Sort A-Z • • • • • • • • • • Recent usage in crossword puzzles: • Canadiana Crossword - Jan. 22, 2018 • Penny Dell - Jan. 17, 2018 • Penny Dell Sunday - Jan. 7, 2018 • LA Times - Dec. 28, 2017 • Canadiana Crossword - Nov. 20, 2017 • Penny Dell - Nov. 13, 2017 • Canadiana Crossword - Nov. 13, 2017 • Penny Dell - Sept. 30, 2017 • Sheffer - Sept. 16, 2017 • Pat Sajak Code Letter - Aug. 20, 2017 • New York Times - June 29, 2017 • LA Times - May 13, 2017 • Pat Sajak Code Letter - April 25, 2017 • New York Times - April 23, 2017 • Penny Dell - April 3, 2017 • Penny Dell - March 4, 2017 • Washington Post - Feb. ![]() More recently, Trump's decision to officially recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital has upset Turkey, with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan saying. Turkish officials say Turkish President Recep Tayyip. Because it changes the nature of this Turkish incursion.' Turkey launched a military offensive against. 26, 2017 • Penny Dell - Feb. 14, 2017 • Canadiana Crossword - Jan. 2, 2017 • Sheffer - Dec. 17, 2016 View All. Firstly you need to make sure the title deed of the property is free of any debt, you can appoint a lawyer to carry this out. It is important you find a competent lawyer whom you can trust. You will often be asked for a small reservation fee for the property. Your representative will need to draw up a contract between the seller and purchaser, included will be details of the completion date, payment schedule and terms and conditions. Your contract should state that the purchase price includes all certification/name change fees/usage bills and no further costs will be payable. Getting your contracts notarised- You are strongly advised to get your contact notarized, you need to have both an English and Turkish versions of the contract (or a bi-lingual contract) which is signed in the presence of a notary public. This will ensure that the contract is officially accepted by Turkish law and that the terms within the contact are binding for all parties. When the notarised contract is signed by all parties, the appropriate deposit is paid. You will then need to apply for a security clearance, which is your military approval, this will entitle you to own a property in Turkey – military approval will often be applied for by your representative. You can sign a Power of Attorney which will allow your representative to conclude any necessary paperwork on your behalf. Important Notice:- This process has now been simplified and if any foreign owned property has already been military approved, any new foreign buyers do not have to re-apply for military approval. (This applies to all parcels that have been previously cleared after 5 May 2011) If you would like to professional assistance with your property purchase YellAli provides this service.. Disclaimer: The information on this site is provided as a general guide. Information published to YellAli is confirmed by official government departments in Turkey. Whilst every effort is made to ensure that the site is up to date and accurate, information may be subject to change at any time. YellAli does not accept any responsibility or liability for inaccuracies in this information. Legal Restrictions for Foreigners: a) Persons with foreign nationality can buy maximum 30 hectares of property in Turkey in total. ![]() ![]() ![]() B) Foreigners cannot acquire property within military forbidden zones and security zones. Renting in such zones is subject to a special permission. C) In a district/town ( ilce) not more than 10% of the total area of that district can be sold to foreigners d) Foreigners from neighbour countries cannot acquire property in provinces adjacent to their country’s borders. Greeks are not allowed to buy property on the Aegean coast, Bulgarians on the Thracian border or Russians on the eastern Black Sea coast) d) The afore-mentioned restrictions do not apply regarding pledges or liens in favour of natural persons and foreign trade companies. E) Properties are subject to winding up provisions in following cases: (i) if the properties are acquired in violation of laws; ii) if the relevant Ministries and administrations identify that the properties are used in violation of the purchase purpose; iii) if the foreigner does not apply to the relevant Ministry within time in case the property is acquired with a project commitment; iv) if the projects are not materialized within time. If you would like to professional assistance with your property purchase YellAli provides this service.. Content by YellAli - (All Copyright is protected and owned by YellAli - This content may NOT be copied & distributed by another third party, unless appropriate accreditation is given). Disclaimer: The information on this site is provided as a general guide. Information published to YellAli is confirmed by official government departments in Turkey. Whilst every effort is made to ensure that the site is up to date and accurate, information may be subject to change at any time. YellAli does not accept any responsibility or liability for inaccuracies in this information. Yes, you will need to have a contract drafted between the seller and purchaser. You will need to appoint a lawyer to draft the contract, which will need to include details of the completion date, payment schedule and terms and conditions of both parties. Getting your contract notarised - You are strongly advised to get your contact notarized. You will need both a British and Turkish version of the contract (or a bi-lingual contract) This will ensure the contract is officially accepted by Turkish law and that the terms within the contact are binding for all parties. Be wary of anyone who does not want to get a contract notarized. See YellAli Business Directory for trusted Tags.
0 Comments
![]() ![]() Running time 110 minutes Country United States Language English Budget $15 million Box office $306.5 million Annabelle: Creation is a 2017 American directed by and written by Gary Dauberman. It is a to 2014's and the fourth installment in. The film stars,,,, and depicts the possessed 's origin. Annabelle: Creation premiered at the on June 19, 2017, and was theatrically released in the United States on August 11, 2017. The film has grossed over $306 million worldwide and received generally positive reviews from critics, who praised the atmosphere and acting, and noted it as an improvement over its predecessor. Contents • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Plot [ ] In 1943, dollmaker Samuel Mullins and his wife Esther grieve for the loss of their seven-year-old daughter Annabelle 'Bee', who was killed in a car accident. Twelve years later, in 1955, the Mullins open their home to provide shelter for Sister Charlotte and six girls left homeless by the closing of their orphanage. Despite having been told not to enter Bee's locked bedroom, Janice, a young orphan crippled by, is awakened by a noise, discovers a note saying 'find me', and sneaks into the room, which has mysteriously become unlocked. She finds a key for Bee's closet and unlocks it, where she sees an eerie porcelain doll. This unwittingly releases a powerful demon, who begins to terrorize the girls, displaying a special interest in Janice. On the second night, the demon continues to torment Janice, revealing its true form and declaring that it wants 'her soul'. Although she attempts to get away using a, she is left severely injured when caught by the demon and thrown from the second floor landing to the first floor. The next day, Janice—now confined to a wheelchair—is dragged into a shed. The demon, taking Bee's form, successfully possesses her. One of the other orphans, Janice's best friend Linda, notices changes in her behavior and admits to Samuel that Janice had snuck into Bee's room and found the doll two nights earlier. Shortly after Linda's revelation, the possessed Janice, who can now walk, transforms into the demon and brutally kills Samuel. ![]() Annabelle: Creation is a 2017 American supernatural horror film directed by David F. Sandberg and written by Gary Dauberman. It is a prequel to 2014's Annabelle and. Annabelle: Creation 2017 Spanish torrent 18 Seeds 42 Peers Share Ratio The girl twelve years after the tragic death of a nun from the orphanage for some. Download Annabelle: Creation Spanish YIFY YTS Subtitles. Back to Subtitle List. Horror, Mystery, Thriller. 