A Life Ascending

A Life Ascending

A Life Ascending chronicles the life of acclaimed ski mountaineer and mountain guide Ruedi Beglinger. Living with his wife and two young daughters on a remote glacier in the Selkirk Mountains of British Columbia, Beglinger has built a reputation as one of the top mountaineering guides in the world. The film follows his family's unique life in the mountains and their journey in the years following a massive avalanche that killed seven people. Documenting the sublime beauty and ever-present risk of a life lived on the edge, the film ultimately explores the power of nature as both an unforgiving host and profound teacher.

  • Rating:
    4.00 out of 5
  • Length:0 minutes
  • Release:2010
  • Language:English
  • Reference:Imdb
  • Keywords:mountain,   canada,   glacier,  

The life of acclaimed Ski Mountaineer and Mountain Guide, Ruedi Beglinger is explored in this documentary. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechers

A Life Ascending torrent reviews

Dylan D (nl) wrote: The Founder tells the story of the iconic restaurant's origins and expansion, but there's practically a full movie's worth of history not yet explored: expanding the restaurant's menu; its global, not just national, reach; competition with Burger King and Wendy's; the creation of its iconic characters like Ronald McDonald and The Hamburglar; and the restaurant's position as one of the largest employers in the world. Fortunately, the early-days take makes for a great movie by itself. Michael Keaton is unsurprisingly brilliant in the lead, flanked by a couple of standout performances from Nick Offerman and John Carroll Lynch. The film will most assuredly challenge the way audiences perceive the brand and the man credited with building it into a fast-food empire.

Childress P (de) wrote: I was nine-years-old when I saw this movie at the movie theater and loved it! Everyone did. This movie has a lot of nostalgia for many of us.

Andrew E (es) wrote: great halloween fodder for kids. fantastic animation.

Harry W (ru) wrote: Putting the talents of Jean Reno into a Luc Besson production again, 22 Bullets sounded like a film with potential for action and acting.To be blunt, the number one thing I appreciated in 22 Bullets was the use of blood. Most contemporary action films, including Luc Besson productions like Taken 2 and Brick Mansions are edited extremely quickly in an exercise of rendering the action PG-13. There is a little bit of jolted editing that goes on in 22 Bullets, but it is not there to hide the blood. In actuality, the film embraces its violent content and uses the imagery to build a gritty mood. The entire film is rich in atmosphere thanks to an intense musical score to match on the auditory level what the blood delivers in the visual experience. The violence depicted in 22 Bullets prove to be the most stylish moments of the film and the fast pace of the story reinforces this feeling. However, it is a case of style over substance in 22 Bullets as the pace does not prove beneficial to the story. The pace seems to move along pretty fast. Considering that the film is a crime thriller this is good in one way because it means that it gets to the point faster, but at the same time since there is so much talking that goes on, the fact that it dashes through it means that there can be quite a bit to keep up with. But despite the fast pace of 22 Bullets, it cannot dash past the fact that it's story is one that lacks originality. And at the same time, since the story is so caught up in taking itself so seriously there is a sense that it tends to drag on with an unnecessary surplus of characters and dialogue which are not really that amusing.22 Bullets may have stylish elements and a coupleof somewhat interesting characters, but at heart it is a very basic revenge oriented crime