Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?
Mike Nichols’ film from Edward Albee's play brought new themes to the film industry. Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton have never been more brilliant together as they portray an experienced married couple who love each other yet verbally attack one another when they see how boring their naïve newlywed guests have made their night.
George and Martha are a middle aged married couple, whose charged relationship is defined by vitriolic verbal battles, which underlies what seems like an emotional dependence upon each other. This verbal abuse is fueled by an excessive consumption of alcohol. George being an associate History professor in a New Carthage university where Martha's father is the President adds an extra dimension to their relationship. Late one Saturday evening after a faculty mixer, Martha invites Nick and Honey, an ambitious young Biology professor new to the university and his mousy wife, over for a nightcap. As the evening progresses, Nick and Honey, plied with more alcohol, get caught up in George and Martha's games of needing to hurt each other and everyone around them. The ultimate abuse comes in the form of talk of George and Martha's unseen sixteen year old son, whose birthday is the following day. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki
Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? torrent reviews
(es) wrote: Being part Norweigan and English...this movie made me feel a weird sense of pride. Taking place during the 1940s during the nazi's reign over europe, this tells the story of Max Manus, a norweigan soldier who's heroic spirit and actions helped defeat the nazi's hold on Norway. I heard this was loose with the facts but it is a movie also so its made to be epic and full of action. This film delivers on both levels of epic awsomness and action. If you don't mind subtitles and love epic historical war movies set during world war 2 era, you'll love this.
(it) wrote: Really good movie, without slow boaring places - well written
(ru) wrote: This film didnt go anywhere I thought it would but it was still an alright film. It bases most of its comedy aspect on visuals and by the end of the movie the visual humor lost some of its charm. The characters were very shallow and allowed for little connection with the audience, even for a comedy. Scott Prendergast plays the stereo typical socially awkward character with no unique or original traits. I feel the film had a lot of potential but with lack of a strong story and original characters let it down. But overall its an enjoyable movie, but I have no reason to watch it twice.
(us) wrote: Bujalski's characters and the dialog (whether it's improvised or not doesn't matter) really hit their marks. Probably the best example of why Bujalski, Swanberg etc are the future of non-Hollywood American cinema.
(au) wrote: tommy was the only good partand adam
(jp) wrote: What happens when the government can't help but intervene and sides with the big dogs with the money against the underdog and tries to regulate the underdog out of business. I thought everything about this movie was top-notch. Didn't realize that it was based on a true story until the end.
(gb) wrote: "The Perks of Being a Wallflower" is yet another coming-of-age film about a teenager named Charlie (Logan Lerman), who is starting his freshman year after a year of struggling with depression, and quickly starts to realize the hardships of High School. Charlie is having a hard time making friends, plus he's still dealing with the loss of his aunt and his best-friend which is making him mentally unstable. However, two seniors, Patrick (Ezra Miller) and Sam (Emma Watson), decide to let him into their own little group. Together, they go on wild adventures, and Charlie finally feels like he belongs somewhere. The Perks of Being a Wallflower is a brave and well-crafted film about love, grief, friendship, and growing up."The Perks of Being a Wallflower" is based on the book written by Stephen Chbosky back in 1999, but this time, the author actually Directed the movie also. I for one had never read the book, but I heard it was really well-written, and quite dark for a book about a teen in high school, so I was a little worried about how the movie would go since it's PG-13, and books tend to be better most of the time because of more detail. Since I didn't read the book, I can't really say how similar the book and movie is, but from what I heard from others it's pretty darn close, except the movie is not quite as dark which is totally understandable since the movie is PG-13. Chbosky's Directional Debut is quite impressive, he made a very effective coming-of-age film which is very mature and truthful.The first ten minutes of the movie is incredibly heartbreaking, Logan Lerman's acting is spot on, his voice and impressions on his face clearly shows that Charlie's character is suffering in silence. Ezra Miller gives a very energetic and likable performance of a character that's emotionally conflicted, and also brings most of the comedic elements to the film. Emma Watson (Hermione from the Harry Potter movies) gives such a electrifying and convincing performance that proves to be her strongest to date. What makes "The Perks of Being a Wallflower" stick out from all the other coming-of-age movies is the darker content, the film doesn't hold back, it's really realistic how the messages about love, loss, friendship, and growing up are presented. The way Charlie is accepted in Sam's and Patrick's group is even quite realistic. Every character in the film is conflicted with their own demons, Charlie is suffering from depression because of his friend's suicide and the thought that he was the one who killed his aunt years ago, Sam is suffering from her troubled past that's still haunting her, and Patrick is dealing with his sexuality and his boyfriend who refuses to be seen in public with him. The messages of love, loss, and friendship is demonstrated masterfully, Charlie is able to get through his depression problems because of Patrick and Sam, but Charlie is able to help Patrick and Sam with their problems also, the power of friendship is just perfectly shown. Charlie dealt with his friend's suicide badly in the beginning, but he realizes that he has to move on with life. Throughout the film, Charlie has his eyes set upon Sam, and though he has never experienced love before, Charlies knows he truly loves Sam not just by her physical look, but how they are able to talk to each other about deep and personal things.The major issue with the film is the abrupt ending which holds a big twist that would of worked if the ending wasn't so rushed. The emotional impact is slightly there at the end and the movie ends with the message of hope and optimism for the future, but the ending seemed pretty forced and it loses that realism vibe the movie had for the first 80 minutes. There is also cheesy moments sprinkled here and there which are a bit off-putting (The scenes with Charlie and the teacher for example), but the performances are just amazing all around, so I didn't really mind the cheesiness all that much. Grade: A
(gb) wrote: He does quality circumcisions. I've seen his work.A serial killer is on the loose in a small European village and the villagers cannot stand it anymore. Kleinman is a reluctant hero, but when the villagers approach him about bringing the killer down, he tries his best to stay out of it. When the murders start hitting close to home, Kleinman partners with some strange characters to find the killer and bring him in."I'll find a place at the house.""The house?""The whore house."Woody Allen, director of Bananas, Midnight in Paris, Annie Hall, Manhattan, Scoop, Alice, Radio Days, The Purple Rose of Cairo, Zelig, and Crimes and Misdemeanors, delivers Shadow and Fog. The storyline for this picture is very interesting and fun to watch unfold. The character development and evolution was not on the level of other Woody Allen pictures. The cast was amazing and delivers perfect performances. The cast includes Allen, John Cusack, Mia Farrow, John Malkovich, Madonna, and Lily Tomlin."Why would any man want identical whores?"I grabbed this off Netflix because I thought a Woody Allen mixed with horror genre film would be cool. It was fun and I was impressed by the cast, but I wished Allen did more with the characters as a whole. I do recommend seeing this picture, but it isn't an all time great Woody Allen gem."You cringe in front of him like a worm."Grade: C+/B-
(kr) wrote: Really, there might be nothing more enjoyable than revisiting the action classics of the late 80's and early 90's. So unbelievable, the dialogue is comedy gold and the plots are normally head scratchingly fantastic. This is no exception. Van Damme (I think is wearing mullet extensions) is typically brilliantly OTT as is Lance Henriksen as the archetypal maniac bad guy. Still, its not what would be generally considered a good movie, quite the contrary, its as good as Wilfred Brimley's French accent.
(kr) wrote: After 6 years I finally decided to watch this awful movie. I should have stuck to my guns and never watched it. Spike Lee should never be allowed to direct again.