2017 Year 109 Mins 6.6 Imdb. Sister Charlotte speaks with the disfigured Esther, who is confined to her bedroom. Esther explains that after Bee's death, they prayed to whatever entity would grant their wish to see their daughter again. An unknown entity answered their prayer and though they briefly see Bee's spirit again, the entity convinces them to transfer its essence into one of Samuel's crafted porcelain dolls. They happily agree but soon realise that they have attracted a looking for a human host. One night, Esther sees Bee's spirit, along with the porcelain doll, transforming into the demon, who gouges out her left eye. They take the doll to Bee's room and lock it in a closet wallpapered with pages from the Bible before enlisting the help of priests to bless both the room and the house. Esther then reveals that she and Samuel opened their house as a shelter for the orphans to repent of their dealings but now regrets it, since she realises that this has provided an opportunity for the demon to look for a human host. The demon crucifies Esther and bisects her body and slams Sister Charlotte on the wall, prompting the other orphans to leave the house. Linda is trapped in the house and hides in Bee's room as the possessed Janice tries to stab her. Sister Charlotte recovers and locks the possessed Janice and the doll inside the closet. The next day, police arrive to search the house and its surroundings and find only the doll inside the bedroom closet, which they remove as evidence. ![]() Janice has escaped through a hole in the closet wall and relocates to an orphanage in. Still possessed, she becomes reclusive and calls herself Annabelle. The Higgins family soon adopt Annabelle. Twelve years later, in 1967, a grown up Annabelle joins a cult and, along with her boyfriend, murders her adoptive parents in their bedroom, which catches the attention of their next door neighbors, The Forms, setting up the events of. In a, set in 1952,, walks towards the camera in the candle-lit halls of the in Romania, as each candle slowly goes out. Retrieved June 10, 2017. Retrieved September 22, 2017. • Foutch, Haleigh (March 31, 2017).. • Giles, Jeff (August 10, 2017)... Retrieved August 11, 2017. • Hall, Jacob (October 19, 2015)... • McNary, Dave (March 22, 2016)... • ^ Taylor, Drew (August 8, 2017).. Retrieved August 8, 2017. • ^ Collins, Clark (August 7, 2017)... Retrieved August 8, 2017. • Casillas, Matt (August 7, 2017).. Silver Screen Beat. Retrieved August 8, 2017. The Hollywood Reporter. March 29, 2017. Retrieved March 30, 2017. • ^ Daswani, Kavita... Retrieved August 7, 2017. • ^ Banks, Nick (August 7, 2017).. Horror News Network. Retrieved August 8, 2017. • Alexander, Bryan (August 8, 2017)... Retrieved August 8, 2017. • Rachel Weber (August 10, 2017).. Retrieved August 11, 2017. • Kroll, Justin (June 22, 2016)... Retrieved June 22, 2016. • Lincoln, Ross A. (June 24, 2016)... Retrieved June 28, 2016. • Wilson, Staci Layne (August 7, 2017).. Dread Central. Retrieved August 8, 2017. • Pearlman, Cindy (August 6, 2017)... Retrieved August 7, 2017. • Mitchell, Peter (August 8, 2017)... Retrieved August 8, 2017. • Miska, Brad (June 30, 2016)... Retrieved June 30, 2016. • Hamman, Cody (June 30, 2016)... Retrieved June 30, 2016. • Sandberg, David F. [@ponysmasher] (August 15, 2016). Retrieved August 16, 2016 – via. • Daniell, Mark (August 6, 2017)... Retrieved August 7, 2017. Film Music Reporter. November 23, 2016. Retrieved August 2, 2017. Film Music Reporter. August 2, 2017. Retrieved August 13, 2017. • McNary, Dave (March 22, 2016)... • D'Alessandro, Anthony (December 6, 2016)... Retrieved December 6, 2016. • • ^ Scott Mendelson (August 20, 2017).. Retrieved August 21, 2017. • D'Allesandro, Anthony (August 9, 2017)... • Lang, Brent (August 11, 2017).. • ^ D'Allesandro, Anthony (August 13, 2017)... • D'Allesandro, Anthony... Retrieved August 20, 2017. • Tartaglione, Nancy.. Retrieved August 7, 2017. • ^ Nancy Tartaglione (August 15, 2017).. Deadline Hollywood. Retrieved August 21, 2017. • ^ Anita Busch (August 21, 2017).. Deadline Hollywood. Retrieved August 21, 2017. • Seth Kelley (August 21, 2017).. Retrieved August 21, 2017. • Ford, Rebecca; McClintock, Pamela (August 12, 2017).. The Hollywood Reporter. Retrieved August 24, 2017. Retrieved August 15, 2017. • Lowe, Justin (June 20, 2017)... Retrieved August 4, 2017. • Debruge, Peter (June 20, 2017)... Retrieved August 4, 2017. • Hewitt, Chris (August 8, 2017)... Retrieved August 8, 2017. • Emily Yoshida (August 11, 2017).. Retrieved September 13, 2017. • Chris Nashawaty (August 11, 2017).. Entertainment Weekly. Retrieved September 13, 2017. External links [ ] • on • on. The Fuji Story Built into every Fuji bike is 117 years of pride and passion. Fuji's century-old pedaling pedigree is present whether you're climbing on a feather-weight all-carbon road racer, slipping through the wind aboard an aero tri machine, ripping singletrack astride a full-suspension MTB, hopping barriers with a nimble 'cross bike or spinning the boardwalk on a stylish beach cruiser. For us it’s not just about the number of years we've created bicycles, it’s about what people say as a result of those years. More often than not we hear the same thing: “My first bike was a Fuji.”. A airplane of the Romanian military during the. Beginnings [ ] In 1818, during the reign of, the prince of Wallachia, an unmanned hot air balloon was flown off in Bucharest. On July 7, 1874, Colonel with and a third person flew over Bucharest in a hydrogen balloon named 'Mihai Bravul', which had made its first flight on June 9 of the same year. On November 20, 1909 the was formed as a joint venture by Mihail Cerchez. The school, conducted by French flight instructors, had five hangars, bleachers for spectators and shops where the imported from France were assembled. The school opened on July 9, 1910, when the chief flight instructor and director of the school crashed a biplane from a height of 40 metres (130 ft) during a demonstration flight and broke his leg. Guillemin was succeeded by who made the first flight across Bucharest on September 7, 1910. Molla was succeeded by two others before the school closed in late 1912 due to financial difficulties, having trained six officers, but only licensed two. ![]() ![]() ![]() In November 1909, the Romanian Minister of War commissioned to build the A. Vlaicu I airplane at the Army Arsenal which first flew on June 17, 1910. On September 28, during the Fall, Vlaicu flew his airplane from to carrying a message, Romania thus becoming the second country after to use airplanes for military purposes. [ ] Along with other Romanian pilots, Vlaicu flew reconnaissance missions during the., the first metal aircraft in the world, was completed after his death, in May 1914. World War I [ ] During, Romania acquired 322 aircraft from France and ex- aircraft from including and single seat fighters and and two seat fighters.,,, and artillery observation and reconnaissance aircraft,, and bombers. ![]() On September 16, 1916, a Romanian downed an aircraft near; this was the first Romanian Air Force victory. By the end of World War I, Romanian pilots had flown about 11,000 hours and 750 missions; however, it was unable to prevent the December 1916 Romanian offensive at the from being defeated, which resulted in the occupation of Romania, and an. Interwar Period [ ]. This section does not any. Unsourced material may be challenged and. (August 2015) () During the, the RoAF, second only to among the future countries, had a powerful national aircraft industry which designed and produced all types of military and most civil aircraft. In particular, the series were stressed-skin fighters, worthy to rank with the other single-seat fighters of WWII, and used in significant numbers on the. See Fujifilm's range of digital cameras. From high end professional, through to easy-to-use point-and-shoots, we've got the right digital camera just for you. We welcome your questions and comments. Our goal is to provide you with the most useful information as quickly as possible. The Fuji Story Built into every Fuji bike is 117 years of pride and passion. Fuji's century-old pedaling pedigree is present whether you're climbing on a feather-weight all-carbon road racer, slipping through the wind aboard an aero tri machine, ripping singletrack astride a full-suspension MTB, hopping barriers with a nimble 'cross bike or spinning the boardwalk on a stylish beach cruiser. The RoAF was reorganized during an 18-year period. Over 2,000 military and civil aircraft were built in Romania, based on local and licensed foreign designs. The military aviation used IAR 80 fighters, which became famous on the Eastern Front, and bombers manufactured. And fighters, and bombers,, transport and were purchased from in the interwar period. World War II [ ]. Main article: When Romania, allied with, went to war against the on June 22, 1941, the Romanian Air Force had 621 airplanes, including its locally made fighter IAR 80/81. The air force accomplished hundreds of missions, contributing to Romania's recapture of and, which had been occupied by the a year earlier. Until the episode [ ], the Romanian military fighters gained 661 air victories. Romanian Military Aviation fought on the Eastern front until August 22, 1944, bringing an important contribution to the great battles in,, and the Ukrainian fronts. Between 1941-1944, Romanian aircraft won 2,000 air victories. The most famous were Prince, who gained 68 certified victories, Captain and Captain, who shot down 60 enemy airplanes. Following in August 1944, Romania turned against Germany and joined the allies. Cold War [ ]. Romanian Air Force, currently retired and in storage since 2003. Starting with 1948, Romania tailored its military to Soviet concepts and doctrine. On February 15, 1949, the Aviation Command was established based on the Soviet model (regiments instead of flotillas). New Soviet aircraft, such as,,,, and entered service. A year later, 77 and entered the air force, and in 1952, other 88 aircraft: and. In 1958, the first supersonic fighter entered the inventory. Three years later, in February 1962, a new fighter was added to the inventory,, which represented one of the most effective fighters of that time. Starting with 1974, Romanian-made aircraft supplemented the already existing