An unconventional documentary that lifts the veil on what's really going on in our world by following the money upstream - uncovering the global consolidation of power in nearly every aspect of our lives. Weaving together breakthroughs in science, consciousness and activism, THRIVE offers real solutions, empowering us with unprecedented and bold strategies for reclaiming our lives and our future.
- Stars:Lane Andrews, Dwynne Arnesson, John Bedini, John Callahan, Deepak Chopra, Frank Doran, Albert Einstein, Duane Elgin, Catherine Austin Fitts, R. Buckminster Fuller, Foster Gamble, Kimberly Carter Gamble, John Taylor Gatto, James Gilliland, Amy Goodman,
- Director:Steve Gagné, Kimberly Carter Gamble,
- Writer:Mary Earle Chase, Foster Gamble, Kimberly Carter Gamble, Neal Rogin
An unconventional documentary that lifts the veil on what's really going on in our world by following the money upstream - uncovering the global consolidation of power in nearly every ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Thrive torrent reviews
(gb) wrote: There's a review on here that the second hour of this film rivals The Raid 2. And I have to wonder in which way he means. If it is the fast-paced, kinetic, in your face action, then I would at least agree with the one, at least. Not necessarily the first two. I wouldn't say that the film is slow-paced or lacks the complexities of movements as The Raid, both of them, but both Raid movies are above and beyond what anyone has done in fucking years in terms of action. If the reviewer meant as far as bloodiest action film since The Raid 2 then I would wholeheartedly agree with that. I still think the latter would win over this as far as a more violent action movie in general. But this is pretty up there as far as violence is concerned. The scene in the apartment complex is, by far, the bloodiest scene I've seen in any movie this year. And that covers violent horror movies and think of the ground that covers. I wouldn't say this is the second coming of action films or will give the genre a much needed boost of creativity, but I thought this was a pretty good movie. It's funny since the last movie I reviewed, Once Upon a Time in Shanghai, I gave it an average score because it was all action and no story to hold it together. And I suppose that this film could be described the same way by some people. I would disagree in the sense that, while it may not be particularly good, there is a story here that, surprisingly, had me invested. It's not like I was emotionally attached to the characters, but the film at least tries to give the leads some personalities as opposed to just being talking heads filling in time before the next action scene comes. And the whole plot involving the Triads and John Lee and their illicit business dealings was not as convoluted as it probably would've seemed at first glance. One thing is that the movie's tone is way too goddamn serious and dark. I don't think there's a problem with that as long as you sprinkle in some moments of levity to bring it all down for a bit. You don't have to do them every five minutes, as that would kill the pacing and how it builds up, but maybe after every big plot point there could've been some lightness involved. The film just crawls through a pit of despair, ugliness and depression the likes of which you've rarely seen. Oh and top of that pit of despair, ugliness and depression there are used needles and razor blades. I may be overstating the point, but the movie took itself way too seriously. The action is the real strength of the film. It's just not afraid to be violent as fuck, which is something that most films, even Korean films, tend to shy away from just so they can get as much people watching as possible. The acting is fairly solid, but there's a bit of melodrama in some of the performances themselves. Like the ending itself was so weepy. This wouldn't usually be problematic, but it literally comes out of nowhere and it serves no purpose other than to show that Gon, the lead character, who's a cold and stoic killer, actually had human emotions. That's fine, I guess. But it was so out-of-context that it wasn't even funny. It didn't fit and the ending of the film came across as very flat. With that said, in spite of the flaws in terms of tone and story, I actually did enjoy this film quite a bit. Probably more than I was expecting to be honest. It's not gonna set your world on fire but it is gonna offer a solid, ultra-violent alternative to summer blockbusters, if that's what's up your alley. Pretty good movie here.
(ru) wrote: I'm pretty willing to watch Vidya Balan do anything, but let's be honest here: the role of the long-suffering sister who seeks justice for her murdered-in-plain-sight sister is fairly thankless-- even if they didn't just put Balan in glasses and a ponytail (apparently Hollywood AND Bollywood for "frumpy") and call it characterization. The much more interesting character and the storyline we should've followed is that of the crackjack journalist who at first dismisses the story as blah tear-jerking 3rd page news, played with head-bitch*-in-charge relish by Rani Mukherjee. However, hampered by ripped-from-the-headlines, TV movie-of-the-week sentimentalism and staidness, the filmmakers pass up the opportunity to make a much more interesting film about media manipulation and the power struggles within the context of the Indian justice system.*No seriously, the credits roll on the character calling herself a bitch in the empowering way, no matter how many times the subtitles kept trying to convince me she was saying "witch".
