The Naked Brand

The Naked Brand

The Naked Brand is a story about how corporations can help save the planet one small step at a time. It's an introduction to a bright new future where companies tell the truth and work hard to create better products and a better planet. Corporations have incredible influence on the world we live in and that's given them free reign to pollute, collude and mislead us, but advances in technology are rapidly making them accountable not just to shareholders, but to everyone. Now that we have constant access to the truth about the products we use and the ethics of the companies behind them, big brands are realizing that looking great isn't enough. It's time to actually be great.

  • Rating:
    4.00 out of 5
  • Length:57 minutes
  • Release:2013
  • Language:English
  • Reference:Imdb
  • Keywords:The Naked Brand 2013 full movies, The Naked Brand torrents movie

The Naked Brand is a story about how corporations can help save the planet one small step at a time. It's an introduction to a bright new future where companies tell the truth and work hard... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechers

The Naked Brand torrent reviews

Nathan C (us) wrote: Perhaps the most important documentary of a generation.

Jeramie K (ag) wrote: The first Street Kings wasn't great, but was still entertaining and effective. The same can be said for this sequel but on a much lower level. Relative to the first, the plot is more predictable, the "twists" don't work well, the dialogue is cheesier, and the acting [overall] is sub par. Shawn Hatosy is completely in over his head, and it shows. For what it's worth, it does the straight to video crowd proud.

BRiana C (fr) wrote: Snowpiercer left me with mixed feelings; while I appreciated its social commentary, I was left than pleased with it lack of variation of setting and immense amounts of gore.Snowpiercer heavily relied on its thread of light vs dark in order to advance the message of the movie with light eventually equating knowledge in the end. While this thread was well placed and executed, I felt that the fact that the setting was so stagnant partially detracted from this. The filmmaker could have done a better job of differentiating each section of the train to help combat this.Another point of discontent for me was the amount of Chinese spoken without translation or subtitles. While sometimes Nam would use the electronic translator at his disposal, they were still long periods that his Chinese went untranslated in the movie. I don't know if this is because I found some bootleg version online that neglected to include subtitles or what but it left me pretty lost.I also felt some part were bizarrely not thought through. For instance, how did the two kids who survived in the end come out unscathed and fully garnished in eskimo clothing when the 2 people standing next to them were incinerated?? That makes entirely no sense.I did enjoy the overall social commentary on classism and survival throughout the film. I would definitely say that Curtis is not a classic hero figure. This was hinted at when he turned his back on Edgar and allowed him to be sad. A true hero would have found a way to beat the odds and save him while furthering the mission.All in all, the movie was OK. Not great, and not terrible, but definitely too gory for my tastes.

Emma Mon C (mx) wrote: Probably my favourite film ever.It made me laugh, cry and long to be born in another decade.Criminally underrated."YOUR TRAINING TO BE A MEDIUM? HE'S TRAINING TO BE A LARGE"

Yuriati T (us) wrote: Bought the dvd, and later turned it off after spending 30 awful minutes trying to stay awake watching this crap. Low-budget films are often promising, but this one fails. Terribly.

Nicolas L (ag) wrote: Film monstre, peu facile d'approche, mais l'un des plus intelligents qu'il m'ait ete donne de voir jusqu'a present. L'idee portee par le film est a la fois courageuse et bien argumentee : le neo-liberalisme, par ses methodes et ses objectifs, est comparable au nazisme. Ensemble ils poursuivent une entreprise totalitaire, normalisatrice, de neutralisation des sentiments. Une profonde reification de l'humain, en somme. La prestation des acteurs est tres bonne : ils parlent comme des robots, mais le personnage d'Almaric finit par s'humaniser au fur et a mesure qu'il comprend les mecanismes de la machine dont il etait le rouge zele.

Martin C (au) wrote: Every visual and camera movement is art, the dark humor and twisted material is just enough to make you uncomfortable. The ending sequence is fantastic. This movie is an allegory to how simple minded most of the human race can be. With the final character showing what repression does to oneself. I've watched this once and it is disturbing without using horror like editing and quick camera movements. I could see this movie being a Stanley Kubrick film if he was alive and wanted to do this movie.