jets. The Romanian flew its first flight on 31 October 1974. It represented a great step forward taking into account that it was the only jet fighter not made by the Soviets, the only one ever manufactured and operated by a country. ![]() In 1962, the first helicopter subunits were established and followed later on, in 1965, by the first Soviet and helicopters. Renewing the aircraft fleet process went on, the first 12 entering the service between July–September 1979. On 14 May 1981, at 20:16, Soviet Soyuz-40 was launched from to perform a common Romanian-Soviet flight, with and as commander on board. During the early 1980s, 67th Fighter-Bomber Regiment and 49th Fighter-Bomber Regiment from and were equipped with new IAR-93s, which replaced old MiG-15s and MiG-17s. In December 1989, just a few days before the against communism began, aircraft entered the Air Force inventory. Since 1990 [ ]. A pair of of the ready to take off in. 2007 Baltic Air Policing [ ] Four MiG-21 LanceR Cs were deployed from August–November 2007 at, in for. The Romanian detachment succeeded the Cs of Escadron de Chasse 01.012 from, which fulfilled the Baltic Air Policing since May 2007. Once the RoAF finished its three-month stint, a detachment took over the mission. The four aircraft and most of the staff came from the. A total of 67 personnel, among them nine pilots, were part of the detachment: 63 served at Šiauliai, while other four served at the air traffic control centre in, to ensure smooth cooperation with local authorities. The Romanian detachment attracted attention from the local media, not least from the fact that it was only the second time a fighter from the era deployed to - MiG-29s had also been deployed there in 2006. Structure [ ] Air Force Staff [ ] The Romanian Staff represents the military concept-developing, command and executive structure providing Air Forces peacetime, crisis and wartime leadership in order to reach, maintain and increase, as required, the of the military subordinated structures so that to be able to operate under authorized commands responsible for military operations planning and conduct. Generate, mobilize, structure, equip, operationalize and regenerate the required forces, provide the logistic support necessary to conduct and based on higher orders, take over both the Joint Operation Air Component and independent air operations command and control, through the Main Air Operational Center. Starting with July 1, 2010, the Romanian Air Force bases were renamed to Air Flotillas. Air bases [ ] The Romanian Air Force has 5 active. RoAF 90th Airlift Base • 711th - operating LanceR A, B; • 712th Fighter Squadron - operating MiG-21 LanceR B, C; • 713th - operating; • 714th Helicopter Squadron - operating IAR-330L/M (located at - former ); - • 861st Fighter Squadron - operating MiG-21 LanceR B, C; • 862nd Fighter Squadron - operating MiG-21 LanceR A, B; • 863rd Helicopter Squadron - operating IAR-330L/M (located at - former ); • 53rd Fighter Squadron - operating Lockheed Martin F-16's upgraded to the MLU standard. - • 951st Fighter Squadron - operating MiG-21 LanceR A, B; • 205th School Fighter Squadron - operating MiG-21 LanceR B; • 952nd Helicopter Squadron - operating IAR-330L/M; - - • 901st Strategic Transport Squadron - operating. • International Institute for Strategic Studies, The Military Balance 2010, page. 24 December 2014. Retrieved 24 December 2014. • 9am.ro,, from, November 7, 2005 •. Aviation International News. Retrieved 24 December 2014. Retrieved 2016-10-26. Retrieved 2016-10-26. Retrieved 24 December 2014. Retrieved 24 December 2014. Retrieved 24 December 2014. Retrieved 2016-10-26. Retrieved 24 December 2014. • Horia Salca.. Retrieved 24 December 2014. Cooper, D.V.M.. Retrieved 24 December 2014. Aviatia Magazin. Retrieved 24 December 2014. Aviatia Magazin. Retrieved 24 December 2014. Retrieved 24 December 2014. • Jozef Wilczynski, Technology in Comecon: Acceleration of Technological Progress Through Economic Planning and the Market, p. 243 • Green, 1971, p.25-26 • Green, 1971, p.26 •, November 2007 issue, p.36. •, November 2007 issue, p.37. Retrieved 24 December 2014. • June 13, 2011, at the. Flightglobal Insight. Retrieved 4 April 2017. • International Institute for Strategic Studies, The Military Balance 2010, page 158. Retrieved 1 June 2015. Retrieved on 12 June 2015 • roaf.ro (Romanian Air Force official website). Retrieved on 01 November 2017 Bibliography [ ]. ![]() ![]() ' THE CASE FOR CHRIST is a wonderful and important film. It. offers much to the atheist, agnostic, and believer alike. Trittin, Author and President, LifeSmart Publishing, LLC 'Realistic, pitch-perfect, and powerful. So needed in our time.' Beverly Lewis, New York Times bestselling author ' a must-see, incredibly well made, entertaining, and thought-provoking film. I was truly blown away! Stephen Kendrick, Producer, War Room 'WOW! Two thumbs up. So powerful and very well done. Great acting. Great cinematography. Go see this true story and take your family and friends!' Jon Erwin, Director, Woodlawn, Moms’ Night Out 'I was completely impressed. I loved the ‘realness’ of Lee's journey that didn't sugarcoat his pursuit of truth. Thanks for being an open book Lee Strobel!' Stephen Dervan, Preaching and Prayer Pastor, Sherwood Baptist Church ' THE CASE FOR CHRIST is superbly made with a powerful message. See it early and take a friend!' Alex Kendrick, Director, War Room ' THE CASE FOR CHRIST is just wow so, so good. I could watch it again an A+.' Kevin Downes, Producer, I Can Only Imagine 'I loved this movie! It was personal, profound and poignant. Brady Boyd, Pastor of New Life Church 'This is the best faith film I’ve ever seen. An absolutely captivating story that fills you with hope.' Jason Romano, former senior producer at ESPN, host of Sports Spectrum podcast 'I absolutely loved THE CASE FOR CHRIST. Watch The Case for Christ Full Movie (2017) Online Now! Latest Drama of Beloved The Case for Christ is Free Ready To Be Streamed Right Now! What set the movie apart for me was the storytelling. What a well-made film! I can't wait to watch it again.' Clayton King, Pastor at Newspring Church 'This is one of the most powerful evangelistic movies I have ever seen! ![]() It connects on every level.' Pastor Greg Laurie 'This movie is the real deal don't miss it.' Santiago “Jimmy” Mellado, President and CEO, Compassion International ' a must-see movie for both Christians AND atheists.' MovieGuide® ' a marvelous film. Well acted, well written, and a very powerful story!' Kerry Livgren, Founding member of KANSAS 'It is honest and real, and I highly recommend it' Kathie Lee Gifford 'It is such a powerful redemptive story! Steve Carter, Teaching Pastor, Willow Creek Community Church ' one of the most important films of the past decade.' Patrick Novecosky, Editor-in-Chief, Legatus magazine 'It was so good that I was sorry when it was over. Just awesome, from beginning to end.' David Limbaugh, author of Jesus on Trial and The True Jesus 'You’ll be blessed, encouraged, and inspired to act by this movie.' Ed Stetzer, Billy Graham Distinguished Chair, Wheaton College 'Warning to skeptics: this movie could be hazardous to your unbelief!' Rice Broocks, Author, God’s Not Dead book 'It was simply profound!' Jeff Farmer, President, Pentecostal Charismatic Churches of North America ' Extremely well done—I highly recommend it. Phil Ehart, Drummer for KANSAS 'The quintessential outreach film of our time!' Samuel Rodriguez, President, NHCLC 'an engaging, beautiful story ' Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap., Archbishop of Philadelphia 'This movie is a must see.' Sheila Walsh, Bestselling Author 'From one of my favorite books of all time to an incredible movie.' Steve Green, President of Hobby Lobby, Inc. 'It triggered both cheers and tears. It’s a good movie!' Greg Stier, CEO and Founder of Dare 2 Share Ministries 'An outstanding movie.' George Wood, General Superintendent The General Council of the Assemblies of God 'I encourage you to take your family and friends ' Pastor John Hagee, Cornerstone Church 'Unbelievably well done, extremely powerful love story—compelling and convicting!' Matt Roberson, Lead Pastor, Metropolitan Baptist Church, Houston '‘A’ for the script. ‘A’ for the props. ‘A+’ for the acting. A must-see film ' Fr. Francis 'Rocky' Hoffman Executive Director, Relevant Radio Network 'Objective minds will be challenged.' Matthew Pinto, Publisher, Ascension Press. Based upon the book by Lee Strobel, this is a journey through the spiritual, intellectual, and emotional struggle of a newspaper journalist conflicted by his wife's conversion to Christianity. Determined to disprove to his wife and, in effect to himself, Christ's Godhood and therefore the Christian faith, Strobel focuses on the key element--the Resurrection. If he can disprove the Resurrection, he can prove the falsehood of Chrisitanity, as he sees it, and win back his wife to 'reality.' The film also merges a subplot involving the shooting of a police officer allegedly by a known gang banger. These two parallel investigations by Strobel are well-integrated in the script and directed with a clean firm hand by the movie's director, and form a satisfying related climax, as Strobel employs a single-mindedness to both investigations fueled by his journalistic skills, but crippled by a blind drive