#

Twelve Chairs

A former aristocrat Ippolit Vorobyaninov leads a miserable life in Soviet Russia. His mother-in-law reveals a secret to him - she hid family diamonds in one of the twelve chairs they once ...

. . His mother-in-law reveals a secret to him - she hid family diamonds in one of the twelve chairs they once . A former aristocrat Ippolit Vorobyaninov leads a miserable life in Soviet Russia

Twelve Chairs is the best funny movie of Ilya Ilf (novel), Yevgeni Petrov (novel), Vladlen Bakhnov, Leonid Gayday. This movie was introduced in 1971. We can counted many actors in this movie torrents, such as Archil Gomiashvili, Sergey Filippov, Mikhail Pugovkin, Natalya Krachkovskaya, Natalya Vorobyova, Glikeriya Bogdanova-Chesnokova, Nina Grebeshkova, Yuriy Nikulin, Natalya Varley, Klara Rumyanova, Leonid Gayday, Igor Yasulovich, Georgiy Vitsin, Saveliy Kramarov, Viktor Pavlov. The kind of movie are Comedy. Many people rated for this movie, Rate is 8.4 in www.imdb.com. We have a good movie torrents. Share with your friends and watch this movie together . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

Twelve Chairs torrents

Twelve Chairs full movie

Twelve Chairs 1971 torrent

Twelve Chairs torrent, Twelve Chairs movie torrents, download Twelve Chairs full movie, Twelve Chairs 1971 torrents, download Twelve Chairs 1971 torrents, watch Twelve Chairs movie, Twelve Chairs englishsub, free download Twelve Chairs movie, movie Twelve Chairs torrent

Links Name Quality Seeders Leechers Size
Download   12 chairs Other 34 30 700.16 MB

Users reviews


(gb)

ayer. "LILY SHOU-SHOU MAKE ME SHOCK"- from : mr


Benjamn S (ag)

Ya manisfet desprecio respecto a la Elektra del Universo Cinematogrfico, pero incluso la sosa interpretacin de Elodie Yung supera a esta cosa. Un spin-off que est lleno de clichs, esincreblemente bsica en funcin y donde encima las actuaciones son horribles. Elektra : como no hacer una pelcula de accin competente


Chris C (nl)

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . late great


Devin M (fr)

But on the whole, its almost entire lack of a story, poor attempt to be clever and artsy, and being just plain annoying and dull make this movie memorable only as an example of a failed film concept. Its only real merit is that among the sea of crazy ideas it throws at the audience, it does provoke some interesting and novel thoughts on occasion. This movie epitomizes my distaste for BS deep philosophical discussions. Overall, I felt that in their attempt to make an artsy, educational movie, they ended up with more of a pretentious lecture series that was often deliberately confusing and cryptic. I must stress that while I am not personally intensely interested in the intricacies of philosophy, I do believe that many philosophical ideas are interesting, thought-provoking, and worthy of discussion; however, this was not my experience with this movie. There was simply too much unnecessary and useless complex terminology and figurative language that it just put me off more than it made me want to learn. Granted, some of the ideas were interesting and thought-provoking, but many were not, and regardless of the quality, the presentation of these ideas was too often soaked in academic arrogance and absurdity. I felt like I was briefly sitting in on a bunch of philosophy lectures, many of which just irritated me--either because they were absurd or because they were laced with meaningless intellectual mumbo-jumbo. It actually wasn't so much a movie as an series of often farcical philosophical discussions set to a poor, disorienting, and distracting animation technique. This movie is probably the most pretentious and annoying movie I have ever seen. Animated movie that is actually more of a scattered collection of short, often pretentious, philosophical ideas and lectures weakly tied together into a story of a young man who cannot stop himself from dreaming


James T (us)

interesting but not as good as the first dracula


Jesse O (nl)