Lilmissrachh09hotmailcouk L (ca) wrote: excellent film !!!!!

Russell H (it) wrote: starts off kinda funny but as it goes on, it takes itself a little too seriously even though it continues with the jokes.

Captain S (nl) wrote: i've only seen bits of this...

Lauri M (gb) wrote: beautiful, quite slow-paced film, with an interesting story. beautiful shots of nature. one of my favourites from Miike. In my opinion, Miike should choose more this kind of stories.

Ben S (jp) wrote: I always want to smack Amy Irving's character (NOT, mind you, Amy Irving--who's wonderful), and I've never entirely bought the chemistry of the two leads. And yet I completely love this movie and watch it constantly. I love it's depiction of New York in the late '80s.

Chris L (ru) wrote: Unfairly overlooked by its sequel, this "film" is just as baffling and unwatchable. Highlights: Sonny Bono as a velvet-wearing womanizer, Julia Louis-Dreyfus as a woodland elf and TWO characters suspiciously named Harry Potter. "He's running out of time AND apartments!"

Cameron K (br) wrote: Sitting in a room of film students, watching this piece of seventies avante-garde, I was simultaneously awe struck by its invention, experimentation, and daring in following its own vision, and bracing myself to be a minority opinion. I was correct...most of the folks in the theater thought it was unfocused and excruciating to get through. It's not a film for everyone (despite featuring a superstar like Mick Jagger, in what ranks with David Bowie's work in Merry Christmas Mr. Lawrence as one of the great acting jobs by a musician) but those willing to open themselves up to its formal eccentricities will find a fascinating look at culture clash and the decadence of fame (think Sunset Boulevard with gangsters and drugs instead of Hollywood). Oh, there's a plot, concerning a gangster escaping to Jagger's apartment after blowing away several members of his own gang, but it switches genres constantly and is quite secondary to the editing and audio choices directors Nicolas Roeg and Donald Cammell foist on the audience to convey the sheer insanity of the protagonist's descent into the world of the sixties. If nothing else, watch it for the Memo from Turner sequence, which is one of the greatest scenes ever filmed and seems to have influenced music videos to this very day.