to prove a pre-determined opinion. On one hand, his relentless crime story approach puts an innocent man in prison and on the other, drives a wedge between Strobel and his newly 'Christianized' wife. And behind all of this, is a failed relationship between Strobel and his father. The high production value, taut direction, top notch acting, and unobtrusive musical score all belie the low ratings given to this film by what appears to be the atheist community apparently, for some reason, being deeply offended. Frankly, giving a film like this a rating of 1 or 2 reveals more about the rater than the film. A key finding in Strobel's Resurrection investigation reveals, I believe, the reason for the strident and shrill objections by the atheist reviewers to this film: the most vocal and militantly resistant objectors to the Case For Christ shared a lack of a loving relationship with their fathers. That kind of lack--and the pain it brings--shows up in these reviews. I don't normally put user reviews in here as I review movies at a movie site and am an IMDb contributor. Out of the 22 User Reviews, 16/22 give this very transparent and mediocre film either 9 or 10 stars out of 10. There is no way that any objective viewer could consider this film any more that what it was, a poorly made soap-opera with an obvious religious agenda. Lee Strobel's book has been analyzed and exposed for quite some time now and there is no way around the fact that his book and sources are quite flawed and biased. As far as the movie goes, it is being given a pass simply because it was not horrible like most of the other Christian films. The movie did not follow the book other than to show renditions of some of the interviews and there were logical fallacies galore. Personal opinion is not evidence and the movie, like the book, continued to commit one fallacy after another, especially Assuming Facts Not in Evidence. Along with the conclusions based on fallacies, this movie was just mediocre and pedestrian. Except for an acceptable effort from Vogel, the acting was wooden and unconvincing. In the end, Lee Strobel was not driven to his knees by evidence, but by emotional blackmail and manipulation. There is really no reason for anyone to see this movie, believers or non-believers. It was simply not very good. 'The Case for Christ' dramatises Lee Strobel's journey from Atheism to Christianity. As you'd expect for someone who was not just an unbeliever, but scorned faith, it was not an easy ride. Predictably, many Atheists aren't going to like the movie, but I think it stands on its own merits. It is more biopic than apologetic and while a dramatisation, Strobels himself has said the movie is 85% accurate. ***Contains Spoilers*** It particularly focuses on his strained relationship with his wife. Strobels is a successful journalist, but this dynamic sends him into a tailspin and while he sets out to disprove his wife's faith, he also turns to alcohol and workaholism to cope. We see someone depicted as a loving husband and father, part of a loving family, start to fracture. I've heard something similar from a friend who went through the same thing when his wife became a Christian before he did and it felt like he was competing with another husband. The spiritual aspects of the movie are pretty well handled. Scenes in which people pray don't feel awkward or contrived. Sermons are relevant and the whole thing comes across as authentic. Strobel's wife's more emotional journey to faith contrasts with his own. A murder investigation is used as a foil for Strobels search for truth about Christ. As an investigative reporter he is portrayed as relentless, but he makes an error bias that gets a man jailed. It's meant to demonstrate both his doggedness in pursuing the truth but also his blind spots and challenges the viewer to see their own. Along the way we do get apologetics, and on the whole it's handled well, I thought. It's definitely apologetics light, but it demonstrates that Christianity has rational grounds for belief and gives enough for anyone who's interested to investigate further. The overall impression given is of someone who's done his homework and been confronted by the credibility of Christianity. In the end Strobels has to make a step of faith, but as his Atheist mentor says (who is presented very sensitively - there were no 'angry atheists' in this), it's a step of faith either way. One part that I thought may have been a little awkwardly handled was Strobels visit to a psychologist. He asks her about the hallucination theory, which she debunks (like most of Strobels questions, the answer is summarised rather than elaborated - it was already a 2 hour movie). However, she ends up confronting him about his father wound, which is another aspect of the movie. It didn't feel out of place but I can see how many Atheists will feel it was a little below the belt. But as portrayed in the movie, it is pertinent to Strobels' psyche. Ultimately you could have changed the premise and this would remain a solid drama. Well constructed and well acted. Hollywood knows a cash market when they see one. They have learned that evangelicals will throw lots of money at anything that supports their beliefs and helps indoctrinate others, and so we're seeing these proselytizing flicks regularly. What makes this one particularly loathsome is that the filmmakers hawk it as being based on the 'hard-hitting' journalism of Lee Strobel. Well, they have a funny notion of 'hard-hitting,' since Strobel's book basically packages the essays of thirteen Christian academics, mostly from theological institutions. That's the sum of his 'hard-hitting' research--letting readers be evangelized by believers. It's not surprising, then, that the product of his work is unconvincing as anything approaching journalism, and that applies equally to the film. If you want an actual investigation into the historical Jesus, read the scholarly, On the Historicity of Jesus: Why We Might Have Reason for Doubt by Richard Carrier. The Kindle version costs about the same as a movie ticket and your intelligence won't be insulted for your trouble. As a former Christian, I can see how this movie is appealing to the Christian audience because it gives them a victory in their eyes. From a film-making perspective, it is quite boring, unimaginative, offers little evidence for the 'case' for Christ and is simply unconvincing. Of all Christian based films 'PUREFLIX' has came up with, this takes the cake for simple boredom and eye twitching nonsense. Spoilers to follow: It is a case to disprove the Christian faith that backfires into the atheist becoming a Christian. Here is the problem: The only evidence mentioned was there's a lot of copies of the new testament. Witnesses 500+ say they saw Christ after the crucifixion. A medical doctors opinion is that if he were to be treated as stated in the bible that he would definitely die. All of this information and a music montage at the end of the film changes him to be a full on believer. Atheists like myself tend to be more scientific and continue asking questions unlike this movie's portrayal of a angry, daddy issues riddled, drinker, bad father who tells his daughter what to think (when he wasn't), as well as a person who accepts minimal circumstantial evidence. Things not brought up in this movie as an argument against god. The virgin birth Miracles: healing the sick, the blind, bringing dead back to life. Reconciling these supernatural occurrences with reason and science. Other than saving his daughter from an evil noodle at a restaurant, why god does nothing to help the others in suffering. 5000+ children a day who die from starvation, disease, etc. The movie chocks god up to be a teacher who's only lesson is love and as a human of science, our main character is supposed to accept that given the experiential evidence and the world's evidence of 'god is either impotent, evil, or imaginary. Take your pick, and choose wisely.' - Sam Harris The movie in general offers fluff and sad stories to make you bend your knees to a god who is one of those 3. It is a low blow for them to reference famous atheistic philosophers and scientists and say they had daddy wounds which makes it no coincidence that they cannot accept 'the Father'. One can make the argument that those who have daddy wounds tend to gravitate to Christianity because they didn't have a father to love them. Anyone who watches this film for evidence or maybe a change of heart, to change their mind about Christianity will fail to find it. Christian's will feel validated and atheists will sitting their laughing. The movie is really biased and portrays anyone who isn't a Christian as a lost soul or has mental issues dealing with loss or parents. It just comes off absurd and ignorant of reality. There are three main story-lines intertwined in this movie. The husband/wife relationship between Lee and Leslie Strobel 2. Lee Strobel's attempt to debunk his wife's newly found faith 3. The imprisonment of an innocent 'cop killer' All story lines were superficial and not well intertwined. I found the notion of arguing semantics and facts about a man who lived over 2000 years ago, who may or may not have been the son of 'God', extremely frustrating. A debate on the existence of fairies would use the same methodology to confirm their existence. In the