The Gift to Stalin

The Gift to Stalin

A Jewish child deported to Kazakhstan is saved and adopted by Kasym, an old Kazakh railway-man. Kasym gives him a Kazakh name, Sabyr, that in Kazakh language means humble. The child grows up in the small Kazakh village along with other deportees Vera, a traitor's wife, and Ezhik a Polish doctor. The Soviet militia harasses the poor peasants and Vera suffered the harassment of a bully cop: Bulgabi. Finally Vera accepts the marriage proposal of Ezhik but the jealous Bulgabi tries to prevent the marriage. The result is a fight in which Ezhik shoots himself accidentally. The old Kasym decides that Sabyr is now old enough to go to seek his real parents. At the end Sabyr, now an adult, decides to return to the village, but the village no longer exists because it was destroyed by a Soviet nuclear test.

A Jewish child deported to Kazakhstan is saved and adopted by Kasym, an old Kazakh railway-man. Kasym gives him a Kazakh name, Sabyr, that in Kazakh language means humble. The child grows ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechers

The Gift to Stalin torrent reviews

Nik M (es) wrote: Its animation is smoother and there are very very few moments of tolerable scenes, but nothing can save the films that have doomed themselves to repeat their plot structures, feature poor voice acting, drown in cliche, and ultimately fail to set their scope beyond a stretched episode.

Dora K (au) wrote: Entertaining for a bit, but not extremely funny. Loved to see Joanna Garcia and Beth Broderick again though.

Robert B (de) wrote: Appallingly obvious & lazy. They get lost in the woods, a girl trips on log while running away, a priest comes to the rescue, girl looks wrong way while driving.

Tim C (mx) wrote: I love all films based on Nicolas Sparks novels.THEY TUG!!!!!

Tommy M (es) wrote: Henry Roth (Billy Crudup) is a successful children book author who has a lot of problems that he is unable to deal with that comes from his childhood. Tom Wilkinson (Rudy Holt) is his Illustrator along with best/only friend/father figure. Regretfully Tom dies from a tumor and Henry is left to write one last children book. But without Tom Henry is having an incredibly hard time doing so and that's when Lucy Reilly (Mandy Moore) comes into play. She is also an illustrator and is hired to help Henry with his final book. This movie like many others who follow a writer and his pursuit to a book is a weird one. Manly because all of the characters seem out of this world and clinically insane. However once you get past that layer you start to understand the simplicity of such a wonderful script. I found Mandy Moore and Billy Crudup to do a wonderful job at portraying their characters. The reason why I gave this movie 3 stars is because I found it to be touching but it never had any wow moments for me until the very end, and by end I mean last 15ish minutes of the movie. Worth seeing? I say yes.

Jared L (mx) wrote: Robin Williams is very creepy. You don't hear that very often, but in this film he surely brings the creepy side of him out..

Toby E (ru) wrote: Quirky semi-tradgic romantice comedy. Worth a watch.

Shaun I (br) wrote: great movie if you have a warped sense of humour so yeah all of you will love it you mentalists

Matthew G (ag) wrote: Only saw the Re-Cobbled Cut (I haven't seen the Miramax version), so I'll only judge it based on the new cut. This movie was fun and enjoyable. I like how they showed the movie as Richard Williams initially intended it to be viewed (with 20+ additional minutes and sketches), plus the animation is some of the most gorgeous I've seen in an animated movie. The scope is huge, and the atmosphere is astounding. I'm surprised that it took so many years to create, and the aspect ratio is fairly wide for an animated feature (2.35:1). In the new cut Tack and the thief don't talk at all, and the thief successfully steals the whole movie throughout the final half hour's exciting sequence; he is a riot! The late Vincent Price is enjoyable to listen to as the ever-rhyming Zig Zag, and it is one fun movie to look at. This one sequence where Tack chases after the thief is a visually trippy scene. I personally thought it was fun.

Ryan C (gb) wrote: I thought it was a really good sequel to the original. It had the same feel with new elements and a new doll that was awesome (it's name was Torch.) The kills were pretty awesome and I like how you get to see Toulon for the first time on screen. I really enjoyed this one.

William M (gb) wrote: The 50 Foot Turkey in the room. I saw a lot of films in the 80's on VHS. I can't ever remember seeing Krull. It's more likely that I saw Krull but it left such a dull impression on me that I can't remember ever seeing it. I attempted to watch it the other night and turned it off halfway through. Without your "Nostalgia Goggles" on, this film is a real snooze fest.We're talking about a film that cost 27 Million here. It wasn't some cheapy sword and sorcery film. Yet. somehow that 27 million never made it on the screen!THE PLOT- Huh? What plot? Aliens land and attack. take girl, guy goes to save girl and collects a series of people to help him in one boring scene after the next. End.THE SCORE- James Horner did a decent job here of breathing some life into a film on life support. However, this is no Wrath of Khan or Aliens score. I'm going to excuse Horner because he likely wasn't given much to work with in the film.VISUAL EFFECTS - For an 80's film, the visual effects stand up ok.CHOREOGRAPHY - Dreadful. Enemies just kind of mosey onto the scene like they are taking a weekend hike through the woods. They shoot little laser beams while everyone else plays backyard sword fight. THIS HAS by far the most boring fight scenes I have ever seen in a film. It's like they are playing Water Ballet with swords, "Uh, Ok, I need to move this way while you slowly swing a sword at me." Utterly Dull. THE ACTING - Whoever hired the actor to play Prince Colwyn needs his license to practice casting taken away. Equally goofy and serious, this character goes nowhere. I can't help but think this character would have been better served if they had went the Kurt Russell Big Trouble in Little China route. Arrogant and dumb. Freddie Jones is ok in this film but playing it so straight he just doesn't come off the screen too well. More like drying paint. He works much better when he is allowed to go off the rails in movies like FireFox and Dune. WTF is Liam Neeson doing even being in this film?! I know it was early in his career but compare this to his work in Excalibur. Here he is totally in the background. So small back there that you can barely even see him. What a waste of talent.I can't help but think this film was used to pad someone's wallet. The 27 Million to make the film is not on the screen. This looks like a film that Roger Corman could bang out for 10 million. Compare this to Excalibur - a much better film- 11 million. The Empire Strikes Back -20 million. Huh? Where did the 27 million go? Up someone's nose?

Al S (fr) wrote: A dark, stylish, unique and chilling film noir at it`s best. A taunt, well-crafted and superb mystery thriller that takes back to the old school cop films of the 40`s and 50`s. A gripping, disturbingly compelling and first-rate edge of your seat thriller. Clint Eastwood gives one of his finest performances ever.

Leslie B (kr) wrote: Tongue in cheek, would watch again.