Adam F (ag) wrote: If you stitched together "King Kong", "Godzilla", Boris Karloff's "Frankenstein" you would probably get something akin to one of the strangest giant monster movies and strangest interpretations of Mary Shelley's Frankenstein: "Frankenstein versus Subterranean Monster Baragon" a.k.a. "Frankenstein Conquers the World". You don't know how crazy this movie is until you hear the plot: I'm just going to dodge a bullet right away and say that in the film, they call the Frankenstein monster "Frankenstein", so we'll just go with that. In Nazi Germany, during the final days of World War II, the heart of the legendary Frankenstein monster is brought over to Japan via submarine. We are informed that although Frankenstein has been killed many times, his heart is immortal and, given proper nourishment, will grow itself a new body in time. Japanese scientists hope to study the heart to learn its secrets... just as Hiroshima is bombed by Allied Forces and the lab it is stored in is buried under rubble. 15 years later, Dr. James Bowen (Nick Adams, who you will recognize as "Glen" from "Godzilla vs. Monster Zero") and his girlfriend/assistant Sueko Togami (Kumi Mizuno) spot a mysterious feral boy roaming the streets and it turns out to be Frankenstein! With his irradiated heart, the boy begins growing to titanic size until an accident causes him to escape. The monster (Koji Furuhata) is friendly, but scared and runs away to the countryside, where he is hounded by Japanese military. You see, at the same time as this Frankenstein plot is going on, we have the emergence of a gigantic dinosaur, Baragon (Haruo Nakajima). This creature, who has remained alive for millions of years underground is going on a rampage in the countryside and the damages it causes is being attributed to Frankenstein. It all works itself up to a big showdown between Frankenstein and Baragon.As much grief as I gave King Kong from "King Kong vs. Godzilla", I have to say that of all of the monsters in the "Godzilla Universe" (because this film does tie into the Godzilla franchise) Frankenstein is the worst one. Say what you will about people in rubber suits fighting each other in front of the camera, but this guy, with his exaggerated overbite, messy hair and huge forehead looks ridiculous. You don't even have any of the trademark Frankenstein icons on him. No stitches around his wrists or electrodes coming out of his neck He's just a giant ugly guy running around. Faring much better is Baragon, the subterranean monster. This is a pretty cool creature (one that would interact with Godzilla a couple times over the years) with some interesting abilities and a unique look to it. The suit is well made and the moments where the two monsters are fighting are the best parts of the movie. The rest of the film though, it's a mess. Baragon just appears out of nowhere, is absent for most of the film and despite being seen by a principal character is not acknowledged at all until he begins attacking the countryside. Frankenstein is even more ridiculous. Why, for instance does he only begin growing so big when in the care of Dr. James and Sueko? If the monster is growing huge because of the radiation from the atomic bomb, then shouldn't he have been a giant baby, then a giant teen instead of going from a regular-sized teen to a gigantic adult? There is also a human character that is straight-up insane in this film that I need to bring up, Dr. Ken'ichiro Kawaji (Tadao Takashima). For a doctor/ scientist, he has some really questionable ideas. For instance, a problem early on in the film is that the Frankenstein monster is eating so much that they have to put him in a cage to prevent him from roaming around and devouring everything in its path (well, they said it's for its own protection, but they chain him up so I think they were just lying) so he proposes that they cut costs by sending the creature to the zoo! This guy becomes obsessed with the monster. He desperately wants to study it in order to unlock its secret of immortality, to the point where he comes up with this plan where he will personally blind the monster by throwing grenades at its face and then cut out its heart and brain in order to study it. His validation for this is that the military is planning on killing it anyway, so that's pretty much the same thing.When it comes to what you want to see in a giant monster versus movie, it's a mixed bag. Like I said, Baragon looks terrific, but Frankenstein looks pretty bad. In terms of destruction, we don't get to see either monster really go on a rampage in the middle of Tokyo or any other major city so the amount of destruction is pretty weak. If you love seeing monsters throw rocks though (something that seems to have become really popular in these monster movies) there's a lot of that. Some of the miniatures, like the scaled cars and boats are well done, but the movie also has some really terrible miniature animals (a horse and a boar) that look like cheap toys. When it comes to the monster fight itself, with Baragon and Frankenstein ducking it out, the battle begins well. Frankenstein is much quicker than the dinosaur (which makes sense considering one of the actors is in a bulky suit and the other is trying to move quickly so we can never recognize who is under that makeup) but it's hard to get a feel for who is winning. The fight eventually begins to drag and then just ends, it's nothing special really.As an entry in the Godzilla series, the only people who will really get a kick out of "Frankenstein Conquers the World" are that small margin of people who need to see every single movie or who just can't get enough Baragon. Frankenstein's monster never appears again in any Toho films (there is technically a sequel to this film, but that's a whole other story we'll get to in a couple of days) so you're not really checking this movie out for him. Fans of Mary Shelley's novel will find this way too silly for their tastes so that audience is out. Even with its tie into "Destroy All Monsters" and some other later movies, with the conclusion of this movie being what it is and the lack of an introduction for Baragon, the next time it shows up it might as well be a whole new character. The movie is a novelty, something so crazy you can watch and brag about it to your friends, but it isn't very good and it's a lot more fun to talk about it afterwards than it was to watch it. (English Dub on Dvd, April 8, 2014)

Jessica L (ru) wrote: Not necessarily a lancaster fan or a western fan, but this was on amc Thanksgiving morning and I was hooked. Felt like i was a fly on the hitching post, privy to cowboy decency & justice.

Oliver N (us) wrote: Likely to be the most ridiculous of the late 90s disaster movies - and next to Armageddon, that's a real achievement - Dante's Peak does succeed at producing likeable leads and truly guilty-pleasure worthy status... but other than that, the vast amount of clich is nothing to be proud of. But do we really care?Verdict: B-

J B (fr) wrote: I would give this one negative three stars if I could. It is really that bad.

Chris M (br) wrote: Creativity at an all time high. Watch with Headphones on and be Scared.

Al H (br) wrote: The worse movie I've seen in the last 10 years.