end, there was no hard and fast fact, rather a highly emotional leap formed from the increasing pressure Lee was facing due to his marriage problems, falsely and publicly accusing an innocent man of attempted murder, and mental and emotional burnout from researching his 'Existance of Christ' issue. There was no clear 'Case for Christ'. Just a disappointing and poorly wrapped ending. The acting is good, the plot is compelling and keeps interesting all along. It is a must see both for believers and non believers. I never understood why the possibility of existing a man that taught about love and forgiveness would cause so much hate. The bad reviews are clearly written by people which hate the idea of Jesus. For the non-believers, this movie brings a chance to doubt yourself and your beliefs, which is always a positive thing, because, if your truth remains the same, at least you know about the subject and that makes your testimony truer. For the believers, I am one and I have had my times of struggle with faith, as I am sure most Christians have had. Even if you always believed with no doubt in your heart, you will learn impressive things with this movie. I saw a trailer for this film and thought it was about a genuine investigation into the historicity of Jesus. Boy was I wrong! It is nothing more than a piece of trashy propaganda for American Christians. If I might also say, it has the distinct feel of 'made for t.v.' Basically, all the Atheists are made to look like angry, arrogant know-all's while the Christians are all patient, loving and well rounded individuals. Its really nauseating!Perhaps the worst scene of the lot is when a 'psychologist' claims that Strobels atheism was all down to his bad relationship with his father.The moral of the movie (and don't you just hate when movies have morals) is that all atheists are damaged people who just need to find God in order to be cured. It should be shown exclusively in bible study classes and not inflicted on a thinking, intelligent audience. 'Christian' movies have a reputation of being artificial, unprofessional, and only appealing to those who are already indoctrinated. 'The Case for Christ' breaks these stereotypes, delivering the best piece of Christian filmography that I've seen, as well as a good biographical drama by more general standards. As mentioned, 'The Case' avoids the pitfalls that the majority of Christian films fall into. It does not vilify atheists, make Christians appear impossibly pious, stuff the script with corny and unnatural dialogue (or significantly lack any other production quality), or contrive situations in order to 'prove' Christianity (this is a biography, after all). While the primary character, Lee Strobel, isn't a very nice person for most of the movie, he is no more flawed than most protagonists, and these flaws are never blamed on atheism, per se. Mike Vogel's portrayal of a man doing what he feels is best for his family and dealing with life's stresses, especially those that come from having one's worldview challenged, is genuine and moving. I don't think many folks will come into the movie theater as skeptics and walk out as Christians, but I think the movie's producers were mature enough that that's not what they were intending or expecting. The movie likely won't answer all of a skeptic's questions (though the questions they do address are relevant, not straw men), but it answers enough of them that they should realize that (some) people do indeed have reasons for their beliefs. Altogether, Christians and non-Christians alike should walk away from this movie with the desire to learn more, and they'll have experienced a good piece of cinema in the process. If Lee Strobel was ever an atheist, it certainly doesn't show in this book. As other critical reviewers have suggested, he constructs here what amounts to an easily-vanquished stalking horse of straw -- not a substantive argument of real skepticism. After cherry picking easy fly balls and grounders from what could have been much more challenging intellectual terrain, the author uncritically consults ONLY professional advocates and apologists for Christianity, and then repeats their arguments. He -- and they -- accept the words of the synoptic gospels 'verbatum' as accurately reflecting the preaching, message, and claims of Jesus of Nazareth. The latest in a growing trend of religious propaganda (i.e. The Atheist Delusion, Joseph and Mary, Is Genesis History?, etc.). In essence, twisted and irrational 'logic' masquerading as facts and 'evidence'. Religious zealots pandering to the uneducated, the naive and the gullible. No matter how you dress it up or present it. Personal delusions, primitive superstitions and beliefs are not a case for anything. Instead of wasting your time on this type of non-sense, spend an hour or two watching just about anything on PBS, you're brain will thank you! Sorry, but no. This film may be based on one man's conversion, but his arguments, like the book, are based more on feelings and suppositions rather than fact or evidence. It is precisely because of this dishonesty, for lack of a better term, that the film fails. Credibility is key when arguing the affirmative on belief, the problem here is that there is none. Again, like the book, the film meanders between emotion and assumption, not on the actual debate in question. Further, it insults the viewer's intelligence by glossing over massive loopholes regarding the Biblical Christ's existence; and further, makes no effort to validate its position with facts. Bottom line, while the actors do an admirable job of playing their roles, the fact remains, they can't save a film whose very premise is so tenuous and dubious. One final note, like others have noted, these religious films are becoming more strident in their propaganda bent. They're not offering an argument or even a discussion, it's more an attempt to muddy the waters between legitimate searches for truth through science and facts versus feelings, fears and guilt. This is not coming from an atheist or somebody particularly religious, though finds the Bible and its stories fascinating. This is coming from someone who loves film of all genres and decades, would see anything with an open mind and an intent to judge it on what it set out to do and wanted to see as many films from 2017 as possible. 2017 has been a mixed bag for film, with some good and more films, some disappointing and less films and some that fall somewhere in between. 'The Case for Christ' is not among the year's very worst but is in the bottom half of the quality spectrum to me. It is understandable why atheists would hate it with a passion, though some here have to me not expressed their feelings very well, but it is my feeling that it's not only atheists who will dislike 'The Case for Christ'. Critics were very mixed on it themselves and it is also my feeling that even the converted will find themselves preached. Coming from a non-atheist and as said someone not particularly religious, 'The Case for Christ' did come over as too heavy-handed and one-sided and like it was trying too hard to appeal to Christians and the converted. There are a lot of theories presented here but these theories are little more than strongly put and theories masquerading as fact, that talk at you bombastically rather than provoking thought, with very little that holds weight to back it up. The bogus scientific elements too strain credibility to an unbelievable degree, science is practically re-invented here so scientific experts are another group that will find the film hard to swallow. In short, 'The Case for Christ' has a script that does mean well and tries, and sometimes succeeds, in being sincere, but tends to be uninspired and patronising. When it comes to the storytelling, 'The Case for Christ' never rises above superficial level. A few good, if familiar, ideas but never fully explored and cranks up the sentimentality to the point the sweetness and sugar makes one nauseous and the sentimentality is hard to stomach. Some of it is ludicrous too. The pace is dull and meandering, the music is forgettable at best and the direction has flashes of inspiration but is mostly blandly workmanlike. For all those problems, 'The Case for Christ' is not all bad. It looks pretty good and slick, handsomely shot and nicely mounted. It's particularly striking in how the look and feel of 1980 Chicago is captured, and the film does that very well. The acting is pretty decent, despite the awkward dialogue and thinly drawn characters, with the best performances coming from Faye Dunaway and particularly Mike Vogel. Not all the material is a disaster. The insights of the extent to which religion still shapes popular and political thinking in the United States and how are actually interesting and well argued. It is a pity that everything else in the writing fails to convince. In summary, will be, and has been, very controversial for understandable reasons on both sides. Apart from a few good things and some intrigue and sincerity, it is very sad to say that 'The Case for Christ' had a case that didn't convince me and didn't do much for me. 4/10 Bethany Cox. Yeah, everything I write probably has spoilers in it, so I checked the box. Let me cut to the chase though: It all boils down to the Resurrection: Either it happened or it didn't. If it didn't, as the Apostle Paul says in the Book of 1 Corinthians (First Corinthians, for those who don't read the Bible normally): 'If in Christ we have hope in this life only, we are of all people most to be pitied.' 