A Lesson in Love
After 15 years of marriage, David and Marianne have grown apart. David has had an affair with a patient of his and Marianne has got herself involved with her former lover Carl-Adam, who's also David's best friend. When she travels to Copenhagen to meet Carl-Adam, David takes the same train as she does, making it look coincidental. Spending time together remembering their past and talking about their future, they come to understand each other again, which leads to a reconciliation.
- Stars:Eva Dahlbeck, Gunnar Björnstrand, Yvonne Lombard, Harriet Andersson, Åke Grönberg, Olof Winnerstrand, Birgitte Reimer, John Elfström, Renée Björling, Dagmar Ebbesen, Sigge Fürst,
- Director:Ingmar Bergman,
- Writer:Ingmar Bergman
After 15 years of marriage, David and Marianne have grown apart. David has had an affair with a patient of his and Marianne has got herself involved with her former lover Carl-Adam, who's ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
A Lesson in Love torrent reviews
(br) wrote: Yet another historical event I had not heard of. Fascinating story of a nation under foreign influence and the cancerous rise of apartheid. Interesting to view the British version of having bad people in positions of power. It's ugly. Definitely worth your time.
(jp) wrote: Helen Hunt was nominated for an Oscar but it is John Hawkes who steals the show with his astounding performance as the poet Mark O'Brien who spends his nights in an iron lung and his days on a gurney.
(ca) wrote: Very nice idea for a movie, also very scary when you think about the threat of a nuclear weapon being detonated. I really like how they went through the process of what would happen if one was detonated, and the effects it would have on people. They also go through how easy it would be to smuggle a nuclear weapon into a city like New York. However! The idea of demanding 0 nuclear weapons world-wide is completely foolish! Do these people really think that EVERY COUNTRY is going to just sign an agreement and get rid of all of their nuclear weapons? Honestly I think that is an impossible thing. Plus, even if all COUNTRIES got rid of their nuclear weapons, that does not mean that terrorists would stop trying to get their hands on them.Anyway it's a good quality movie. I still think it's stupid to think it's possible to have a world without nuclear weapons.
(ru) wrote: This movie sucks ass, the scariest part was when like, a bird hits the car windsheild and the boogeyman looks like a green skeleton pirate from pirates of the caribbean
(mx) wrote: It's a true shame, the movie begins about a passionate belief in helping the innocent of 3rd world countries, and quickly, very quickly finds itself being about true love, and forgetting about the starving people or people under fire. It's a hollywood story at it's core.
(au) wrote: It was so fun!!! XDDDDD
(de) wrote: why not it has something somewhat historical
(br) wrote: We could say it is boring, but the key to understand is that you need to watch the hole story for an hour before it make sense and you will feel the power of that movie. It is like to describe love in one sentence - I love you! Better make a hole movie about it till you can say these words otherwise it is ...pure Hollywood.
(it) wrote: THIS WAS ONE OF MY FAVORITES AS A KID. A GREAT OLD MOVIE.
(fr) wrote: It's an experience like no other- you just kind of let it wash over you like a sixties cultural baptism, and you're never sure whether you're better or worse for it. There's an energy to the film which sometimes feels passive but often feels angry, and it's this pulse that drives the film forward even when conventional storytelling is thrown out the window. The other compelling elements are the characters of the film, all of which have the kind of natural charisma needed for an exposition like this- particularly Robert Forster. At its best the film shows the quantity of violence that runs (or overruns) our society, and more importantly the bizarre desensitization we feel about it, especially with a medium between "us and them". The story is never a chastisement, never a lecture; it's merely a reenactment that asks us to take note of the strangeness of it all, and its observations are more relevant now than ever before.
(ru) wrote: What can you say about a movie that is over 75% fog? Even MST3K couldn't save this one from being something of a bore. (MST3K version is 2 1/2 stars.)
(au) wrote: Not everyone's cup of tea but I really liked it.
(ca) wrote: Its final scene may come across as manipulative, but the power of this film on the whole is tremendous, with strong performances and focused direction. (And yes, there are crazy men & women in the world that really do act the way the bombers do. I should know. I've lived around the Long Beach, California area for 2 years. I've never known bombers of course, but just as insane.)
(us) wrote: Borrrring. Maybe it was just me, but I didn't sense any sort of chemistry between the two. If anything, seemed like Mara's character was taken advantage of.
(us) wrote: The Scarlet Claw is one of the best of the Rathbone/Bruce films as its excellently atmospheric with an intresestingly macabre and goulishly memorable story (although has no basis in any of Arthur Conan Doyles stories) Nigel Bruces' bumbling Watson (who for me makes these films) is also on top form in this one. I'd reccomened this to any one interested in the Sherlock Holmes although purists please note thiat it isn't an Arthur Conan Doyle story. I'd also reccommed this if you like film noir or B&W 1930's/40's Universal Horror movies.