(ca) wrote: As someone who practices medicine, and studies medicine from people past and present who have seen thousands upon thousands of people, it is without question the vegetarian diet is the best diet for reversing chronic disease. However, this is not to say that they need to be a vegetarian forever, nor is it to say that the vegetarian diet is the best diet because there is no best diet for an individual other than the one which fits his or her temperament.The internet is filled with opinions that are based upon many opinions of people who have never studied medicine or treated a single patient. This has absolutely no merit for me. Seeing patients is an entirely different world than reading about something on the internet. Moreso, reading about the same problem on the internet as it walks into your clinic are two entirely different situations. The system is broke. The entire philosophy of modern medicine is inept. Attempting to remove disease from the body is akin to trying to remove darkness from a room. You can only give a dark room light if you want to see, just as you can only give a diseased person health if you want them to be healthy again. This is common sense. And the movie illustrates this perfectly.
(gb) wrote: Funny enjoyable movie that intersects the luxury of a forgein life into the poor local life in Delhi. Stella's "Robin hood" approach is both funny and sad, in her survivalist approach with the family she is paid to look out for. Real and lovely film.
(de) wrote: Besides ecological thrillers depicting major natural disasters I also enjoy movies about biological/chemical warfare. It is a potential threat that can affect thousands or even millions of people depending on the target location. This one deals with a virus spreading through jet fuel engines. People are getting sick and dying at an alarming rate so Dr. Tess Martin (Anne Heche), the best virologist in the country is contacted to investigate the what type of virus it is and its origin. Thankfully, hope lies in the form of Jack Bowen (James Tupper), a man who plays by his own rules and who knows more about this mysterious outbreak than anyone realizes. Is it a conspiracy theory? Is big pharma behind this deliberate outbreak? How about the military? You will have to watch it and not bad for a straight to dvd film. It is not of the caliber of Outbreak with Dustin Hoffman and Donald Pleasance which was fantastic but still for folks that find this topic interesting, definitely worth watching on Netflix.
(de) wrote: Didnt understand what was going on
(kr) wrote: Liked it. A slow pace, but I enjoyed the historical aspect.
(fr) wrote: A well-written and well-acted indie film. Beautiful landscape. The movie would not have worked without Billy Crudup.
(gb) wrote: Good movie just WAY to short when it gets good it's over
(ru) wrote: enjoyed the neo-nior style with dark cynical humor
(es) wrote: Who in the world was Dr. Littlefield (or whatever the name was). I mean, I know in the end it was a pseudonym and such, but I didn't remember hearing that name in the movie until he asked that question. Maybe that means there was just way too much going on, but it was fully enjoyable.
(mx) wrote: STUNK. Should've left the legacy alone, I paid money at the cinema for this!
(ru) wrote: I heard Tom Hanks and comedy and I said ok, lets put it in. Oh boy and how I wish I hadn't. There was nothing very special about this movie, I could have cared less about the characters that the movie centered around. This is not something that anyone should really spend their time with.
(kr) wrote: Did they really have to make a sequel?
(it) wrote: A good follow up to the more scary Willard, this one is oddly sweet. A plot about a kid befriending a killer rat could make for a dire film, but the kid isn't annoying so it all works well enough.
(it) wrote: meh. promising premise, fails to deliver. nice to look at if you want to spend the time - i like the beach scene
(au) wrote: My #2 movie of all time!
(ca) wrote: Pretty good movie and a thriller with an original premise. Again a European movie proves that you shouldn't overdo and underestimate the viewing public just to get airheads into cinemas. No windswept hero here, just a shit scared nurses aide trying to rescue his wife. A more discerning thriller for a more discerning European audience and the pace and excitement carries you through right til the end. Little cheesy but thats ok too. It is entertainment after all.