1 Corinthians 15:19 What he's saying, is what's pointed out to Lee Strobel by a Christian who he works with in his office. This is the insight that provides the impetus for Lee's entire struggle and search to debunk Christianity. He figures if he can succeed, where so many have tried and failed, then he will have proved Christians to be the most pitied of all people, since they are worshiping a dead god. However, try as he will, he cannot find the evidence to dispute either the biblical accounts, or the extra-biblical sources he consults to try to weaken the Bible's eye-witness testimony. Josh McDowell set out similarly to disprove Christianity, and found that the evidence is not only irrefutable, but that it is sufficient, in a court of law to prove that Jesus is who He says He is - the Son of God (Evidence That Demands A Verdict)! So, contrary to all the atheists who post garbage on here, and probably most of whom never even went to see the movie, I found myself intrigued, and my faith strengthened. Remember, faith is not, as Google says based on 'Spiritual apprehension or feelings' rather it is a certainty, based on evidence presented that we can believe something to be true, even without knowing or seeing the power at work within it, or having been there at some previous historical moment to see something happen with our own eyes. We stand on the earth, yet we (most of us) have no idea how gravity works, nor do we care that it is invisible and we cannot see it. We KNOW it's there, and we have faith it will hold us down. I know that's not quite the same thing in this example, since we are talking about spiritual realities, but remember, Jesus came - to prove to us that He is real, and that He is God. He, Himself, told Pontius Pilate that He came 'To testify to the truth'. And that is the truth. Nice production work, and occasional flashes of sincerity, but still falls short of its goal. Its another one of those fundie Christian proselytizing exertions, but you don't need me to tell you that. One gets the impression that each time the movie production suits manage to put together a kitty to forge yet-another of these, it's with the perennial hope, 'This one will be different. This one will deliver.' It's 1) better than the usual run, but 2) that's not saying much. No, it doesn't really deliver. Flicks like this are attempts to use a kind of moral grooming to create pristine little scenarios in which American evangelical Christianity plays out like an honest proposition. But sensitive folks can quickly sniff out that grooming and ultimately resent being treated like jacka55es whose radars were presumed not subtle enough to detect it. Here's a woefully incomplete list of facile treatments: * The wife is a bit too quick to draw a causal line between her daughter's rescue and the rescuer's Christianity; it makes sense neither logically nor narratively. Sure, she feels powerful emotions at her daughter's rescue. That doesn't mean she's duty-bound to jettison clear-headed thinking. She can be grateful and sensible at the very same time: One doesn't have to crowd the other out. * Though managed more artfully than I've seen elsewhere, Strobel is still a bit of a straw dog. He's painted as a somewhat acrid species of atheist. Most atheists are quite different from the Strobel depicted here. * The flick winds up fixing on the resurrection as key to the Christian 'faith'. There's a very strong argument for the view that thinking you're a Christian because you profess to 'believe' articles of faith (the virgin birth, resurrection, ascension, etc.), may be straining the gnat and swallowing the camel. * More generally, the flick falls into the trap of promoting a creed basis for Christianity--that accepting a creed is the basis for your self-identification as an adherent of the religion. I've come to the place in my life when I find it hard to imagine a sadder waste of human spiritual searching. This flick backs a horse that loses, right out of the gate. * The textual criticism argument fails on two points. One, there's plenty of evidence for the view that the New Testament texts had been modified, specifically in ways that wound up having downstream effects on popular notions of 'correct' creed. Two, the flick doesn't even mention the fact that the Gospel stories went through 4 or 5 inter- generational oral transmissions *before* someone wrote them down; and this probably explains more about those texts than my first point. * Why doesn't the flick show Strobel shutting himself into a room for a week or so and carefully reading/combing through the New Testament? I suspect it was left out because most of this flick's demographic would leave it out themselves; that is, they hold the Bible to be true while not reading it either. * Strobel's mentor plunks a copy of Bertrand Russell's 'Why I Am Not a Christian' on the desk in front of Strobel. Russell's prime argument in that text was not ancient-historic, it was philosophic. In the following scene, Strobel's editor then says that canned thing about Christianity resting on the historicity of the resurrection. This juxtaposition is confused, but does shed light on the demographic for the movie; it's aimed at folks who haven't read or reflected on philosophical views of the matter, so 1) the Russell book is reduced to a boogie talisman, and 2) the movie can then wend into the tar pit of historicity--which in the end winds up being a matter of bald belief (not faith). That's insulting to thinking people. * Strobel tells his wife, 'I don't like what you're becoming.' Which raises a question that might elude the casual viewer. That question is, 'What *is* she becoming?' That's an important question! Now, there are some scripted and produced moments that show her sitting with her Bible and being truly moved by genuinely sweet passages. Remember: It's often *not* good. Weak people can be taken in by religious frauds who sink their fangs into them and turn them into monsters. Heck, Jesus talked about that! * The doctor is able to argue convincingly for Jesus's death. He might also argue vociferously for his resurrection, but not from a medical standpoint, as a medical researcher. A white lab coat only caries so much gravitas. * There's a scene that actually--and I suspect unwittingly, on the screenwriter's part--gives away the shop on the communication issue in relationship. Strobel's wife talks about 'her (new, religious) feelings' in a general, wizzy-wozzy way, but bizarrely fails to couch those feelings in honest, convincing language. Remember: Even poetic language would and should be welcome in these situations. But she can't even muster that. How far did she honestly *think* she'd get in her so-called 'communication' with her husband? When I watched that scene, here was my takeaway: You were *not* seeing a collision of worldviews/belief systems. You were seeing two blind people bumping into trees in disparate forests. I've seen that before, and I fear I know the next step: She's going to start blaming the pain she feels as a result of all that tree-bumping on the people around her whom she would otherwise simply love; she'll start dismissing them from her heart, as 'tools of Satan'. *.and there's more. While nicely produced and occasionally trenchant, the whole thing is yet another mess, in which a writer sets himself the task of bending screen writing to the defense of an untenable proposition--that belief (not faith) is a source of redemption/salvation. The producers may weigh in production finery--which includes truly marvelous exertions on the parts of the actors--but people who expect top-to-bottom solidity in their narrative products won't be taken in. Beyond the excellent presentation of material to support the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, this true story about Lee Strobel's marriage being on the brink of ending because of his wife's faith in Christ was another gripping dimension to the plot. Their intimate talks about faith and how Christ was deepening their love for each other through their investigation of faith is astonishingly well acted and deeply moving. At the heart of their relationship is the demonstration of how Christ divides, then unites, whereas the Evil One only divides. You could not ask for a happier ending than when Lee finally surrenders to the truths about Christ that he uncovers after two long years of research. I LOVE THIS FILM! Prepare yourself for this shock: This is a Christian movie, and it is ACTUALLY GOOD! I expected this movie to be like other Christian movies, with cookie-cutter black-and-white characters which portray atheists as awful and heartless people and the hero as someone who can do no wrong. This movie was not that way. The characters are real and the roles are acted really well. There are also no cheesy conversions like in a lot of Christian movies. Everything seemed authentic. This is actually a good movie. I'm not saying it was good for a Christian movie, it was actually a good movie as far as all movies are concerned. I rented this in the hopes that it would be a thoughtful examination of why some people believe in the existence of Christ and others