Donetsk is the coal-mining area of Ukraine. Here most people work for low wages in the run down mines, while others make a lot of money. No matter which side of the social divide you are on... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
You may also like
The Other Chelsea: A Story from Donetsk torrent reviews
Private U (us) wrote: It is commonly known that the whole world has a severe disdain for Nazis, especially for Hitler. As a result, there have been loads of films which show how foul the Nazis were. In contrast this film portrays the events from the perspective of loyal Nazis. Lore helps us to remember that those who supported Hitler were people as well, regular people like us, misguided though they may have been.
Shadow W (jp) wrote: Young children might like this, that's true. It contains little bits of excitement and adventure- only to be crushed down by its slow and flat sequences.
Alice S (mx) wrote: Biting and absurd satire. So many quotable lines! "On Wednesdays, we wear pink." "Irregardless, ex-boyfriends are just off limits to friends. I mean that's just like the rules of feminism." "Gretchen, stop trying to make 'fetch' happen! It's not going to happen!" "Get in loser, we're going shopping." "Grool... I meant to say cool and then I started to say great." "Sorry, we only carry sizes 1, 3, and 5. You could try Sears." "You can't sit with us!"
Tracy F (gb) wrote: Decent thriller. A little sporadic at times but pretty good overall.
Aya C (kr) wrote: first of all WHY was there footage in the opening credits that had NOTHING to do with the entire movie?? secondly, the whole script was unbelievable, just a cheap rip off of ET.I only watched it because it was on Mystery Science Theatre, which made it bearable lol.
Kyle C (us) wrote: Funny here, funny there but maybe a little too long and some of the jokes fall flat, but the ones that work, work well.
shai l (gb) wrote: it would've been a memorable piece if the actors could actually act. shame.
Ryan B (es) wrote: Robin William's best work ever. This will always be one of my favorite films of all time.
Frank F (ca) wrote: There was no need for this film in a post-Scream world.
Denise H (jp) wrote: I love productions with David Suchet in them but this flick's storyline was a pale repeat of many others. There's been some true classics but this is not one of them.
Allan C (kr) wrote: It's a ridiculous and over complicated story about Jack Palance battling feudal landowner, Fernando Lamas (father of Lorenzo Lamas), in China over a shipment of nitro. Only worth watching for getting to see Palance play a good guy for a change and for the location photography.
Harry W (gb) wrote: With Marvel films currently in their heyday, Hulk offered a chance to look back at their glory in the making.Modern day audiences would be less familiar with Hulk and more familiar with The Incredible Hulk (2008) as the latter was produced by Marvel Studios with the intent of fitting straight into the contemporary Marvel Cinematic Universe. However, it is not a film I really enjoyed. Director Louis Leterrier's vision for strong imagery bought powerful action to the film, but it was at the expense of an actual story. As multiple Academy Award-winner Ang Lee is in charge of helming Hulk, there is greater credibility to the film. Stereotypically, his films can be slow and long but visually magnificent, and though the former does not necessarily fit the standard of contemporary superhero films it can be forgiven if the latter is strong enough to compensate.In contrast to Louis Leterrier's film, Ang Lee's take on the Bruce Banner story is focused far more on being a background story which depicts the man's transition into The Incredible Hulk and the internal conflict and suffering he faces as a result. Louis Leterrier's film overlooks this and is instead focused on the pursuit of Bruce Banner with intention of harnessing the weapon he has become. As a result, it ended up having a pathetic lack of a story to base itself on. Ang Lee's film is quite the opposite. As Hulk was made in 2003, it came from a time where the standard for superhero films was established by Sam Raimi's box office-smash Spider-Man (2002). However, Ang Lee chooses to follow a path more along the lines of M. Night Shyamalan's Unbreakable (2000) in which there is a greater focus on what Bruce Banner's powers do to his psychology and his general existence rather than what he can actually do with them. This allows for a complex and insightful path of narrative, but it also interferes with the fun value of the Marvel roots in the story. There are clearly some segments of the script in Hulk which intend to add slight elements