Brudebuketten

Brudebuketten

Siv Blom is a young impulsive girl with a special ability to come up in extraordinary situations. She also sleepwalks and one day strolling she sleepwalks unsuspecting into the bedroom to the sublime painter 'Picasso'. The art painter comes to admire her naivete, but doesn't have enough time for her. After that Siv stumbles across a new man, a junior manager in the firm Høyland & Høyland. Høyland jr. falls for Miss Blom, but definitely not his mother. Therefore Siv is sent on business to Stockholm and thus she meets man no. 3, the womanizer Victor Wahlin. Who to marry now that Siv has acquired three very eager suitors whom all wants Siv's consent. The stage is set for many intrigues. Who wins?

. You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechers

Brudebuketten torrent reviews

Peter F (de) wrote: Inspired, but ultimately drab and under-cooked mumble core film. Alex Ross Perry would go on to far greater things!

Simone H (au) wrote: A total masterpiece.

Les B (jp) wrote: So many good bits to this movie; have no reservations about giving this story five stars!

Mloy X (es) wrote: Doon Harrow (Harry Treadaway): My dad made this. Lina Mayfleet (Saoirse Ronan): It doesn't look very safe. Doon Harrow (Harry Treadaway): That's my dad.This film had so much potential to be good; after all, it had ubber talented Saoirse Ronan as one of the main protagonist and the always cheeky Bill Murray, plus a wonderful supporting cast of very credible, seasoned, main-stream actors (Martin Landau and Tim Robbins) and incredible character actors like Toby Jones. The story was well-rounded enough-- it had an interesting conspiracy subplot, coupled with a tantalizing promise of a grand adventure. So why did it fail to connect with me (as an audience), I'm not entirely sure. Maybe the pacing was a little too leisurely for me, even though there was a need for quick action from the characters, the sense or urgency just wasn't there. Maybe the main characters were under-developed and so we didn't really get to know them and grow attached to them and care about their struggles. Or maybe there was too many red-herring subplots in the film that didn't seem to lead anywhere (the reason for the gigantic animals was never addressed or why Doon, the male lead seemed to calm to see a mammoth-sized moth) nor lend anything vital to enhance the story. Overall, it was okay to watch, but there wasn't anything really endearing or memorable about this film or its characters, which was a shame.

Randy Y (gb) wrote: A thriller that just relies on the name power of Al Pacino. The story really doesn't give the viewer a lot of hints to keep them interested- it just uses an intense score- like a made for TV movie- to convince viewer the movie is interesting.

Nicholas W (mx) wrote: charlie sheen's fav movie

Adam F (nl) wrote: Who is "Swimfan" is a predictable, poorly put together thriller that is pretty lacking in any genuine thrills. Even if you haven't seen other movies of this genre the overall premise just gives away almost everything in the movie because it never tries anything creative or different from other films in the genre. From the setup to the escalation of the obsession to the final confrontation everything is very standard so it becomes more fun to start calling out what's going to happen in the movie than actually watching it. The characters are stupid and never think of doing something as smart as say... contacting the police, the teachers at the school or even their parents for help or warning each other that there's a crazy woman that might be after them and no procedures to ensure anyone's safety are even taken, resulting in a plot that feels contrived. Any scenes where the antagonist of the film confronts anyone else is off screen (too bad, since those parts would have been nice to see and actually exciting) so the movie also feels very cheap, like they didn't have the time or budget to show a character fighting for his or her life so they decided to just tell us it happened instead. The editing for this movie is atrocious. Towards the end there are several scenes that end so abruptly and are so short that you'll think your Dvd is skipping and the scenes always end before the payoff so they leave you really unsatisfied. If you haven't seen anything like this before (a character making a mistake and then being stalked by a man or woman that becomes obsessed with him or her to the point of putting people in danger) you might have a good time but it's just an incredibly mediocre thriller that doesn't even deliver any form of titillation or cool gore/violence. (Dvd, December 24, 2012)

Ashley S (br) wrote: One of the funniest and most quintessentially Australian films ever made. Ben Mendelson is excellent and this film has some of the greatest quotes out there; "I didn't call you an idiot, I asked if you were an idiot, ya fuckin' idiot!" "I've got a poem for ya. "You are an idiot, You are a bitch, You shit me to tears, ...I'm goin' down the pub."" See it if you can.

