Ten years after the war, West Germany's market economy is booming. Into an unnamed city that's rife with corruption comes a new building commissioner, Herr von Bohm, committed to progress but also upright. He's smitten by Marie-Louise, a single mother who's his landlady's daughter. Von Bohm does not realize she is also Lola, a singer at a bordello and the mistress of Schuckert, a local builder whose profits depend on von Bohm's projects. When von Bohm discovers Marie-Louise's real vocation and looks closely at Schuckert's work, will this social satire play out as a remake of "Blue Angel," a visit of Chekhov to West Germany, or an update of Jean Renoir's "Rules of the Game"?
Writer:Pea Fröhlich, Peter Märthesheimer, Rainer Werner Fassbinder
Ten years after the war, West Germany's market economy is booming. Into an unnamed city that's rife with corruption comes a new building commissioner, Herr von Bohm, committed to progress ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Erik B (fr) wrote: The documentary seems to be a lot like the music of The National. It's insecure, brooding, but also has a pulse you can really boogie to if you wanted to. The exploration of sibling rivalry between fame and failure is deeply personal, but it's also kind of charming in a way. Beringer and Beringer are both fascinating people with a a lot of love in their hearts. This is the exploration of the barriers that keep brothers apart and the joy they feel on the moments where they come down. At least, that's what it's like when it gets going. At first, It's a charmingly incompetent, but undeniably frustrating portrait of a band. However, it thematically makes sense, so I can't exactly fault it. Yeah it's a little imperfect, but so are people in general. I think that's the ultimate draw to this film, National fan or not.
Bobby N (kr) wrote: It wasn't as good as the first but the inly problem I had with it involved the middle east plot lines. I found what was happening at home to be interesting and should have been focused on more. It felt like a commercial for Abu Dhabi, unlike the first film in which the trip to Mexico lasted no more than half an hour. The girls are just the same though and thats what makes me love it. The characters are who theyve always been and thats all i could ask for
Jonah P (ag) wrote: It is better than Sloppy Seconds but still bad.
Lauren S (kr) wrote: This film was both insightful and heartbreaking. I highly recommend it!
(fr) wrote: Precisely casted creepy and innovative political thriller describes the reality of the world you may not know much about it. One of the best movies of this genre you have ever watched.
Marco S (us) wrote: Buenos actores y varias historias entrelazadas alrededor del mundo de las apuestas. Recomendable.
Mark A (ca) wrote: In Bones, Snoop Dogg seems content to deliver forgettable one-liners instead of really acting. Avoid this unintentionally comedic and trite garbage at all costs
lord r (ag) wrote: I absolutely love this movie. It is Martin Short and Charles Grodin at their very best!
Jamie C (es) wrote: Good intense film a little slow in places and more of a survival film than a action film, But when it picks up it's amazing and just like Rocky it's the start of an amazing film series for Stallone.
Ivan S (de) wrote: one of John Cusack's best performance
The Critic (nl) wrote: The bastard child of James Bond films; not a part of the franchise but more embraced by audiences than other unofficial exercises with the return Sean Connery in the lead role. It's an interesting depiction of Bond, who comes out of retirement to once again serve the Crown. Connery is more than comfortable in the role and Kim Basinger is lovely as his much younger leading lady. Overall, the film is standard franchise fare and runs too long, but is enjoyable enough popcorn entertainment.