new couple move into a vacant house, the one in the neighborhood suspect there's something going with them. After all the efforts, when they come to know the couple's true identity, they're already involved in their undertaking and now cooperating is the only way out. So how it ends with their entanglement takes the film to its final stage.Comedy scenes were good. Not that much clichd, so one can have a decent fun watching it, especially with a low expectation. Both the lead women were hot, despite not much cleavage in the film. There are some unexpected parts too, but as a comedy, it was much better. And as an action & spy film, it doesn't do much to impress. Overall, a passable film, particularly comedy wise. So if you prefer it, then it should be on that merit.6/10

Aditya M (ag) wrote: This documentary is little more or less than a parade of people talking about how much they adore Calvin & Hobbes. This would have made for a dull and monotonous affair, if not for the genuine love that radiates from the many, many admirers of Dear Mr. Watterson. If you are a fan of the great comic strip, it's quite likely that you will enjoy this one.

Amber P (au) wrote: It was alright. I had a hard time paying attention and becoming invested on the characters to give a crap.

Peta G (es) wrote: How do you decide that it is worth killing a loyal friend in "a greater cause"? War may be hell but surviving it may sometimes be worse. I thought it was well made and certainly well acted. I just wish that the climactic choice was drawn a little better.

kyo 9 (it) wrote: A movie about adult industry in a unique perspective..Personally, I still think there are other ways for a young director to self-promote themselves besides using AV industry..

Rawan N (es) wrote: don't bother watching this stupid movie

Alice (es) wrote: Him: The director is so young he hasn't even been born yet.

David K (ca) wrote: One of the best Johnny Depp performances. Its a very good movie although the ending might ruin it for some

Bonnie Z (es) wrote: the book was much better than this movie

Edgar C (nl) wrote: Life, and Nothing More, more properly titled also as And Life Goes On... takes place in the aftermath of the earthquake of Guilan that killed more than 50,000 people. This place happens to be near the location of Where is the Friend's Home? (1990). Therefore, the director of this movie decides to travel to this area with the purpose of finding out the fate of the two key characters in the Iranian modern classic.But... The director of that movie was Abbas Kiarostami, wasn't he? Well, not according to this film!!The importance of this movie in particular is extremely massive because of too many reasons to be counted... and yet, there I go.a) It represents the turning point in Kiarostami's vision, as his visual style of compelling landscapes and in-car conversations begin to shape the auteur vision of the internationally acclaimed Iranian master. This style will be evident in the impressionistic existentialism of Taste of Cherry (1997), and in the psychological poetry of The Wind Will Carry Us (1999).b) It is the first attempt by Kiarostami to take his meta-film concept to a whole other level. Being the second installment in the Koker trilogy, which refers to the town of Koker in which the protagonist of Where is the Friend's Home lived, you will notice that this wasn't filmed in immediate continuity after the first movie, but Through the Olive Trees (1994) was. In my personal opinion, the documentary Homework (1989) and Close-Up (1990), his absolutely groundbreaking and endlessly brilliant masterpiece, were the neccesary stepping stones for finally merging, for the very first time, the concepts of reality in documentaries and fiction in movies perfectly for the very first time.c) He is playing with the concepts of reality and fantasy.... Oh boy, here I go with my Levels dissection technique of reality and meta-reality again! Boring, I know:+ Level 1: Where is the Friend's Home?.- Back in 1987, the whole world saw a minimalist movie of heart-moving, humble and tender proportions. It was the first significant movie of the master by that time. By this time, the only levels in existence was this one, and Level 2, which referred to Kiarostami breaking the movie. Yet And Life Goes On... dared to break the second level from a meta-reality perception.+ Level 2: And Life Goes On....- Finding the protagonist of the previous movie and dissecting Kiarostami's psychology through his alter ego Farhad Kheradmand are the most genius achievements of this thought-provoking and visually hypnotizing spectacle. To what extent is the film documented? To what extent is the film scripted? To what extent does the protagonist reflect Kiarostami?These answers can be obtained with some factual research and interviews, but not essentially obtainable within this film realm, and yet, despite its tragic aftermath imagery and inert rocky settings with some astonishing green hills, the film seems dead in the surface and yet emanates a substantial amount of life that is capable of rejuvenating the film appreciation of the modern viewer, so long submerged in Hollywood standards. The landscapes are a contradiction of destruction and beauty, like an impossible coexistence. Is it possible, then, for reality and fantasy to coexist? It turns out that both, in fact, share a scary degree of interchangeableness, which is the main idea of the film.And yet, that idea is communicated through a film, not a documentary. What a fascinating, self-assuring paradox!96/100

Steve G (ru) wrote: Disclaimer: The following review is for "Lethal Weapon 3: Director's Cut" although it will be referred to as simply "Lethal Weapon 3"."Lethal Weapon 3" is an okay action film. "Lethal Weapon 3" has got good acting from "Mel Gibson" and "Danny Glover". The plot to this film is alright, there are a few scenes which like the previous film were not necessary. Something I do like about this film is the comedy. The action scenes in this film aren't great, in fact the final climatic action scene is boring. The music in this film is pretty good. I give "Lethal Weapon 3" a 6.5/10.

