[REL] Zerkalo (1975)

Pranama
Posts: 167
Likes:
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2009 1:00 am

Re: [REL] Zerkalo (1975)

Postby Pranama » Sun Jan 09, 2011 11:33 pm  0 likes

Geez, Tarkovskiy in Spanish! What about original Russian version? Not available?
User avatar
ptguardian
Posts: 4479
Likes:
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:00 am

Re: [REL] Zerkalo (1975)

Postby ptguardian » Sun Jan 09, 2011 11:57 pm  0 likes

pranama wrote:Geez, Tarkovskiy in Spanish! What about original Russian version? Not available?


several if you search emule. if you want to try one and post once it is confirmed that would be cool ;)

or you can grab off torrent http://btjunkie.org/torrent/Andrei-Tark ... 626af64c97

:cool
User avatar
Phuzzy4242
Site Admin
Posts: 6541
Likes:
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2009 1:00 am

Re: [REL] Zerkalo (1975)

Postby Phuzzy4242 » Mon Jan 10, 2011 12:17 am  0 likes

This was a very disjointed movie - I don't understand more than a few words of Russian or Spanish but I doubt I'd "get it" even then and without the detailed synopsis on RFF I'd have been completely lost. I have no subs for this film but usually don't need them to at least understand what's going on. The film is entirely focused on the woman (who plays several different roles according to RFF) - I'm not sure how this is FLM material because even though there are children in it, almost nothing that happens seems to involve them much. RFF also mentions nudity but unless my version was cut, the only nudity was by the woman and that was very brief.

Tarkovskiy seems to be an acquired taste I don't have (me and "no taste" probably go together :) ). I don't think I'll be saving this one. Thanks to Ldieguez for bringing this here - I'd never know whether I like a movie or not if someone didn't let us know about it.
User avatar
ptguardian
Posts: 4479
Likes:
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:00 am

Re: [REL] Zerkalo (1975)

Postby ptguardian » Mon Jan 10, 2011 4:50 am  0 likes

Phuzzy you bring up a couple of points i think are worth mentioning further upon. first one you said "I'd never know whether I like a movie or not if someone didn't let us know about it." i agree with you completely Thanks Ldieguez for bringing this here :cool

second point you mentioned you didn't see skin except by the woman. my version is 1hour41minutes51seconds not sure how long the version you watched was. there is a scene that is very brief with the boy swimming and a girl walking nude in the distance. if you blink you will miss it. the problem with RFF is this counts for a listing for most of the movies listed there and many of the ones here. only a few brief moments of not much in reality. if that is what everyone wants a simple key word search than an emule search one can find many more movies that are considered this kind of OT. well without these being seen we won't know how much is really to offer. so they are very welcome.

but that brings up another point. is this version of OT really for everyone. give me one movie with Chloe Moretz with no skin at all and it will have much more to offer for me any day. the tidbits of this sort should just be a bonus. (IMHO) i am very glad that the meaning of OT has a broad range of perspectives here otherwise it would hold very BRIEF interest to most(pun intended)

:cool
User avatar
Phuzzy4242
Site Admin
Posts: 6541
Likes:
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2009 1:00 am

Re: [REL] Zerkalo (1975)

Postby Phuzzy4242 » Mon Jan 10, 2011 7:26 am  0 likes

ptguardian wrote:Phuzzy you bring up a couple of points i think are worth mentioning further upon. first one you said "I'd never know whether I like a movie or not if someone didn't let us know about it." i agree with you completely Thanks Ldieguez for bringing this here :cool

Since I have limited bandwidth and little time to find new stuff, the best way I can contribute is to give an honest review of what I watch. If I think a movie's great, I'll say so. Likewise if not. I truly like foreign (to me) films much more than the Hollywood drivel, and even though I'm language-challenged, a film's story almost always gets through even without subtitles. I sometimes watch a film with the audio OFF, though it's helpful to get intonation even if I don't understand the actual dialog.

I always appreciate when people either release a rip they've made or point me at a film I've never heard of. Being stuck in the middle of the U.S. where "culture" is almost nonexistant and the snobbery of Hollywood wants people to think they're the only filmmakers in the world, practically the only way I know whether a movie is worth spending the time on is when people bring it here. It's so refreshing not to have multiple car explosions, high-speed chases, and 50 people getting killed in every movie.
ptguardian wrote:second point you mentioned you didn't see skin except by the woman. my version is 1hour41minutes51seconds not sure how long the version you watched was. there is a scene that is very brief with the boy swimming and a girl walking nude in the distance. if you blink you will miss it. the problem with RFF is this counts for a listing for most of the movies listed there and many of the ones here. only a few brief moments of not much in reality. if that is what everyone wants a simple key word search than an emule search one can find many more movies that are considered this kind of OT. well without these being seen we won't know how much is really to offer. so they are very welcome.

I also have the 1:41:51 version while both RFF and IMDb list it as 1:48 so I wasn't sure if it was cut or not. I couldn't care less whether there is skin or not - that doesn't make the movie itself good or bad - but it's one aspect that can decide whether someone downloads a film so I thought I'd mention it.
ptguardian wrote:but that brings up another point. is this version of OT really for everyone. give me one movie with Chloe Moretz with no skin at all and it will have much more to offer for me any day. the tidbits of this sort should just be a bonus. (IMHO) i am very glad that the meaning of OT has a broad range of perspectives here otherwise it would hold very BRIEF interest to most(pun intended)

:cool

OT to me means there are kids in a film who play an active part in the story. If they're only "props", the film isn't OT. In this film, the children are virtually window dressing - it's all about the woman. If they weren't there at all, the story would have been little different.

