Transcendence

Transcendence

Two leading computer scientists work toward their goal of Technological Singularity, as a radical anti-technology organization fights to prevent them from creating a world where computers can transcend the abilities of the human brain.

Transcendence revolves around Dr. Will Carter (Johnny Depp), a forecast researcher in artificial intelligence field. His work is in order to manufacture a machine having the ability of self-awareness, combining all the knowledge that the human has ever known with every emotional expression of human characteristics. The controversial experiment of Will not only made him famous but also made him the greatest goal of anti-technology people and they will not do any tricks to prevent him. In a case to assassinate Will, they accidentally became the catalyst for his success research–his body was paralyzed. And the worst thing of all was the Will’s thirst for knowledge had evolved to become a demon aspiring the power which can not stop. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechers

Transcendence torrent reviews

Private U (ca) wrote: Its funny because it sucks so much.

Bill A (ag) wrote: Gross and engrossing. Watch at your own risk.

Jared M (jp) wrote: not as bad as i thought it would be.

Seth P (es) wrote: The atmosphere was good, the characters were eh, the dialogue was pretty bad, but there was some good parts...

Tara C (jp) wrote: The best movie with a great soundtrack.

Sean H (de) wrote: Lee did his best to ruin this

David W (au) wrote: Adam Sandler's first Big star role in Billy Madison provides laughs enough for the audiences. Critics.....Not so much

Reed P (it) wrote: I liked it. I was very young when it came out. I also had the biggest crush on rob van winkle aka vanilla ice

Johnny B (jp) wrote: I enjoyed it IT was a thriller all the way through watch number one first its even better cause you can understand it more

Perry B (mx) wrote: Perty Kewl. Not a total waste of time, like many movies

Barney o (ag) wrote: WHAT I LIKED: Wow this really is a franchise reboot; not only does 'Casino Royale' re-energise and re-stylise Bond, it also brings in a level of sophistication that we've never seen before. Seriously, the STORY is so twisted and layered, yet unlike the convoluted political nonsense of a 'Mission: Impossible' film, it's personal and so it has high-stakes and flows really damn well. This is impressive on it's own as it keeps you captivated and engaged, but it's even more amazing when you consider how it sets up the next film and keeps you in the know and surprises you just the right amounts. Yes, if it sounds like it's achieved a lot, it has - for goodness sake not only is this an exciting revenge plot, a great spy-thriller and a gripping character tale - it's also the best love story of the franchise so far!But a sophisticated story isn't all that makes this movie; something was needed to lift things above that grittiness. Luckily, this film found that solace in Daniel Craig. My gosh is this guy a good Bond; bringing a steeliness to compliment the new-found tone, yet a charm and witt to make everything all the more enjoyable. You properly, properly root for the guy, and that's thanks to Craig's performance, as well as his relevance and arc in the overall story. He can do smooth, he can do cold and he can damn well do action and as a result he's already the best Bond since Connery. Put all that good stuff in a film with all the usual fun action, glorious locations and sweeping musical numbers? It's kind of a Bond movie, but it's something quite a bit more too.WHAT I DIDN'T LIKE: A film this fresh and ambitious is bound to have problems, but the question is do they hinder the overall experience? Well, rarely; the only issue I have is that the overall tone is a little hard to adjust to - being such a fan of the classics. Having said that, in the words of 007 himself: "do I look like I give a damn?" Hmm I probably shouldn't, but I can say the feeling would have been less jarring had it stayed consistently dark throughout.VERDICT: I'd go as far as saying that the story in 'Casino Royale' is one of the biggest achievements in Cinema history. It engages, it flows and it works, and Daniel Craig elevates it even further. Just wow.

Courtney K (fr) wrote: hmm; it's been a while since i've read the book & from what i can remember, i feel like this was a fine movie -- although i did catch that none of them were British -- but reading other reviews i guess it's not a very good adaptation. there's an older film from the 60's that apparently follows better so i guess i'll watch that one next.

Ian J (kr) wrote: Any reasonable person would go into this film expecting guts, gore, and gobs of bad acting. You get the guts and gore, but you also get some genuinely intense action, acting, and emotional agony. David Slade delivers. Hartnett does the usual brooding, and continues to do it well.

Konrad A (fr) wrote: A good Halloween movie to see your any time this was a funny movie.

George O (de) wrote: Nothing much happens in this film. I've heard the same storyline from people on public transport going home in early hours of the morning, I just feel like I've watched a recently dumped husband sell off his belongings. Some character development is good and Will Ferrell, Christopher Wallace and Rebecca Hall are all well cast making it interesting to watch from that standpoint. There's just not much there!

ANDERSON G (nl) wrote: "Wall street power and greed" is a film about the money and the degradation it brings, with an always pessimistic view of money, Oliver Stone tries to show us the capacity of corruption of the human being in exchange for his materialism , Except that Stone is extremely clichd and caricature in his message. With a well-worked script that subtly shows the change of the secondary characters due to the enrichment of our protagonist, and leaves loose points in its plot by ignoring the illicit enrichment without showing how the money was washed or something of the kind, anyway The story of Bud Fox (Charlie Sheen), an ambitious stockbroker in the 1980s who engages in a scheme of speculation and illegal information gathering for self-enrichment and his cupbearer Gordon Gekko (Michael Douglas). The moral of the film is precisely to talk about the degradation and well of materialism, and Oliver Stone who is known for making documentaries of socialist character and for always his severe criticisms of capitalism, his film can be caricato and loaded with ideology, Stone is a great director and managed to get his message across, albeit weak. Technically, film is good, has a spectacular montage and a great mix of sound, a color palette with grayer tones, typical of the 80s and a soundtrack full of Jazz that composes well the scenes. In terms of performances we have no highlights , All fulfill their function and finished, we do not have three-dimensional performances, exaggerated and not very contained, but worth a compliment to Martin Sheen who is great as a supporting. At the end of the day we have a great movie, which fulfills its role, and is closer to impress than to disappoint.