1967. The world is alive with change: brimming with reawakened energy, new styles, music and an infectious sense of hope. In Jordan, a different kind of change is underway as tens of ... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
When I Saw You
1967. The world is alive with change: brimming with reawakened energy, new styles, music and an infectious sense of hope. In Jordan, a different kind of change is underway as tens of ...
You may also like
When I Saw You torrent reviews
Niclas H (kr) wrote: Inte en av Stathams bttre.verdriven och ologisk!
Ben D (jp) wrote: Jamie Thraves came to my attention with his 2000 feature film debut The Low Down, a fascinating slice of life piece set in London. He seemed to go very quiet until 2009's misjudged American debut, Cry of the Owl (despite starring two people I like very much indeed, Julia Stiles and Paddy Considine). I wondered, watching Treacle Jr, whether the bad experience of Cry of the Owl, sent him back to his cinematic roots, for what we have here is another slice of London life, natural in feel, and with Aidan Gillen again. I've always wondered why Aidan Gillen isn't a bigger star - he's a phenomenal actor - and here he plays Aidan, a man with obvious emotional problems and learning difficulties, who befriends a man, Tom (played by Tom Fisher), who has abandonded his family to live homeless. The two strike up an odd-couple friendship (despite Tom attempting to flee repeatedly) and Tom is introduced to Linda, Aiden's girlfriend, played by Rhian Steele - and she is a nasty piece of work, abusive to Aiden (she hits him in a shocking moment, and later seems to attempt to rape him) but seems lost too. As these three souls connect and disconnect, Thraves' camera simply observes.Treacle Jr is not initially an easy film to love: we wonder why a man seems to walk out on a happy life. Aidan seems to deliberately irritate and antogonise. And yet, as these two become friends, the film becomes increasingly charming, and we care about its characters, until by the end it has become something genuinely moving. Defiantly low-key, this is the kind of British cinema we should be celebrating. It shows that with the simplest of elements you can make a film that can speak to multitudes, and be more memorable than any movie wtih a budget of millions. That Thraves funded this off his own back (risking his own home) shows how much he believed in it: do him a favour and try and see it. You won't regret it. This is British film-making of a high order. Wonderful.
Fred D (us) wrote: Exceptional a surprisingly good Boll-movie.
Taina A (es) wrote: Ihan hassu elokuva miehen ja naisen vanhenemisen iloista ja suruista. Tsekkihuumori puri kyll, ahtaat sukupuoliroolit sen sijaan ahdistivat meiklist...
Lia M (au) wrote: Perfect. So well done you forget you're watching actors. Not a pretty picture of maleness, or femaleness either, for that matter. But a completely real, completely commonplace one.
Another V (jp) wrote: Sometimes, one good man in this world can make a huge difference to the lives of many. Why do humans periodically go on insane genocidal killing sprees? Why do so many people turn their backs when it happens? This movie is at times a tearjerker. If you watched Schindler's List and felt it was important, that it told a tale of many who are no longer around to tell their story, this is the same sort of thing, about what happened in Rwanda not that long ago. To see the difference that one person can make, when willing to take a stand and do SOMETHING, is inspiring. Prepare to be inspired.
Alan L (au) wrote: Really clever and watchable film
Rob W (it) wrote: Very lackluster. Compared to the book, which is one of my favorites, this 99-minute film was a huge disappointment. It was too short, and didn't tell the story with the umph the book had. The movie lacked the very important imagery, tone, and mood that makes the book a classic. This was just a decent outline of the book, but not satisfactory for those who read and like the book. Overall, it was below average.
Tex P (de) wrote: Visually cool, but lacking all else. You'll wait till the end of the credits just to see Galaxina's tits, but you'll wish you'd just gone to sleep instead.
Andy F (au) wrote: This Universal horror mash up is better than you might think. It's played dead straight and each monster has its own story within the overall plot. Great atmosphere and superb performances and a fitting end to the Universal monsters... or was it (see House of Dracula)!
John Y (nl) wrote: This film goes from hokey to down right scary in less than an hour.