And Chloe, even in a small role, makes a movie better. :heart
User avatar
ptguardian
Posts: 4479
Likes:
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:00 am

Re: [REL] Zerkalo (1975)

Postby ptguardian » Mon Jan 10, 2011 8:13 am  0 likes

thanks for your response Phuzzy. i really wasn't expecting one.

i apologize for using your words as an outlet for my own. nothing personal towards you. you just happen to bring up a few things that were on my mind.

i do however have some of the same feelings about Hollywood. my town has a couple of movie studios so i get to see some first hand explosions and such. they are always fun in person but do get a bit over done on screen.

i find the that kids roles are OT to me if they have a cute personality. if they are little shits not even a little exhibition will save them. very few actors are so cute that can pull off being a little shit while still being cute (Chloe would rock at being a brat).... i collect movies from all genre as such i find it nice to be able to watch an entire movie instead of just scanning for a few tiny snidbits.

i do appreciate your views they never come across as insulting to the original poster

as for the length of this movie i would say the good bits must of been left out of our versions :(
FLL
Posts: 2191
Likes:
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 1:00 am

Re: [REL] Zerkalo (1975)

Postby FLL » Mon Jan 10, 2011 9:45 pm  0 likes

Phuzzy4242 wrote:This was a very disjointed movie - I don't understand more than a few words of Russian or Spanish but I doubt I'd "get it" even then and without the detailed synopsis on RFF I'd have been completely lost. I have no subs for this film but usually don't need them to at least understand what's going on.

A comment like this is almost completely pointless when subs are easily available if you just take 10 seconds to check. I haven't had a chance to download any of the links yet to check for synchronization so I haven't posted, but they are at opensubtitles in many languages.

Phuzzy4242 wrote:I'm not sure how this is FLM material because even though there are children in it, almost nothing that happens seems to involve them much. RFF also mentions nudity but unless my version was cut, the only nudity was by the woman and that was very brief.
Phuzzy4242 wrote:OT to me means there are kids in a film who play an active part in the story.

It would have been helpful if had you specified what link you downloaded.
It's good to know what OT means to you but that is not the most common FLM usage, and if you assume it means your definition then you will often confuse yourself. Most often "OT" at FLM means it's included in one of the RFF categories such as girl-topless, though as ptg says RFF's listing by itself sometimes says little about what merited the category.
User avatar
Phuzzy4242
Site Admin
Posts: 6541
Likes:
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2009 1:00 am

Re: [REL] Zerkalo (1975)

Postby Phuzzy4242 » Mon Jan 10, 2011 11:59 pm  0 likes

FLL wrote:
Phuzzy4242 wrote:This was a very disjointed movie - I don't understand more than a few words of Russian or Spanish but I doubt I'd "get it" even then and without the detailed synopsis on RFF I'd have been completely lost. I have no subs for this film but usually don't need them to at least understand what's going on.

A comment like this is almost completely pointless when subs are easily available if you just take 10 seconds to check. I haven't had a chance to download any of the links yet to check for synchronization so I haven't posted, but they are at opensubtitles in many languages.

When a reviewer on RFF has to split the entire plot into sections just to make it understandable, the film is most likely disjointed to the point where subtitles are superfluous anyway. I almost didn't download it because of the review. Maybe my expectations were low to begin with, but other things about the movie annoyed me almost from the start such as obvious continuity problems like shadows of the boom mic clearly showing on the wall. I wondered whether I was watching the right movie with its time jumps and the same actors playing different characters. Everyone but the woman was window dressing - they could all have been trained Pomeranian dogs and the "story" such as it was would have been no different.
FLL wrote:
Phuzzy4242 wrote:I'm not sure how this is FLM material because even though there are children in it, almost nothing that happens seems to involve them much. RFF also mentions nudity but unless my version was cut, the only nudity was by the woman and that was very brief.
Phuzzy4242 wrote:OT to me means there are kids in a film who play an active part in the story.

It would have been helpful if had you specified what link you downloaded.
It's good to know what OT means to you but that is not the most common FLM usage, and if you assume it means your definition then you will often confuse yourself. Most often "OT" at FLM means it's included in one of the RFF categories such as girl-topless, though as ptg says RFF's listing by itself sometimes says little about what merited the category.

OT is in the eye of the beholder - I certainly wouldn't try to hold someone else to my definition. I understand what OT means to most people here, and while "that" definition of OT neither attracts nor repels me from wanting to watch a movie, I know it does for others so I try to include it in my reviews to help people decide if it's worth it to them to download.

I commented the way I did mostly because I don't think Zarkalo is an FLM movie - the kids had almost no purpose and didn't interact with anybody other than in the section at the firing range. Again, I'm not complaining about Ldieguez' posting but about the movie itself. Like I said, I lack "taste" and am probably too low-brow to appreciate many of the films people are nice enough to present on FLM. Hopefully what I write about the films I watch is useful to somebody. If not, I won't be offended if people just skip my posts. :)
User avatar
ptguardian
Posts: 4479
Likes:
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:00 am

Re: [REL] Zerkalo (1975)

Postby ptguardian » Tue Jan 11, 2011 12:08 am  1 likes

a search on the mule i found a lot of links all listed at the same time length. so this should work for most. it works fine for the one i got off torrent.

English Like this post to see ed2k links  [49.5 Kb]

Return to “Russia”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests