Samurai Assassin

Samurai Assassin

February 17 to March 3, 1860, inside Edo castle. A group of assassins wait by Sakurada Gate to kill the lord of the House of Ii, a powerful man in the Tokugawa government, which has ruled Japan for 300 years. They suspect a traitor in their midst, and their suspicions fall on Niiro, an impoverished ronin who dreams of samurai status, and Kurihara, an aristocratic samurai who befriends Niiro. Niiro longs to identify his father, knowing he is a high-ranking official who will disclose himself only if Niiro achieves samurai status. With American ships in Japan's harbors, cynicism among the assassins, and change in the air, Niiro resolves to reach ends that may prove ephemeral.

February 17 to March 3, 1860, inside Edo castle. A group of assassins wait by Sakurada Gate to kill the lord of the House of Ii, a powerful man in the Tokugawa government, which has ruled ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechers

Samurai Assassin torrent reviews

Alex P (it) wrote: given the huge hype, bit dissappointing... movie sort of dragged in the middle... wud have been bored but for Surya n Shruthi... May be only for Surya fans or for the fans of Sci-Fi genre...

Brian M (jp) wrote: Epic.. In the sense that this is one of the worst movies ever made.. Kudos..

Tyrone H (jp) wrote: This movie is quite ambitious but fails becuase it is not ambitious enough in the end. I watched it becuase i'm always interested to see what Kilmer is doing and i liked the last film (Felon) of his that i saw. It tells most of the story in one location and through a series of flashbacks. I say most becuse the initial sequence is that of the end of a hiest. The location is Echo Park in LA. I say 'most of the movie' and that is where it went wrong for me.. the whole story could have been told in flashbacks ...how much more mysterious could it have been if it had started in the park...and unknown man in a raincoat with a briefcase in a park and gradually peelled back the layers of the story. There appears to be some disappointment with the 'pace' of the film. Well that's becuase it's not a hiest movie. It's about a man who on one day looks back on the whole of his life and belives that he can repair the damage that he has caused, but who also interacts with others, some strangers, and how he affects their lives on that particular day. For that type of movie it is beautifully paced. The misunderstanding about what type of film this is is probably caused by the action sequence at the beginning and the expectations of the movie could have been set more realisticly by showing that sequence in flashbacks later in the film. Even so this is a good film with some good performances. The small twist/reveal is telegraphed well in advance...just listen to the telephone conversations. But this doesn't harm the movie because the reveal just resolved something that had been nagging at me since the begining of the Park sequence. Give it a try. It has some nice ideas and good performances...just don't expect lots of fast paced action and Bayification!

Anonymous W (au) wrote: As boring as golf... still it's a story worth telling... I find I appreciated it more when the movie ended. Jim Caviezel also makes it worth the watch, probably why I endured throughout the film, good choice for the actor, though he looks a little old to play the age 28.

Jouni K (br) wrote: A bit different kind movie about going to marriage.

The Golden Jackal (nl) wrote: I saw most of it, but I wasn't impressed enough to finish it later. Not encouraged by the obvious "stage-to-screen" transition.

Cameron J (de) wrote: "A Clockwork Orange II: The Empire Got Back"-I mean, "Strikes Back"! It's all unimaginably indulgent sex, violence, vulgarity and blood riches, so I guess it's safe to say that the rehabilitation of Alex DeLarge didn't exactly pay off. Man, I've heard of classy porn, but this, well, probably can't even be considered all that classy, because it is pretty much the beginning and the pinnacle of the modern cinematic movement to paint Rome like the grimy place of sin that it really was. This film is probably more ambitious than it needs to be, and I say that not because porn should be this pricy (Interesting how Peter O'Toole went from "Laurence of Arabia" to "Tiberius of a...", well, you can finish that rhyme yourself), as much as it should have realized that it's pretty much impossible for a heavily dramatic Roman epic to not be at least a little bit interesting when it's co-financed by Penthouse, and written by some guy who said that most people have the potential to be sexually attracted to virtually anything. Man, Gore Vidal was a little crazy, though not quite as crazy as Caligula, and yet, I feel that the craziest dude associated with this film might very well be Malcolm McDowell, because he loved being involved in censorship boundary-pushers so much that he might not so much have been artistically ambitious, as much as he was just a sex addict. If nothing else reflects that, it's his more recent projects which reflect that he may be a little bit mad from syphilis, because he used to be in some good stuff... in addition to this film. No, flawed though it may be, this film is decent, even if it is short on decency, and maybe a little bit of characterization. Momentum out of the gate is momentarily stunted by limitations in immediate development which come to be compensated for by near-rich gradual exposition, and yet, characterization would be so much more meaty if it didn't get to be manufactured in feel, with types, occasionally of an almost cartoonish nature whose lack of humanity leave the intentionally unlikable character aspects to stand as too disconcerting for the convincing performances to completely make up for. Subtlety issues shake a sense of genuineness to characterization, and they do more than just that, because even though there is arguably a little more subtlety to this film than many are saying, when that subtlety lapses, it tumbles, into cheesily trite scripted dialogue and set pieces, and direction which overemphasizes its atmosphere and, of course, its visuals. The controversies surrounding this film could not be more just, as the violence is unnervingly graphic, and the sexual content - which ranges from simply racy to disturbing, if not out-and-out bizarre - is utterly pornographic, trying to carry some artistic weight which falls flat under a sense of trashiness which, honestly, stands firm throughout the film, - at least in its relatively realized and definitive two-and-a-half-hour-long version - devaluing it, even though it can admittedly be respected for being the most unique thing about this film. Beyond that, this is more of the same as far as gritty, dramatic portraits on the corruption of a great power of Rome are concerned, complete with having its formulaic path outstay its welcome, for the film is so excessive that even its structure drags along, into aimlessness, under the weight of filler, if not meandering material which keeps the film from getting to its point in a punctual manner. Momentum is retarded enough on paper, and Tinto Brass' direction makes matters all the worse, with a directorial, not thoughtfulness, but emptiness which isn't so recurrent that the film rarely compels, at least the patient, but frequent enough to dry the atmosphere up and make the problematic length of the drama all the more palpable, until, of all things, dullness sets in. The film is reasonably entertaining on the whole, whether it be through campiness or through genuine effectiveness that guides the final product further than many say it does, but the more the film drags its feet, the harder it is to ignore how questionable such attempts at compensation as abrasive storytelling and graphic content are. The final product fails to transcend underwhelmingness, but I disagree with those who say that glimpses of a rewarding film are lost, because as messy as the film very much so is, it does, in fact, do plenty of things right, at least stylistically... up to a point, that is. As ambitious as the film is, even its technical value has its flaws, whether it be shoddy sound mixing, or filming so grainy that is sometimes bears resemblance to, well, '70s porn (not that I keep up with that... you know, beyond this film), and yet, the technical shortcomings cannot completely overshadow undeniable artistic value, found within a grand, if formulaic score by Bruno Nicolai - under the alias of Paul Clemente - that the messy sound mixing cannot completely betray, and within often dreamy cinematography by Silvano Ippoliti that the flimsy filming cannot completely betray. Visual style is solid, though not as much as the visuals themselves, and by that, I am not so much referring to the disturbing imagery, but rather to art direction by Danilo Donati which restores both the Roman Empire and Caligula's own flamboyant world, not especially impeccably, but nonetheless handsomely, and immersively. If there is an artistic integrity to this stylish smut fest, then it is supported by a decent deal of money that goes into crafting a unique vision of Rome, in all its beauty and all its grime, and even though technical shortcomings stand, entertainment value is anchored by still-solid aesthetic value, just as it thrives on substance, or at least the concept of the substance. Perhaps the idea behind this film, alone, undercuts some potential within its subject matter by placing more focus into the sleaze and corruption of Gaius Iulius Caesar Augustus Germanicus, rather than the politics and scale which films of this type normally focus on, but the truth is that through all of the grime and histrionics is a genuinely compelling dramatic portrait on corruption which holds the potential of being crafted into a rewarding, if not strong film. The intentional and consequential misguidance of the storytellers hold so much of the drama back, yet the final product would not be as intriguing as it ultimately is without bona fide heights in Tinto Brass' direction, which, for all the attention to graphic content that, honestly, one might mostly blame occasional directors Giancarlo Lui and Bob Guccione for, and for all the dry spells, carries an almost captivatingly surrealist style which holds a sense of taste, punctuated by realized moments in dramatic storytelling which absorb unexpected depths in a drama so unsubtle in so many areas. Of course, Brass does not breathe refreshing effectiveness into this film on his own, because if nothing else sustains your investment, it is Malcolm McDowell, who does more than he probably should in his portrayal of a corrupt lead who is rich with charisma and passion, and equally filled with evil, all of which McDowell captures in a layered, emotionally charged and altogether committed performance. Caligula is written a little thinly, and that holds McDowell back a bit, yet McDowell's film-carrying portrayal of the lead is almost revelatory, and decidedly instrumental in making the final product genuinely engaging as a questionably crafted, but ultimately endearing epic. When it comes time to clear away the grime (Ha-ha, that's a rhyme... and that's another one), thin characterization and other shortcomings in subtlety which range from cheesy melodramatics to exploitatively graphic content trash up a bit of artistic momentum, while dramatic momentum goes further retarded by the tropes, dragging and dry spells which secure the final product as underwhelming, yet don't drive it as far from rewarding as many say, for there is enough inspiration to tasteful score work and cinematography, immersive art direction, engrossing subject matter, often effective direction, and a strong, driving performance by Malcolm McDowell to make Tinto Brass' "Caligula" a serviceably compelling study on the vile mind of one of Rome's most corrupt rulers that is by no means for everyone. 2.75/5 - Decent

Neville P (us) wrote: sequel to the wonderful born free, about elsa's cubs and how they are helped to live in the wild

Brad W (ru) wrote: More fun than Austin Powers.

Nice O (mx) wrote: Add a review (optional)...

Jim D (nl) wrote: Fun movie. Farmer makes a Faustian bargain with the devil and enlists Daniel Webster to help him get out of the pact he has made with the devil.

Kathy L (br) wrote: The critics got it wrong this time. Nice mix and depth of plot with multiple storylines and characters working through relationships, hardship and difficult life decisions. Loved the soundtrack and the casting. Well done.