Brian C (it) wrote: What is not to love with this silly messy bit of horror nonsense? It is just so fun.The movie packed full of characters that are interesting, interact well (although not really believably) and we have over-macho useless cops getting in the way of everything.And David Naughton's head on a giant waffle cone.Gotta try to butter brickle!

Evan H (gb) wrote: This movie has wonderful performances all around. It has a bitter-sweet storyline that brings tears. It's wonderfully put together and brought out. For a TV movie it's really well thought-out!

Claudette A (ca) wrote: It was a fun movie about youthfullness. I didn't recognise Courteney Cox with all those freckles. I liked the original movie better.

Claire M (ag) wrote: Cheesy ninja film, average pace, fight scenes ok.

Sean K (us) wrote: Rediculous storyline. Blackmailer turned friendly ally! Weekend afternoon movie at best!

Cameron J (gb) wrote: Interesting how much an exclamation point can distinguish a generic title. ...So, yeah, anyways, "Earth was shakin', we stood and stared; when it came, no one was spared! Still, I hear... 'Buuuuuuuuuurrrrrrrrrn!'" Man, that is one seriously long "burn"... with an exclamation point (Aw yeah"!"), kind of like this "Burn!", with an exclamation point. So yeah, this film's title is a whole lot less convoluted than the film's narrative itself, or even the nationality associated with this film, which is Italian and features an American as a Brit inspiring an uprising within a Portuguese colony in the Caribbeans. Shoot, we are talking about Gillo Pontecorvo, the director who, upon taking on this project, had just gotten done with "The Battle Algiers", another ethnically convoluted and, well, somewhat bland film. No, this film is good, and if it didn't reflect Marlon Brando's comfort with working with Italians, he might not have gotten into "The Godfather", although intrigue does find itself shaken up a bit, by more than just pacing issues.The background behind the two leads and a number of their more important peers is lacking in this initially distancingly underdeveloped film, and once you begin to grow accustomed to the narrative by way of gradual characterization, the film, oddly enough, begins to jar focus between the leads and their respective angles in the narrative. It's difficult to get invested in either story branch, because of their uneven juggling's begetting a sense of thinning within characterization, and that somewhat defuses a sense of depth which might compensate for the contrivances within the thematic value of this anti-slavery drama, whose allegory is worthy, but sometimes laid on a little too thick, with all of the thematic imagery and sentimental dramatic atmospherics. Shortcomings in thematic genuineness shine a light on the familiarity of worthy themes, even if this film does go at them from angles that are a little different than what we're used to (South America had some racial issues, same as southern America), and that, in turn, shines a light on the familiarity within most all other aspects of this drama, which is ultimately not much of anything new, not with its character types or plotting tropes. The film follows a worthy path with inspiration, yet not enough flare to go about its business uniquely, or even quickly, because even though the film isn't exactly sprawling, with a runtime of just under two hours and, in the case of the restored version, just over 130 minutes, it is still too long, as I jokingly said earlier, making up for time saved on extensive exposition through repetitive set pieces and meandering filler, if not overly meticulous storytelling. Franco Solinas' and Giorgio Arlorio's script may hurry along in some places, but it drags its feet in too many other, and if nothing else stresses that, then it is Gillo Pontecorvo's steady directorial storytelling, whose very Italian dryness and ponderous pacing are effective in their thoughtfulness, but blanding about as much as anything, and occasionally even dull. Intelligent, adequately nuanced and altogether very competently put-together, the film is always compelling, at least to me, and I'm sure plenty others will be able to overlook the shortcomings better, yet those shortcomings still stand, and firm, shaking up a sense of focus, convincingness, momentum and entertainment value. The film requires a fair bit of patience, and if you can submit it, it ought to be paid off, reinforced by an admirable artistic value.Rather underused and sometimes forgettable in its being either inconsequentially placed or utilized as a supplement to sentimental tonality, Ennio Morricone's score remains excellent, with a combination of beautiful classical sensibilities and lively tribal, if not modernist sensibilities that is refreshing, as well as artistically and, to a certain extent, tonally sharp. Visual style might not be quite as sharp, yet it is more prominently utilized, with art director Piero Gherardi restoring the 19th century Caribbean, South Americas and, at one point, Britain with distinction so realized that it is technically lavish, especially before the dated, but well-lit lensing of cinematographer Marcello Gatti. The artistic value of this film really exposes its Italian background, for the film is nothing if not an aesthetic achievement that delivers on consistently strong style to accompany substance that is not quite as consistent, at least in execution. Themes regarding anti-slavery and political strife within oppressed territories of the 19th century are sometimes laid on thick, yet they are worthwhile through and through, behind a dynamically scaled, human-driven plot which juggles a number of thinly drawn, but promising roles which are sold by a solid cast. Standing out from the cast is the unevenly used Evaristo Mrquez, - as a slave who becomes the militant leader of an uprising and a struggling society, and whose must face the burdens that come with such a role - as well as leading man Marlon Brando, whose flawless English accent and even more impeccable charisma bring colorful definition to the William Walker character (Not to be the American filibuster who subscribed to ideas similar to the ones embraced by this Walker), until an exposure of some genuine humanity and subtle layering project the passion in Walker to, not simply fulfill an important mission, but do right by the oppressed. Brando, Mrquez and others bring a lot of depth to this occasionally superficial drama, and in all fairness, they have plenty of quality material to work with, for although Franco Solinas' and Giorgio Arlorio's screenplay is uneven and meandering, it offers genuine wit and dramatic edge to all but make up for shortcomings in largely well-defined characterization, just as Gillo Pontecorvo's direction, for all of its occasional contrivances and many dry spells, delivers on tightly staged action, heavy visuals and a slow-burn (Pun not intended) atmosphere that, when backed by realized material, proves to be moving. This film is pretty powerful at times, standing to be more coherent and entertaining, but ultimately managing to compel throughout its course, enough so satisfy on an aesthetic and dramatic level.A touch underdeveloped and uneven, with the occasional lapse into subtlety issues and glaring conventions throughout an overdrawn, ponderously course, the final product is a challenge to one's patience, firmly reinforced by an excellent artistic value deriving from strong score work, art direction and cinematography, and by the worthy subject matter, the strong performances of Marlon Brando and Evaristo Mrquez, and the intelligent, generally thoughtful scripted and directorial storytelling which secure Gillo Pontecorvo's "Burn!" (Exclamation point"!") as a rewardingly biting political and human drama.3/5 - Good