do not. It's really just an essay on what this one guy believes. Never looking at any opposing view, or even looking critically at his own 'evidence.' For example it starts (spoiler ahead) with a classical case of if God wasn't here a rescue wouldn't have happened. But they don't consider that if God exists then he made the rescue necessary in the first place. NUME: Generatorul de Scuze DESCRIERE:Suntem siguri ca toti copiii nu au vrut sa isi faca tema cateodata, si poate chiar s-au dus cu ea nefacuta la scoala, in speranta ca nu o sa fie intrebati de ea. Ei bine, la fel s-a intamplat si cu cele doua personaje principale din Captain Underpants, doi copii de la scoala, asa ca au nevoie de ajutorul tau pentru a gasi cele mai bune scuze ca sa le prezinte profesorului. Pentru asta va veti juca jocul Generatorul de Scuze, despre care va vom povestii mai multe lucruri in continuare, asigurandu-ne astfel ca faceti o treaba cat se poate de buna la joc. Veti introduce intr-o casuta raspunsul la diferite intrebri, cum ar fii care este numele profesorului tau, la ce materie ai avut tema, care iti este numele, urmand ca apoi sa alegi tot felul de motive si de detalii pe care sa le introduci in scuza ta. Dupa ce ai ales toate aceste lucruri, calculatorul va genera o scuza bazata pe datele introduse de tine, care va fii interesanta si amuzanta, cu siguranta. Incepe deci jocul chiar acum, doar aici, si nu pleca nicaieri, caci urmeaza si alte jocuri foarte tari astazi pe site-ul nostru! CUVINTE CHEIE. Ti-a facut placere sa joci Generatorul de Scuze online pe? Vrem sa stii ca acest nou joculet a fost adaugat la data de in categoria cu Jocuri cu Aventurile Capitanului Underpants. Generatorul de Scuze a fost votat de 1 ori si a obtinut 1 voturi pozitive. Nu mai sta pe ganduri, iar daca ti-a placut jocul voteaza-l si tu si nu uita sa-i oferi un Like, Share pe Facebook si un +1 pe Google. • Incercati cele mai noi si interesante din 2018 pe care le puteti gasi doar pe site-ul nostru. Vi-am pregatit o gama larga de joculete ce sunt cu siguranta pe placul vostru! 2018 © Copyright. NUME: Capitanul Chilotei de Memorie DESCRIERE:In categoria de Jocuri cu Capitanul Chilotei/Jocuri cu Aventurile Capitanului Underpants de pe site-ul nostru am adaugat tot felul de jocuri pana acum, dar jocuri de memorie cu carti nu au mai fost adaugate pana acum, asa ca suntem foarte entuziasmati caci un astfel de jocut a fost adaugat chiar acum pentru voi toti, el fiind intitulat Capitanul Chilotei de Memorie, si fiind recomandat in totalitate de catre echipa noastra administrativa. Tocmai de aceea vom continua prin a vi-l explica, asa ca faceti bine si cititi descrierea pana la final! Patru carti vei avea in primul nivel, dar numarul creste in fiecare nou nivel. Dai click tot pe cate doua carti ca sa le intorci cu fata la vedere, si cand sunt identice, cele doua carti raman la vedere, dar tu primesti in schimb puncte. In fiecare nivel esti cronometrat, deci cu cat termini un nivel mai repede, cu atat mai multe puncte vei primii, ceea ce iti doresti cu siguranta. Acum ca stii ce aveti de facut, dorim sa va uram mult succes si distractie placuta, invitandu-va sa aruncati o privire si peste celelalte jocuri pe care le-am adaugat astazi aici! CUVINTE CHEIE. ![]() ![]() Ti-a facut placere sa joci Capitanul Chilotei de Memorie online pe? Vrem sa stii ca acest nou joculet a fost adaugat la data de in categoria cu Jocuri cu Aventurile Capitanului Underpants. Capitanul Chilotei de Memorie a fost votat de 0 ori si a obtinut 0 voturi pozitive. Nu mai sta pe ganduri, iar daca ti-a placut jocul voteaza-l si tu si nu uita sa-i oferi un Like, Share pe Facebook si un +1 pe Google. • Incercati cele mai noi si interesante din 2018 pe care le puteti gasi doar pe site-ul nostru. Vi-am pregatit o gama larga de joculete ce sunt cu siguranta pe placul vostru! ![]() 2018 © Copyright. Captain Underpants: The First Epic Movie - Aventurile Capitanului Underpants. Distributie Kevin Hart, Ed Helms. Regizat de Rob Letterman. Sinoposis Captain Underpants. Vizioneaza acum filmul Captain Underpants: The First Epic Movie - Aventurile Capitanului Underpants online subtitrat in romana HD, gratis si fara intreruperi! ![]() ![]() Directed by Raoul Peck. With August Diehl, Stefan Konarske, Vicky Krieps, Olivier Gourmet. The early years of Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels and Jenny Marx, between. The young karl marx the young karl marx 2017 free watch The Young Karl Marx full movie online for free watch the young karl marx 2017. Den unge Karl Marx. ![]() The Young Karl Marx chronicles the period when young Karl Marx meets his future long-term friend and co-author Friedrich Engels and the several following years. During the Berlinale press conference dedicated to the film Raoul Peck was asked if he read Karl Marx. He answered that he attended seminars dedicated to Marx's Capital. His film is reminiscent of such a seminar; interminable and tedious. There are many dialogues, questions, answers however the film completely lacks artistic vision. There is no interesting music, camera-work or a gripping plot. Raoul Peck tried to underline the more materialistic side of his relationship with Jenny, showing his sex life and child birth. ![]() To deprive Marx of certain romanticism is also not fair, the young philosopher was a romantic of his own kind; he was engaged for seven years to Jenny and dedicated many poems to her. The discussions depicted in the film are too primitive for such great thinkers such as Marx, Engels, Proudhon and Bakunin. The proletariat, on the other hand, is shown as a group of people with abject faces and feeble children, which makes the ideas of Marx about the proletariat too idealistic and not connected to reality. One of the positive sides of the picture is that Peck did not try to distort facts about the people in the film, however after the film finishes one feels relieved that the drawn-out seminar on Karl Marx is finally over. ![]() ![]() Read more at: http://indie-cinema.com/2017/02/young-karl-marx/. ![]() Running time 140 minutes Country India Language Budget ₹17 Box office est. ₹50.84 Tumhari Sulu ( English:Your Sulu) is a 2017 Indian directed by Suresh Triveni and produced under the banners of and Ellipsis Entertainment. The film stars as the titular character, an ambitious housewife who becomes a radio jockey for a late-night relationship advice show. And co-star as Sulu's husband and boss, respectively. Tumhari Sulu was released worldwide on 17 November 2017, both critical and box office success earned over ₹584 million (US$9.2 million) on a ₹170 million (US$2.7 million) budget. ![]() The film received nine nominations and won the award for Vidya. Contents • • • • • • • • • Plot [ ] Sulochana Dubey, nicknamed Sulu, is a middle-class housewife staying in with her family. Sulu enjoys her life to the fullest with her husband and 11-year-old son. She dreams of being a working woman, but since she couldn't complete her high school she cannot think of any white collar jobs. Her two elder twin sisters are always critical of her educational credentials and mock her failed business ideas. Sulu is fond of participating and winning any contest around her, be it a singing competition or an athletic event or a lemon and spoon race. Watch Tumhari Sulu (2017) Online Full Movie Free In HD with subtitle. Stream Tumhari Sulu (2017) Online on BMovies. Her husband, Ashok works as a manager in a tailoring firm, which is quite a frustrating job since everyone apart from him is over the age of sixty, including the owners. Most of them are either unresponsive or unreasonable. On top of it, the firm now is taken over by the grandson of the owner, who is very rude and treats him with disdain. Ashok bears all this for his family. Directed by Suresh Triveni. With Vidya Balan, Neha Dhupia, Manav Kaul, Vijay Maurya. Vidya Balan (Sulochana a.k.a. Sulu) essays the role of a beautiful. Watch Tumhari Sulu (2017) Online Full Movie Free on Gomovies, Tumhari Sulu (2017) Online in HD with subtitle on 123Movies. Tumhari Sulu 2017 Full Movie Free Download HD 720p. Download Tumhari Sulu 2017 Full Movie Free Download HD 720p High Speed. SD Movies Point. A Vidya Balan starer film has been released Today. I am a big fan of Vidya. Also, I have huge respect for Manav Kaul as a writer as well as an actor. Her son is constantly teased by a set of students, who sell magazines, CDs, etc., in school, which is strictly prohibited. One fine day, Sulu wins a contest hosted by her favourite radio station. She receives a call from Albeli, the top RJ of the radio station. On the call, Albeli makes her sing. Sulu sings a retro song, which everyone at the radio station finds funny. ![]() Next day she goes to the Radio station to collect her prize. There she sees a poster of auditions for the position of a RJ. She is very excited and feels that this is the job she is waiting for. She insists on filling the form, which the receptionist refuses on some pretext or the other. Co-incidentally, RJ Albeli walks in and feels that she must give her a shot. She takes Sulu to meet her boss, Maria. Sulu is extrovert and engaging, which is a bit annoying for others but Maria finds her interesting. She gives her an opportunity to audition. At the audition, Sulu is very casual and not able to control her laughter after Pankaj, one of the poets at the