of comic charm to match up to the same spirit as Spider-Man, but Ang Lee's intense desire to take the film seriously buries anything lightweight under the heavy drama of the story.For a superhero film, Hulk is really not that much of a fun experience. Hulk should be a film about a superhero, but it's mostly focused on capturing Bruce Banner's battle against oppression from establishment rather than combating evil. The way the film characterizes the suffering of Bruce Banner is decent, but this is not what audiences would be desiring after Spider-Man. Hulk is one of the rare cinematic cases which proves to be substance-over-style in a negative maner, and even though Ang Lee's ambition and the dramatic heft of the script offers admirable assets, they create an experience which is ultimately rudimentary as a whole.Too much of Hulk feels more like it is influenced more by King Kong (1933) than its Marvel comic source material. This is most notable in one scene where the film's romantic interest Betty Ross approaches The Incredible Hulk aware of his true nature before he lifts her up and looks her in the eye before a scene of him protecting her from violent mutated animals. Though many critics deride Hulk for betraying elements of its source material I am not one who has read any of the original comics and judge the experience of a standalone film. But even then, characterizing The Incredible Hulk as a misunderstood gentle giant with an anger problem rather than a raging superhero with strong potential fails to offer much of a super experience. And running at 138 minutes with a slow pace, there is little that can be done to rescue the film. I admire the fact that it has greater ambition than Louis Leterrier's work and find that the dark nature of the story is certainly an innovative idea, but its execution ends up as a prolonged experience with limited rewards. Some moments in Hulk are so grim that the actual drama is monotonous, as if the heart of the film has taken so much suffering that it ends up dead inside. This reflects the emotionally withdrawn nature of Bruce Banner so it works occasionally, but for the most part it proves to create melodrama which attempts to be very dark but ends up rather mundane as a cinematic experience.As an exercise in style, Hulk is of rather mixed quality. Though Ang Lee is a critically acclaimed visionary director, Hulk is clearly not his finest work. I'm not sure how much creative control he had, but he seems rather misplaced in working on such a commercial piece. The scenery and settings of Hulk make the story feel very genuine, but the style of the film doesn't offer much narrative drive. This is notable in the scene where Bruce Banner is exposed to gamma radiation because it comes off as lifeless. There is a brief moment of tension before Bruce throws himself in front of the malfunctioning Gamma spectrometer, and after a momentary flash of green light, the image of The Incredible Hulk's eye and a green mushroom cloud, Bruce Banner is suddenly awake in a hospital bed. There has been no feeling the entire time, and despite the colour scheme playing with grey and shadows to create a dark-spirited mood, the ultimate result is meandering.The value of Hulk as an exercise in style depends on how it works in the superhero genre. To capture this, many shots depict nultiple frames imposed on screen through boxes in an attempt to replicate the style of a comic book. However, this style of editing would be more inappropriate in a faster-moving superhero spectacle. There is a sense that this occasionally interfers with Hulk's desire to function as a genuine, even though it evokes a greater feeling of the superhero style that the film really should be following.In terms of visual effects, Hulk is decent. Though the detail in things may be outdated and leave the experience feeling a little too animated at times, there is certainly a keen sense of determined style supporting the depiction of the titular character. This means that the action scenes end up colourful end intense. However, they remain far few and in-between over the course of the film's extensive running time, and the cinematography is inconsistent. The majority of the shots are either too close to capture the large scale of the spectacle or too far to capture the detail in the titular character with the modicum of mediated shots creating too much of a notable contrast between the foreground and background to give a sense of realism to the experience. When they really zero in on the titular character, you can see that the depiction of The Incredible Hulk's face is over-simplistic and short on detail. This is seemingly to make him look