Watch and you'll see what I'm saying. Stephen Dorff worked hard, but this film's worst enemy was itself. Being one step ahead by taking two steps backward isn't really being ahead, but if that's what they want to believe then so be it. That may very well be so, but to stay one step ahead they had to dumb down what was actually, until that point, a decent movie. Well other than the fact that the filmmakers can say that they got one "over" on the audience by staying one step ahead. There's no logic, no reasoning behind this. How can they count on that? The film falls apart because of this. Hoping that, somehow, Jeremy would slip up and reveal the location after he's told it was a training exercise. You realize how much meticulous planning this would actually take. The logic of these villains start to fall apart. But when you go one step further and the secret training exercise is just a red herring for the real twist, that's when problems start. That's not hard to believe at all. It's not hard for me to believe that the CIA, or whatever government agency you want, would plan these secret training exercises in order to see if one of its agents is up to the incredible demands, or pressures, of the job. What would they have done then? It's so needlessly, and by extension stupidly, elaborate that you have to wonder what the real purpose of it was. I'm not even sure what they were counting on, because for all they know Jeremy, when having gotten out of the trunk, wouldn't have ever given up the location of Roulette. Hiring actors to pretend to be people that are helping Henry, the truck driver and the 911 operator, for what exactly? Why would they go to this much trouble? It's absolutely preposterous. this group of terrorists went through the trouble of staging this very elaborate hostage situation. . . Let me get this straight. It was something to throw Henry off his game to, somehow, get him to loosen up and finally reveal the location of Roulette, the bunker the president hides in during terrorist attacks, a location that changes every so often and only a few people are ever aware of its location. The second, and real twist, is the fact that making everything look like it was a training exercise, even down to hiring 'actors' to pretend to be the truck drivers, the 911 operator, the man he sees through the hole in the trunk walking his dog, Henry, and even his own wife, was fake. but it somewhat works. . . If this had been the REAL ending, it would cheapen everything Jeremy went through. Pushing agents to the limit to see if they can handle the heat. It works because, with the government being as secretive as they are, it wouldn't surprise me if these types of exercises already exist. Basically, the first twist amounts to everything Jeremy was a part of, was actually a training exercise to see if he would, or could, handle the pressure of the situation and not give up important information about the President's whereabouts during terrorist attacks. Skip ahead if you don't want this ending ruined. So fuck it, I'm gonna SPOIL it. Ok, I'm not even sure how I'm going to talk about this without spoiling it. The first twist actually works, in a way. The film has two twists. The film falls victim to wanting to be one step ahead of the audience and I think it comes back to bite them in the ass. Of course that's not even touching the ridiculous ending, which I'm DEFINITELY gonna talk about. Dorff makes it work for the most part because of his performance, and I think he makes the film watchable at best. There's no real hurry or importance to what's going on. even though one of the film's main visual concepts is the big clock counting down. . . This film just doesn't have that same kind desperation, that same kind of 'we're running out of time'. This film doesn't really have that, whether it be budgetary limitations or whatever. The longer he went, the more his chances to survive diminished. It really felt like a race against time in order to save this man in this horrible situation. They were fighting against the clock in that movie, and the way that movie built, it made that concept work. Ryan Reynolds gave the performance of his life in Buried, and it was needed in order to believably sell that story, but on top of that you had dialogue that was covered with suspense and tension. The issues come in when the script, and its story, don't really match up to that performance. For all intents and purposes, Dorff does a great job here. I can't really imagine how hot it must've been, though I'm sure they must've had a ventilation system going so as to make sure their lead actor didn't pass out due to heat. I can't imagine how it must be to be trapped in an incredibly confined space for hours on end. First things first, Stephen Dorff clearly put himself through hell for this film. The point is that, maybe through no fault of their own, this film will inevitably be compared, unfavorably, to Buried. It could've been that Buried's critical success, not commercial success unfortunately, opened the doors up for this film to be financed. Maybe this film had already been in development for a while, maybe even before Buried. Perhaps ripping off is too harsh of a term. You remember that movie Buried? You know, the movie that this one ripped off for its concept


kan T (ca)

kendi halinde siradan bir sekilde ilerlerken, birden bire sicti


Paul D (au)

If you like that sort of thing, then you might be able to get into this one. I guess it is good in the campy/cheesy kind of fashion. It just never really grabbed me. This was okay, I guess


Shane S (es)

o much fun!. A hilarious movie! It doesn't drag at all


Suanne S (ag)

Gerard Buler and Emily Mortimer bring this little Scottish movie to life! LOVE this movie!