The Suspended Step of the Stork

The Suspended Step of the Stork

Alexandre, a TV reporter, is working for a few days in a border town, where a lot of refugees from Albania, Turkey and Kurdistan are packed in. Among them, he notices an old man and thinks he his an important greek politician who disappeared misteriously a few years ago. Back in Athens, he asks this politician's former wife to come and identify him. A slow and dry meditation about inhumanity of borders.

Alexandre, a TV reporter, is working for a few days in a border town, where a lot of refugees from Albania, Turkey and Kurdistan are packed in. Among them, he notices an old man and thinks ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


The Suspended Step of the Stork torrent reviews

Irene S (nl) wrote: now I know why it won thr Oscar for best documentary. its only 38 minutes long. such a powerful short film about how one of the Holocaust survivors survived through muwic and being able to played. she was 108 when they did the documentary and right before it won an Oscar, she passed away. but everyone should and must see this film. you will be very moved by ot and the music is amazing.

Richard L (br) wrote: This is how you tell a personal story set against the apparent end of the world. Eva Green as the epidemiologist Susan returns to work after a nasty breakup just as patients begin reporting a loss of smell. This loss of smell occurs after an emotional breakdown due to grief that lasts several hours. Susan meets Michael, a chef played by Ewan McGregor, just before they too succumb to the new disease.Without a sense of smell, the world adapts, beginning to value other senses and sensations. Unfortunately, the epidemic is just getting started, even as Susan and Michael begin to fall in love.What works so well in this movie is the sense of what is lost. This works on both a personal and global level, depicted within Susan and Michael's relationship and footage from around the world as various societies try to deal with the consequences.Even though what happens next is predictable, the movie succeeds because the viewers quickly grows to care about the slightly damaged couple at the center of the story. The disease and the way it manifests leads to some pretty heartbreaking moments in the movie, but also hopeful moments.At this point it is redundant to remark about how amazing and talented Eva Green and Ewan McGregor are. Together, they are pure magic. Thank goodness they are in a beautiful movie that takes good advantage of their talent.

Ru C (jp) wrote: 3 stars only for having lots of hot naked women! wanted to see thus as apparently its a very dark twisted violent movie, honestly found it boring and thought it was shit! complete waste of my time!

Lucas B (kr) wrote: This is one of the most griping documentaries I have ever seen!

Giorgos V (fr) wrote: Kali tainia vasismeno se alithini istoria. AN eixe kai kaliteres ermineies....

EpicLadySponge t (gb) wrote: I can't be the only one who found the movie's plot confusing.

Hugh A (ru) wrote: this looks mega hot.... that girl on the left is mighty fine looking.

Caroline E (ag) wrote: I enjoyed it a lot.. enough to buy it for $5 :)

Frank R (us) wrote: Like "The Prince of Tides", this film would only be a disappointment to those who insist on comparing it to the novel. As a stand-alone film, it is a delight--enhanced particularly by the now-retro score, cinematography, and Oscar-winning costumes. This is the film that introduced me to the wonderful Alec McCowen. Amazing how many male actors today are given carte blanche to overact, yet Maggie Smith gets criticized for her appropriately broad performance? Please! Loved Maggie in this.

Elgan D (ru) wrote: A camp faux remake of 'Rio Bravo' which has its moments and the Mitchum Wayne dynamic plays well. Feels a little dated by today's standards .

Erik C (us) wrote: Carl Theodor Dreyer??s third feature is very loosely based on Marie Corelli??s 1895 novel The Sorrows of Satan, but more closely modeled on D.W. Griffith??s Intolerance (1916), and, as such, utilizes this same structure, yet the central narrative is focalized through the titular character of Satan (played by Helge Nissen). Unlike Griffith??s epic, though, which successfully operates because of how its four parallel stories intertwine, Dreyer??s film is ultimately hindered somewhat by this four-part structure due to a conflict between the presentation of its theme and the (re)presentation of its main character. Obviously, the film??s effectiveness relies heavily on the characterization of this protean Satan, whom Dreyer initially presents to us as a conflicted and sympathetic character. Intertitles in the prologue inform the audience of Satan??s plight??as a judgment for his fall, Satan??s punishment is to roam the earth tempting God??s creation, accruing 100 years to his punishment for every person he successfully tempts, but getting a 1000 years respite for every person who resists his temptations. However, initial characterizations and attempts at developing and complicating the Satan figure soon become undermined. It becomes much more difficult for the viewer to buy into this representation since, in each section, the viewer is constantly distanced from learning more about Satan??s own inner conflicts--he quickly becomes a secondary character in each of the four sections. There isn??t much of an emotional connection here, as if Dreyer is trying to hedge his bets about how to present Satan as a protagonist. At the very end of the film, there is an attempt at describing Satan??s pain, but it is so brief that, after two hours, it is rather ineffective.Although it is early in his career, Dreyer is already demonstrating here a talent for the visual structures and compositions that his later films would be celebrated for. The film is worth watching if you're a Dreyer fan, but he certainly went on to make better and more complex films.

Dan F (br) wrote: Absurd, preposterous schlock horror. If you have a sense of humour and you're in the right mood, you may find this fun. It's no worse than the majority of Dario Argento's films, and at least it knows it's cheap. There's an almost Warholesque quality to the pulp of it all, only without the posturing smugness.

Jack G (gb) wrote: Absolutely clever and engaging

Harry W (us) wrote: Spike Jonze just seems to excel as showing us gorgeous things, really sweet and beautiful little parcels of stories and Her is just another example. At times it borders on terrifyingly awkward and attempts to pose a desperately hopeless romantic story that is at times frightening and intimate. It's such a clever film, the only reason why it doesn't have five stars is that I felt the film was a bit overlong and seemed to drag a bit towards the end and whilst I was still gripped (more or less) I did start feeling slightly bored as the film's dreamy pace can become a tad monotonous and depressing towards the end. Joaquin Phoenix gives a fantastically mature stand out performance, probably the best acting I've seen from him in a long time and Scarlett Johansson's voice work is great as it was in the Jungle Book also. Weirdly enough, a strong supporting performance comes from Olivia Wilde who has about 15 minutes of screen time but manages to really shine in that time.