more like the actor in the role and to remind audiences of the existing humanity in the character, but it doesn't fit the profile of the character in any way. It lacks the visual monstrosity of the creature and proper characterization since Bruce Banner's superpowered alter-ego is supposed to be a product of pure aggression controlled by his emotions. There is more heart than anger in this, and it betrays the sadistic temperament of the character.The one element of Hulk deserving of nothing less than critical acclaim is Danny Elfman's intense musical score. Managing to perfectly capture the mood of the film at every chance, Danny Elfman creates a sense of wonder during the film's intro and progressively turns it into a reflection of the intended atmosphere at every point in time. Appropriately capturing the scale of things at all the right moments, Danny Elfman keeps the intense life of Hulk active and its tone intact.And riding the ambitions of the screenplay, the cast in Hulk manage to capture their characters with strength.Eric Bana makes as strong lead. In the role of Bruce Banner, Eric Bana manages to capture a strongly introverted nature in which he contains his physical movements and hides himself beneath the facade of his facial expression. As the film progresses and his angry temperament begins to take over, Eric Bana progressively puts more physical movement into his role and lets the tension become more active. The development is slow to match the narrative, and it shows how well Eric Bana works with Ang Lee's vision. Eric Bana makes a strong effort to capture the emotionally withdrawn and confused nature of Bruce Banner, fitting Hulk's vision of a lost soul.Jennifer Connelly is decent as well. Rather than playing a stereotypical love interest, Jennifer Connelly makes the effort to capture a conflicted character with her own natural spirit. As signified by her Academy Award winning performance in A Beauiful Mind (2001), Jennifer Connelly's natural grace as an actress comes from how she works to find depth in subtlety which is the exact tone Hulk attempts to follow. The relevance of her character to the story can end up rather dull at times, but Jennifer Connelly proves physically engaged with the role and works to have a gentle chemistry with Eric Bana.Nick Nolte makes a powerful antagonist for Hulk. Nick Nolte's screen time ends up being rather minimal, but within his few scenes he manages to capture the madness of Dr. David "Dave" Banner without pushing into melodrama. The mental instability of the part is restrained which makes it a challenge to be certain if he is a hero or a villain, though he progressively makes his insanity clear either way and highlights it with raw tenacity and explosive bouts of rage. Nick Nolte's performance is the finest of all the cast members, and the instinctive talent in his line delivery procures some of the most dramatic scenes in the film.Sam Elliot proves to be a perfect fit for the role of General Thunderbolt Ross due to his legacy for portraying soldiers and cowboys giving him a naturally hard edge which he commands with instinct in Hulk, using it to create raw chemistry with Jennifer Connelly. And lastly, the cameo of both Stan Lee and Lou Ferrigno is the same scene is the greatest way Hulk honours fans.Hulk offers an intense ambition for capturing the confused existence of Bruce Banner with tense atmosphere and strong performances, but it ultimately proves an overly long and slow film which favours grim melodrama over action spectacle.
Russell S (de) wrote: The jokes may not always hit, but they aren't always supposed to. Idiocracy stands in my book as one of the greatest precautionary tales of all time.
Caitlyn S (ca) wrote: Good movie. Luke Goss is a great actor in this. I wish he was in more movies. Maybe a little cliche in the storyline but the ending was amazing and made the whole movie work. He is not a good guy but you really like him.
Laurence H (it) wrote: Did not think I would love this movie as much as I did. Must see.
Samuel H (de) wrote: I literally skipped the intro. It's one of the worst movie intros ever. Then there's the 70 minutes of Julia Roberts being the absolute worst human that has ever existed. And finally there are the final 15 minutes in which the film is actually refreshing and speaks wonders on finding a silver lining in the hardships of life. With out the final 15 minutes, this movie would have been a bland, horrible and poorly written movie. However, these minutes were the movies saving grace. All of the actors in the movie, stayed well within their comfort zone. But even so, their performances were good. All in all a decent late 90s flick.