Francisco F (es) wrote: Grand petit film. Perfection de la mise en scene. Subtilite de l'interpretation. Vive Mann !

Henry P (au) wrote: Success in the movie pool! A simple, fun movie about golf and gophers, Caddyshack really is a classic. We open with Danny Noonan (Michael O'Keefe) having his dad grill him about college funds. After he gets to his job as a caddy, what follows is a hilarious plot of two guys getting into a golf match, while groundskeeper Carl Spackler (Bill Murray) goes all Liam Neeson and Punisher on a hilarious gopher. The effects in this movie are cheap, but believable considering the budget and release time, whether it's a guy getting struck by lightning having some weird blue light around him or the gopher. The gopher's phoniness may be a little obvious, but more believable than what CGI would have done. The soundtrack from Johnny Mandel maintains the cheesy feel to it, and with Kenny Loggins songs, adds to the humor. Overall, Caddyshack is a fun comedy that has two-dimensional characters make spectacles of themselves.

Emily B (ca) wrote: My first viewing of Pitch Perfect happened in early 2013. I rarely go to see college comedies because they're not typically to my taste. But my work friends at the time convinced me that Pitch Perfect would be a delightful watch and they were right. With a focus on female camaraderie, Pitch Perfect represents unlikely but lovely female friendships. My favourite part of Pitch Perfect is the initial recruitment when the leaders are looking for a group of girls with beach ready bodies. What they end up getting is very, very different because none of the stereotypically beautiful bodied girls want to join their group. Fat Amy was especially dear to me as she defied fatphobia and was desirable throughout the film to the leader of the male a cappella group. By prefacing her name with Fat she was presenting a body positivity that transgressed beauty standards. Pitch Perfect does have its shortcomings though. The racialized characters are stereotyped. The queer, black lesbian is the butt of every we know she's gay but she won't come out joke. She is made to be 'thirsty' and socially awkward because of it. Some of the humour becomes a little repetitive and redundant as one of the women does a 'snow' angel in a pool of vomit. But, Pitch Perfect is filled with talented female actors with great chemistry and charisma. They are entertaining and light-hearted. I have watched Pitch Perfect several times since my initial viewing and every time I leave feeling silly and euphoric.