Four Seasons of Children

Four Seasons of Children

A follow-up to Children in the Wind, Four Seasons of Children(a.k.a. Kodomo no Shiki) is also based on a Tsubota Joji novel. The film is divided into two chapters, following the young protagonists' minor adventures and real-world awakenings over spring and summer, then autumn and winter.

  • Rating:
    4.00 out of 5
  • Length:0 minutes
  • Release:1939
  • Language:Japanese
  • Reference:Imdb
  • Keywords:Four Seasons of Children 1939 full movies, Four Seasons of Children torrents movie

. You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


Four Seasons of Children torrent reviews

Bill K (br) wrote: There was no closure to this movie

Joseph F (kr) wrote: Worthwhile for the quality of Gray's monologues, but not what I would call riveting cinema...

Chelsea K (kr) wrote: This has a great story for being a made-for-TV movie, and Alyssa Milano is brilliant as the single mother Patty Montanari.

Kendall I (us) wrote: It's official: this is the worst movie I have seen so far. PLOT:A religious college student (Sarah Thompson) wants a job to make extra money and get away from her rude, stoner roommate (Nana Visitor) so she finds a babysitter job on the college bulletin and takes it. A task as simple as watching a kid sleep is what the parents leave her with, but this kid is kind of strange. He wears a cowboy suit all the time (even in bed), is on a strict diet of buttermilk and diced red meat, and keeps appearing and disappearing. Attatched to that, there's been a killer roaming the streets for young girls and she thinks he may be outside. It's pretty generic altogether, even when the climax when you find out what's up with the kid appears-it all turns generic. ACTING:Decent for an awful film. Some actors actually try, but are weighed to the floor with a weak and stupid script. SCORE:Typical horror movie jump-score. It almost sounds like it copies "Saw" and "Friday the 13th" and mashes them together. EFFECTS:I think a chicken just gave birth because these effects are nothing but cheap cheap CHEAP! OTHER CONTENT:With all this bad stuff said, you'd think there'd nothing left to critisize, right? WRONG-O! This movie is so cliched it's painful, with the unnecessary fake-outs when you pull a shower curtain and there's nothing there and the bad guys dying and then returning. And the script has painful lines, such as "He only likes female flesh". This movie does try to be something, though, in some way. It tries to be one of the most controversial movies with over-gratuitous and hard-to-watch flesh chopping. Well, it falls so flat on it's face, that it bored me and even made me laugh at times. But no, this movie is not even laughable. It was an overall unnecessary movie. I do have to admit though, even when it is not laughable, I believe every oce in a while that it is fun to watch a ba dmovie because it's fun as hell to either make fun of, or bash it in a review. And believe you me, this is fun as hell to bash. OVERALL,a horrible, cliched, and unnecessary horror with a generic plot, attempted acting, generic jump-score, cheap-cheap effects, painfully cliched script, panfully stupid lines, gratuitous bflesh-chopping that falls flat on its face. Why'd I watch it? I don't know, but it is THE worst movie I've ever ever seen.

Cyber P (au) wrote: This seems to be like a US version of Wolfenstein (2001)

Nicki M (ca) wrote: Watched this a few times over the years. Always enjoy it. Good cast and relatable story about work pressure and office politics. Scarlett Johansson plays a small but good role here, and Topher is likeable too.

Matthew B (ag) wrote: I know we all joke about "the worst movie you ever saw", but this one is a genuine contender. Just awful creative decisions at every turn, from screenplay on down the line. It is astonishing that no one thought to stop Elizabeth Shue from turning in one of the most embarrassing performances in the history of moving pictures. This gets a half star for two reasons: one, I love the name Molly and two, Facebook won't let me give it zero stars.

Tim S (au) wrote: I remember thinking WTF when I saw this on cable years ago. Not a terrific flick.

Conrad H (es) wrote: Harmless fun with characters whom you could scarcely care about by the end of the movie.

Paul N (gb) wrote: Almodovar's tale of an addict hiding out in the naughtiest convent ever is garish, adorably blasphemous, surprisingly poignant.

Tio B (br) wrote: What a wacky bunch of ethnically diverse pranksters! I can't rate this film honestly, it's a plotless and predictable mishmash, but I have a soft spot in my head for this seventies-spawned urban shenanigan.

Adrian M (ru) wrote: ... SUBLIME ripstein es de lo meor gracias a que no tiene estomago...

Harry T (mx) wrote: Works on a similar level as Early Spring minus Ozu's magic. Compared to Early Spring, it demonstrates more how man and woman depend on each other than what drives them out of marriage while playing on a similar jealousy theme. I'm always amazed at how Japanese cinema has aged well and is still relevant today, this is a great example.

Ross M (es) wrote: (director's cut) Solidly made horror/ adventure hybrid with impressive makeup effects. Plot is a little predictable, but enough cool stuff to keep it interesting. From what I've read this cut is far better than the theatrical cut.

Larry W (jp) wrote: A pretty damn good film that becomes more relevant everyday.

Tyler S (it) wrote: I don't know what's worse...the fact I watched this movie or the fact I watched this movie...Richard Gere plays a man going through a midlife crisis who decides to take up dancing with J Lo as his insturctor....a romance ensues between the 2 during dance lessons. It's cheesy predictable and Gere overacts. I'm a Gere fan but this was one of the cheesiest films I've ever seen.Susan Surrandon was wasted here also.

Brian L (br) wrote: It's like the little stars are little buckets for me to puke into. Luckily, I only filled one. I was so tempted to fill them all, but that would be counter productive. I'm offended by this trash of a film. Is this the image we want to project in cinema? The mortal slaves were so multi-cultural too. When Set commands they bow, wow did the dark skin people leap to the ground. A pathetic film.It's an embarrassment. Is that the dude from Game of Thrones as Horus?I almost didn't recognize him in all the stupidity.Where do I begin? When will it end? This movie is such an abomination. The only reason I am here leaving a review is because it's been on HBO constantly, and it's on right now. I only have HBO as I cut the cord for the most part, so I just want the TV on while I work on my laptop. It's just gotten on my nerves so badly watching all of these good main actors thrown in the trash heap. Nothing for nothing, but who the hell decided to put all these descendants of English countries as the leads? Are you kidding me? What's with the white supremacy leaking out all over. Oh, I forgot "universal appeal." Who wants to watch a movie about the "Gods" of Egypt with the fake looking Disney character wanna-be's and Australian Gods? I love Gerard Butler in everything else, but give me a break. I guess no-one wants to write these checks to actual brown people of African decent.Like I said, I would never have even watched it if it wasn't on so much on HBO right now.I'll quote the great Ridley Scott from his abomination that I won't watch unless forced with my eyes and ears propped open:"I can't mount a film of this budget, where I have to rely on tax rebates in Spain, and say that my lead actor is Mohammad so-and-so from such-and-such. I'm just not going to get it financed. So the question doesn't't even come up."Ridley... Then don't make the film.