thriller. The intro to 22 Bullets depicts a stylishly fimed sequence where the protgonist is the victim of an attempted assassination where he is shot many times and left for dead. The way that the slow motion in this scene combines with the flying blood effects and the classical musical score gives the film a dynamic style, but it also foreshadows what proves to be a conventional story. As the narrative unfolds, so many cliche elements appear before our eyes. And at the same time, they are scattered among a narrative with a frustrating structure. With so many characters that the story focuses on, 22 Bullets jumps from protagonist to antagonist and everyone in between at a really rapid rate which is a challenge to fully comprehend. And as one begins to gain an understanding of everything that is happening, they realise how it is all an assortment of cliches thrown together into another generic crime thriller. There are occasional breaks from it all for moments of energetic violence and action, but the story fails to sustain it all. It's a shame because the action scenes in 22 Bullets are shot well and edited strongly enough while they unfold against the backdrop of some appealing scenery, reinforcing the stylish nature of the film. I just wish that writer-director Richard Berry could find something to do with them.Considering that 22 Bullets is loosely based on the true life story of Jacky Imbert, there is clearly potential with the story. The problem is that the idea of characterization takes a back seat to generic storytelling. Anything present with the intention of adding depth into protagonist Charly Mattei ends up feeling like yet another narrative cliche. The atmospheric nature of the film may strengthen these plot points, but it fails to give a sufficient character to Jean Reno to work with. Very little is offered in the way of depth in 22 Bullets because the story is so thin and predictable that any attempts to change that prove pretentious, weakening the genuine attempts of the script to transcend the generic roots it has set itself in so deeply.But as I said, the central reason I watched 22 Bullets was for its action and acting. And the same way it delivered the action to a certain extent, Jean Reno puts a modicum of greater value into the experience.Jean Reno's leading performance in 22 Bullets is a serious asset. Though his character is largely reduced to being a generic hero in a revenge tale, there are some powerful moments in the film where the atmosphere becomes really heavy as a means of capturing what he is meant to be feeling. Jean Reno keeps up with the mood of the film very well, capturing a restrained but obvious sense of emotional strength during these moments. But most of the time, 22 Bullets calls upon him to be an intense gunman, and he steps up to the plate very well. He doesn't play the character as thinly as he is sketched because Jean Reno has a naturally heartfelt aura about him whenever he speaks of what he is feeling. He clarifies the internal nature of Charly Mattei clearly through his restrained physical acting or articulate line delivery. And when he is called upon to pull the trigger, Jean Reno does it with a strong level of involvement. He shoots his enemies without flinching, but he takes the time to ensure that they understand why which clarifies it for viewers in the process. And at other times, he remains swift with his movements and ready for what ever comes next. Jean Reno keeps his energy alive in 22 Bullets, even though the script puts so much responsibility on him.So 22 Bullets is suitably bloody and led in a strong effort by Jean Reno, but the entertaining action of the film gets buried beneath a narrative that rushes through countless thin characters and cliches who that all still manage to pack the film with extensive periods of unappealing dialogue.

