Printable View
Must confess I just watched this.. Erm.... what can I say. One guy fucked by 20 girls.
http://www.*************/videos/3817...-gangbang.html
That is odd name of the website vanished after i posted
it is *************
video number 38171
I get it... not allowed or some reason.
a shemaletube . com
There are three films called The Firm -one is the Sidney Pollack film with Tomi la Cruise about lawyers (USA, 1993); and there are two UK films about football hooligans, the first with Gary Oldman made in 1989. Haven't seen any of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by LibertyHarkness
Brighton Rock -can another film of this dire novel be worth watching? Imagine, Greene decided to call his villain anti-hero Pinky with no sense of irony at all. Somebody once said of Brighton it looks like a town that is 'helping the police with their enquiries'...!!
"Brighton Rock" The remake was bad - with some decent performances. Not enough to save the film though. As you say Stavros, not a good book to begin with.
The Lost Future
Is there anything Sean Bean wont do for money?
What's he in next, Raiders of Dinos' Underpants! ?
Is that in 3D? I have the glasses...but not the insurance...Quote:
Originally Posted by Jericho
Christ...I hope not! :hide-1:Quote:
Originally Posted by Stavros
The last films I saw were two by Hollywood's highest flyers.
"War Horse" - Steven Spielberg's adaptation of the stage lay about world war one. Beautifully filmed, wonderful horses, great acting but somehow Spielberg finds it hard to avoid cuteness. All in all a good one to introduce kids to the horrors of war in a gentle way. But Spielberg manages to make the Somme look almost beautiful.
And then a kids film Martin Scorsese's "Hugo" in 3D... a really delightful and hugely entertaining new film and the best use yet of 3D in fiction. (Wim Wenders used it to terrific effect in his dance documentary "Pina")
I have spent the last two evenings watching Terrence Malick's The Tree of Life. Once was not enough. Malick is well known for shooting hours of film that are then edited into something brilliant but imperfect, in The Thin Red Line and The New World you can see the joins. This is less of a problem here.
The film is about a man, Sean Penn, an architect, who lives in a world of glass, steel and concrete, and whose life is emotionally sterile. He sees a tree growing in the midst of this forest of glass, and it revives the memories of his youth, and a brother who died at the age of 19. He says the first word in the film Brother, and most of the film is his memories of childhood in Waco, Texas in the 1950s with a stern, keyboard-playing father (Brad Pitt) who represents the way of nature -hard-edged, competitive and combative, dissastisfied with the world as it is- and his mother (Jessica Chastain) who adopts the way of grace, accepting everything as it is. Though they may appear to be active-passive, masculine-feminine traits, Penn's anxiety is only resolved at the end when he becomes reconciled with the truth of who he is, and accepts the way of grace, and is redeemed.
Like it or not, this is a religious film, and that may be why many people dislike it.
The film begins with a quotation:
Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth?...when the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of god shouted for joy? Job 38:4,7
Job, famously afflicted with everything bad you can think of, but never losing his faith in God (even though his friends reckon he must have done something pretty bad to be so badly punished), eventually loses it and asks God Why? To which God responds in the quote above, suggesting Job hasn't, as it were, seen the whole picture -of how Job is one part of the whole universe and must decide what that means to him: and then showers him with goodness and riches as a thank you present.
This context is crucial for what is seen next: a mother receives a telegram telling her that her son has died. In their grief, both parents ask God to tell them Why? And, just as in the book of Job God answers the question with a more detailed description of the creation of the world than found in Genesis, Malick presents a visually stunning version in film, which begins with a shaft of light (Thomas Wilfred's Lumia Opus 161), and then images that are, or resemble the imagery that was actually taken of star clusters by the Discovery mission. Douglas Trumbull also advised on this section, which is a triumph, including the dinosaurs, one of which represents the way of nature, another the way of grace, value that, Malick seems to be suggesting, are eternal.
Directly after this the first child is born, and then a second, and the film follows the development of a family of two parents and three boys until the father loses his job at the plant and they have to move away. To some this is ok but the tedious heart of the film, yet the closely observed rituals and play of family life are beautifully balanced with the overall themes of the film, and the three boys are so natural, as it were, that it is hard to believe any of them had a script or that they were acting. There are subtle touches too -a boy on the margins of the children's group has been badly burned in a fire and lost part of his scalp; I wonder if this is Malick hinting at a dislike of extreme religious cults such as the one that was trashed in Waco in the 1990s? Malick's mystical religious tendency is also similar to Tarkovsky, and in one short sequence Chastain is levitated, just as the Tarkovsky's mother was in Mirror (if not in precisely the same way).
I could go on and on; but its simple really: the best new film of 2011, and one of the best films I have ever seen.
Brighton Rock is bloody boringQuote:
Originally Posted by Stavros
I always liked Absolute Beginner's because it had Tenpole Tudore in it