Brett C (us) wrote: Review In A Nutshell:Hannah and Her Sisters is the story, despite its name, of multiple characters roughly around their late 30s to early 40s and the problems they face during this time of their lives.The film's premise is definitely more mature as compared to the other Allen films I have seen, tackling issues like affairs, lost relationships, life, death, religion, and careers. I was actually surprised how much I enjoyed this film, given the atypical style he uses for his characters and stories. I was able to latch onto something early on this film, telling me that life doesn't get easier once you are older, as one will still find struggles with problems, even the silly ones, that cannot be avoided as that is the concept of life, to live through its ups and downs, and the more one is willing to accept that, the happier they would become. This is not to say that all aspects of the film's plot are highly interesting, but most are. The ones I particularly enjoyed were the issues being driven by a male perspective, maybe because I could easier relate or maybe Allen just had a better knack in writing for it than for the female characters. The best of the bunch was definitely Mickey's story about life, death and love. His search for life's important questions was both profound and hilarious. Just watching the sequence regarding his one date with a certain sister, made me laugh so hard throughout that I may have missed a couple of spoken dialogue during the scene. I also thought positively of both Lee and Elliot's story, showing us that adults who have "settled" could also be confused at times and feel directionless in life, at times reverting back to certain feelings and actions that are found in the youth side of the spectrum of life. I found it difficult to find pleasure in watching and following Hannah's story as I personally felt it lacked any drama for me to invest in. I think her story would benefit more to the much more mature viewers as it would be easier for them to feel a sense of empathy for the character.The film's cinematography, I personally felt was serviceable but nothing that would make one take notice or give true praise to. It did at times provide wonderful movement of the camera during particular indoor scenes, providing a dynamic and interesting style that prevents simple scenes with focus on dialogue feel bland or dull. Would the film benefit if Gordon Willis was handling the photography? Perhaps, and his presence would have probably given the film much more texture; but overall Carlo di Palma didn't completely disappoint with his work here.The film doesn't use an original score like Manhattan; instead it uses tracks from multiple artists. Some of the tracks have this Jazz/Big Band sound to them which is now a clich when supporting a story of upper middle class individuals set in New York, but during its time it worked effectively and gives a film that "Woody Allen" brand.The amount of actors that I know in this is a quite extensive. The main cast includes Mia Farrow, Barbara Hershey, Michael Caine, Dianne Wiest, Max von Sydow, Woody Allen, Maureen O' Sullivan, & Lloyd Nolan. They all delivered a great performance, particularly Allen who was now able to balance out his quirky attributes that is normally found in his character. The film also features cameos or small parts from actors like John Turturro, Carrie Fisher, Julia Louis-Dreyfus, Julie Kavner, Sam Waterston, Daniel Stern, Joanna Gleason, and Richard Jenkins.Hannah and Her Sisters is a strong entry for Allen, with its wonderful cast and strong story elements; it's definitely something I would like to come back to in the future.

Brian R (mx) wrote: Dan Akroyd slumming it in Sci-fi channel movies... how the mighty have fallen!

Ann L (ca) wrote: PAL JOEY One of the top musical comedies of all time. A true classic. It does not fail to entertain even after all these years. Frank Sinatra is at his best in the role of low life nightclub entertainer Joey Evans. It's a great part for him. Fans will immediately recognize several songs worked into the plot which later were included in his standard repertoire of signature selections. Rita Hayworth and Kim Novak were terrific as his love interests, vying for Joey's singular attention. He must choose one of them. Each comes with her own set of special assets. Who will it be?

Gianni V (ag) wrote: Never trust the revolution's monies to an aristocrat!

Alan T (es) wrote: just cos its a Disney Classic

Scott J (ag) wrote: boring the main voice actress is just awful the story is unnecessarily dumb and confusing the animation is still semi impressive but is starting to become less and less neat

Janine Y (kr) wrote: I give ths movie 3 stars for the dancing and music. The dancing is amazing and how they can actually do some of those things with their bodies is truly fascinating. Story however is a bit blah! LOVED the wee glimpse you get of Columbus Short - he is so hot!

noah m (ca) wrote: Nothing special but it was amusing and entertaining to watch!

Vessela D (it) wrote: Nothing special...:(