Ron R (gb) wrote: Not that great of a movie, leaves you confused if you leave and return at a later time. Story line drags and interest departs.

Amy J (es) wrote: One of my Disney favorites....I love this movie...I owned it on vhs back in the day..now I have it on Blu Ray and watch it on Netflix. It's a masterpiece!!

Edith N (mx) wrote: Even Gentle Lions Scar I have known for a very long time that Jodie Foster was in this. Indeed, it's her first film role. However, I think this may well be the first time I've ever actually seen it, and I'd always kind of assumed that she was the star. It's true that she was one of the two title characters, but she still wasn't the star. She got fifth billing; while I would have made one change to that, I'd say it's about right. (I would have swapped the chief of police, third-billed Arch Johnson, with the lion, seventh-billed Major, not to mention putting Johnny Whitaker as Napoleon at the top. Still, Michael Douglas's father was a star--who had worked for Disney before himself!) I would imagine she's probably tired of talking about it, but I quite liked her. In many ways, at not-quite-ten, she was the film's rational center. Oh, she makes a few bad decisions, but she is often the one voicing the things the audience is left thinking. Frankly, I can think of a lot of films which would do better for having Samantha in them! Napoleon lives in one of those bucolic Disney mountain towns with his grandfather (Will Geer). His parents are dead; his only other relative is an uncle who has not been heard of in some time. Still, they do pretty well by one another. One day, they are walking through the mountains when they encounter a clown (Vito Scotti). The clown informs them that, alas, he cannot keep his lion anymore. The grandfather's stories have convinced Napoleon that there is no one better suited to taking in an old lion than Grandpa, so they do. They don't tell anyone; they just buy lots and lots of milk, and Grandpa claims he is bathing in it. And then one day, Grandpa dies. As per his last request, Napoleon buries him on his mountain, going into town to hire a man to do the digging. This is Danny (Douglas), a grad student/shepherd. He invites Napoleon to come visit him on his mountain sometime. Then the letter Grandpa wrote to the lost uncle is returned "no forwarding address." Napoleon knows they won't let him keep the lion in an orphanage, so off he goes to see Danny. For some reason, I was convinced all the way through that Napoleon was played by Dermott Downs, who played the bully Truck in [i]Escape to Witch Mountain[/i]. I was wrong, but if I had been right, the characters might almost be the same, since Truck is encountered at an orphanage. It isn't just that Napoleon wants to keep his lion which is the problem, you see; he's afraid that he will be mistreated in a way not unlike the way Truck treats Tony and Tia. He believes he will be locked up and away from the mountains he loves by people who will be cruel to him. He has a view of orphanages, the system as a whole, shaped by the fiction to which he was exposed. For some reason, we see orphanages as cruel and bitter paces, warehouses for children. We see every foster parent as just in it for the money. The home Tony and Tia go to is actually closer to the kind Danny describes; yes, there's a bully, but there almost always is, when you get large groups of kids together. It is also interesting to me that Danny, the "hippie," is the good guy. Only a few years earlier, the Monkees made several jokes about how various characters would be unable to get into Disneyland with their hair/clothing/lycanthropy; the Walt Disney Corporation was not so big on the country's wild and rebellious youth. However, Danny is not only a grad student; he's studying political science or some such other hippie discipline. We are later left to suspect that this is in no small part because he wants to improve the very system that Napoleon will be put into, but whatever the reason, he is actually unjustly imprisoned because of his beliefs. Yes, he's a shepherd, but the reason he's looking for a job is so that he can get a textbook for school. The implication is that he is taking slightly longer to get through classes than is usual, and the film does not judge him for it. Okay, no one is ever going to mistake [i]Napoleon and Samantha[/i] for [i]Citizen Kane[/i]. It isn't exactly High Art; the entire center of the movie is two kids crossing a mountain with a lion. But so what? The kids act like real kids, even if Samantha is constantly making more sense than even a lot of the grown-ups around them. Grandpa is both a bit on the silly side and a kind and loving guardian; most movies would make us choose. Just because he's a little goofy sometimes doesn't mean that he doesn't take very good care of his grandson and want nothing but the best for him. And maybe living with him wasn't the best environment in some ways, but it was far from the worst for Napoleon. What's more, both the film and the adults in it are shown as being sympathetic toward Napoleon's feelings. Even when they know he isn't being reasonable or in possession of all the facts, that doesn't mean they don't understand why he feels the way he does. The lion is just an afterthought, and I bet Jodie Foster would have been happier if it were one no one ever had.

Jamie L (au) wrote: Even when trying to emulate a shockumentary style Meyer still manages to make an interesting film with tons of camp humor and bosomed females

Allan C (ca) wrote: Joan Crawford is the titular Queen Bee who manipulates and ruins the lives of all those who live in her gentile southern mansion. This is vintage Joan and interestingly enough, Christina Crawford, Joan Crawford's adopted daughter, recounted in her autobiography "Mommy Dearest" that she had to leave the theater midway through a showing of this film because it was too true-to-life in her mother's portrayal of the main character.

Michael T (mx) wrote: One of the great ones; Ozu's classic manages to be poignant and funny at the same time. A must-see.

F B (nl) wrote: Visually stunning but mind numbingly boring apart from some fantastic skiing and extreme footage interspersed throughout the film.

Carl M (es) wrote: The ghosts of the past return after the Benson family moves in to the accursed Amityville house, and now, the footage of their horrifying ordeal has finally been found... THE AMITYVILLE HAUNTING isn't even worth commenting on, seeing as how no one will be able to sit through the first hour anyway. It is another trite and cliche haunted house film that uses the "found-footage" technique to alleviate the cast and crew of any responsibility for the poor performances and careless writing. The introduction of the irritating Benson family is enough to drive anyone away immediately, but stick around long enough, and you can marvel as the shadowy CG ghosts dart on and off screen while pushing people down the stairs. Inexcusable direct-to-video garbage.

Ronald T (kr) wrote: Interesting Movie. Many plot twist. Sad story, but intriguing.