radio station, recites the lines in a sensual manner. Just at the end, she manages to say 'Hello' in a sensual manner, which impresses Maria. Maria gives her card and asks if she would be able to do a call-in night show - where people would call her to talk about their troubles. Maria gives Sulu time to think. Sulu thinks about the job and the sensual accent in which she would have to answer the calls. Just to try out, she calls a nearby grocery store, talks in a sensual accent and requests the owner to get a broom. The owner excitingly comes to the address, only to find out that the floor does not exist. Next, she calls her husband and drives him mad. Next day, she calls Maria multiple times to tell that she is ready to take up the job. As it happens, Maria is in a very difficult situation and is not able to receive any of her calls. Sulu is disappointed and sends a few messages indicating that she is ready to work. Next day, Maria realizes the passion behind Sulu's persistent annoyance and hires her. To start with, Ashok is annoyed with her that she took up the job without discussing with him but later relents out of his love for her. The company provides Sulu pickup and drop facility. On her first day, Sulu faces an annoying caller who tries to change their chat into an obscene one. With her sharp mind, Sulu is able to tactfully handle it. Next, she gets a request from a caller to sing an out of the world kind of a song for him. Sulu, out of excitement, sings a song which she sings only for her husband. Ashok is annoyed by all this, as well as frustrated with his new boss who treats him rudely he faces 2 situations here one is Her job and Second is His Own Job.because of two situations he becomes angry sometimes and insecure Sulu's parents and her sisters are very angry with her program and force her to quit the job. But Ashok stands by her and she is able to continue. Maria is very happy with her and the show becomes very successful. Sulu also enjoys her work. But at times, Ashok expresses his frustration either at his job or hers. It seems that life is like a roller coaster ride for Sulu, high at work and low at home. One day, she gets a call from her son's school and they visit his principal's office. The principal reveals that he is charging some other kids for showing some videos on the phone he stole from Ashok, as well as faking his signatures over the remarks written in his school dairy. On this basis, he suspends her son from the school. This becomes a very big issue in their family and Sulu's sisters blame her that because of her job she has neglected her son. They decide that she now has to leave the job and her son would not stay with them because her low level of education is causing similar influence on him. Sulu takes a tough stand, rejects both the conditions and leaves for her job. While coming back, she gets a call that her son is missing. They later find a note by him, revealing he is very ashamed of what he has done. He is very sad to see that his mother had to leave her job because of his actions. He requests his father to support his mother and her job. Next day police find her son and bring him home. Sulu goes to her office and resigns. She feels that she is not able to handle the emotional turmoil at home. Just as she is leaving, she finds the receptionist having a fight with the tiffin service guy. Sulu has an idea and she requests Maria to give her the contract for the tiffin service. Next, we see Ashok managing the tiffin business and Sulu going to her job; managing both the household and her professional life in her own unique style. • 'Ban Ja Rani' Released: 16 October 2017 • 'Hawa Hawai 2.0' Released: 26 October 2017 • 'Manva Likes To Fly' Released: 3 November 2017 The music of the film is composed by,,,, Amartya Rahut and Siddhant Kaushal while the lyrics have been penned by Randhawa, Nagpal,,, Siddhant Kaushal and Santanu Ghatak. The first song of the film 'Ban Ja Rani' from Randhawa's 2016 album 'Tu Meri Rani' has been recreated for this film and it was released on 16 October 2017. The second song of the film titled as 'Hawa Hawai 2.0' from 's 1987 film has also been recreated for this film by music composer Bagchi and it was released on 26 October 2017. The third single to be released was 'Manva Likes To Fly' which is sung by was released on 3 November 2017. The soundtrack was released by on 4 November 2017. Track listing No. Title Lyrics Music Singer(s) Length 1. 'Ban Ja Rani' Guru Randhawa, Guru Randhawa 3:46 2. 'Hawa Hawai 2.0',, 2:58 3. 'Manva Likes To Fly' Tanishk Bagchi 2:30 4. 'Farrata' Siddhant Kaushal Amartya Rahut, Adityan 2:32 5. 'Rafu' Santanu Ghatak Santanu Ghatak Ronkini Gupta 4:16 Total length: 16:02 Awards [ ] Date of Ceremony Award Category Recipient Outcome Ref. Signature Move was well-received at its world premiere at Austin's SXSW Film Festival. It is a beautiful film. As the director alluded to in her introduction, the film is a lesbian love story between a Pakistan- American Muslim immigration lawyer and Mexican-American bookstore owner in a peaceful diverse Chicago. Basically, it is about everything Donald Trump hates! More seriously, it is about a diverse multicultural melting pot where people of different cultures come together and learn from each other and grow and sometimes come to love each other. The film is well-acted and the script is quite subtle. ![]() Signature Move (2017) Zaynab is a thirty-something Pakistani, Muslim, lesbian in Chicago who takes care of her TV-obsessed mother. As Zaynab falls for Alma, a bold and very bright Mexican woman, she searches for her identity in life, love and wrestling. (film) Signature Move is a 2017 American indie comedy-drama film directed by Jennifer Reeder and co-written and produced by Fawzia Mirza about a Pakistani Muslim lesbian woman living in Chicago with her mother. Fawzia Mirza also introduced herself as a lesbian on Twitter before the film was announced. I particularly enjoyed the performances of Fawzia Mizra as Zaynab and Shabbana Azmi as her mother. The family relationship as Zaynab gradually figures out how to share her true self with her traditional mother is compelling. There are parts of the story that are a little too predictable, but basically it very enjoyable and a great anecdote to today's mean-spirited political climate. Jennifer Reeder's Signature Move plays like a cross-cultural cross between Netflix's GLOW and Rose Troche's Go Fish, a key film in the New Queer Cinema movement. Zaynab (co-writer Fawzia Mirza), a Chicago lawyer of Pakistani descent, lives with her widowed mother, Parveen (Bollywood star Shabana Azmi), the only person in her orbit who doesn't know she's gay. While Zaynab spends her days practicing immigration law, learning how to wrestle like a luchador, and zipping around on her moped, Parveen, a shut-in, spends hers watching Pakistani soap operas and praying that Zaynab will meet a nice Muslim man and settles down. ![]() Instead she meets Alma (Sari Sanchez), a pretty Jewish-Latina bookstore owner. Alma is also the daughter of a former Mexican wrestler (Charin Alvarez) to whom she tells everything (it's worth noting that there are no white men in this film, and you aren't likely to miss them). Though Alma swears she isn't looking for a relationship, the two start spending all of their time together. Zaynab even introduces her to Parveen, but her refusal to come out drives a wedge between the women. If the more experienced Azmi nearly steals the spotlight from the lead actresses, Reeder finds the perfect note on which to end. Media coverage of the feature film Signature Move. Filmmaker and educator Jennifer Reeder hones her signature moves. Signature Move pins down tough. Signature Move on IMDb: Movies, TV, Celebs, and more. ![]() 'Mom and Dad Full MOVIE Mirror link➬:: ⦕ ⦖ #MomandDad FulLMoviE ✭ Mom and Dad FULL MOVIE 2017 Online Stream HD Free Streaming No Download A teenage girl and her little brother must survive a wild 24 hours during which a mass hysteria of unknown origins causes parents to turn violently on their own kids. Watch Mom and Dad Full Movie on youtube. ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() More Mum And Dad (2017) images. Watch Mom and Dad (2017) Free Online - Even with good intentions and an abundance of love, parents can sometimes become.smothering. ![]() ![]() DRAMMATICO – DURATA 126' – USA A causa dell'invasione nazista della Polonia e della conseguente devastazione dello zoo di Varsavia, il guardiano dello zoo Jan. ![]() • ( IT), in LaStampa.it. URL consultato il 26 dicembre 2017. • ( IT), in Cinematografo. URL consultato il 26 dicembre 2017. •, movieplayer.it. ![]() URL consultato il 17 novembre 2016. • M2 Pictures,, su, 3 ottobre 2017. URL consultato il 3 ottobre 2017. • ( EN), dailymail.co.uk. URL consultato il 9 marzo 2017. • ( EN), comingsoon.net. URL consultato il 16 novembre 2016. •, su ansa.it, 3 novembre 2017. URL consultato il 16 novembre 2017. Collegamenti esterni [| ] • • ( EN), su, IMDb.com. • ( EN), su,. • ( EN), in, Flixster Inc. • ( EN, ES), in. • ( EN), su, CBS Interactive Inc. • ( EN), in, CBS Interactive Inc. •, in, AntonioGenna.net. • ( EN), su focusfeatures.com. Condividi la tua opinione sul film! Link offline? Chiedi il ripristino Devi essere per segnalare un link corrotto. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
March 2018
Categories |