La pianiste

Director: Michael Haneke.
Countries: Austria, France.
Year: 2001.
Length: 130 min.
Genre: Drama

Erika Kohut is a important piano teacher in a conservatory of Viena. She lives with her mother, who controls him in one way very possessive, counts every minute and hours that her daugther spend away of home, after her eight hours of work in the conservatory and the repressed her sexually. Is for these reason that Erika goes to the pornocine and pornoplaces for masturbate herself while observe another people doing sex, but all this in one way very sickly. One day Erika comes with her mother to one private piano concert in the house of one friends.There she meets the young son, who falls madly in love of her. From here begins a tortuous relationship that will take them both to the limi.

Actually is a hard film. As you shall know this director is the same of funny games another impacting movie.The difference is that in this film not used the violence for impact the spectator, used the image of one adult women who suffers one hard sex frustration, that became to confused her feelings to her mother and maul to her own sex. the truth is that, like a women,there are some scenes very cruel and shocking. But the best is that the topic of this movie isn't exploited and for this reason is very novel and morbus.

all the good ends

In my view always the best things will finish or aren't durable because it's the only way to distinguish pleasure from pain, the happiness of unhappiness.In fact, there are phrases, known by all, such as that the peace requires war. Because one would not exist without the other. Well in this case the true happiness or pleasure don't exist or we don't will know to distinguish the absence without the opposite sentiment.

Once exposed this, linking ideas, I arise the same way as Nietzsche, if necessary suffer the pain, failure or feel unhappy and then after this period find the inner peace and happiness. For instance a man might pass by a failure at work. But then once he learned the lesson and the tricks for that it can't happen again, you can improve on a personal and working level. Moreover as I said before we find that the good feel can't last forever. We have to give way to another stage.

In short say that if we apply this philosophy, perhaps we can be happier and improve as individuals. tries to think it.

real women have curves ;)

I really hate the people who thinks that beauty is in the thinness,stay in size 32 and in the flat stomach.Because I think that this is a error for two reasons.

For one hand because is clear that isn't good for health wanting to be always thin. The fact of wanting to have a good body, a small size of jeans, entails to being obsessed with diets and weight.And in extreme cases to anorexia.

For the other hand say that, we must take into account, as a society, that fashion is a very important factor in this issue, and today, virtually in any topic. nowadays for be fashion, and be cool do you have to dress well and especially be thin. The women 10 in XXI century is 60 - 90 - 60. As a result the faishon and for be a good look do you have to be a barbie.

In fact to explain my views on this controversial topic that this is an absurd fashion. In the 50 women had more body volume and was totally different to the women of today, however, remain a important sex icon of our times. . So do not worry about what you eat. Remember real women have curves.

funny games

Funny Games, this is called, with irony,the spectacular but painful, Miachel Haneke's film.

The film start with the story of a family that falls into the hands of two sick guys. There have been many other films that dealt with this issue especially in the 70 and 80 (the last house on the left for example).The novelty is that Haneke did a film like a documentary . The movie is not a horror film , is a faithful portrait of a nightmare. A nightmare more disturbing than any horror film because the tone and the documentary doesn't leave exit of the agonizing to the viewer.

The insane style of Haneke and his morbid desire to cause revulsion in the viewer is truly remarkable. him psychopaths were the most disgusting thing that I have seen on a screen in my life, not because they are evil but because they are repulsive in their politic manners and their control. We all know that the character of Hannibal Lecter is a psychopath, but in somehow we made a sympathetic character. But the psychopaths of Funny games are simply horrible.Like the sick guys play with their victims, Haneke plays with the viewer and . He propose the game to guess if you can see the whole movie.. The director is identified with the villain's role and torture ourselves. Interesting point of view.

different, painful, really shocking, but very well designed and interpreted.I think it's a great film because it manages to make you feel just as bad that the victims of the screen and that you finally hate the two sick guys who want begin this macabre game.For these reasons I think that this one is a good film .Because it makes you believe all the things that happened in the screen and you feel the same as the actors with whom you identify.

funny games guys ;)

all we have different friends and all between them, with their flaws and their virtues, with their distinctive features that make them unique.

enjoy your friends ;)

family guy

I really enjoy this tv program. But especially because every character has her own personaluty, and this is very specific and is very funny too. My favorite character is Brian, the dog. simply because Brian is absolutely faithful yet to Peter is still a complete idiot. Brian is also intelligent and sophisticated.it's funny because in this picture you can see that the face of all the characters are a summary of his normaly attitude.

be a leader

the men always have needed a reference for almost all the groups that make up society.In the family, in politics in the country... We believe that we have to have a leader to guide us, that impose us rules or that he will punish us.because in this way we have a sense of order and security . However this statement has implied som econditions.

first the leadership is a talent scarce. The problem is that not everyone is able to steer or govern, but the worst part is that those who are trained to do this, not apply the appropriate rules for everyone.it is also important to have a moral right very clear and equals for everyone. Plato have already referred to all this. He thought that the clever one had to follow a strict education i have a very high knowledge. For this is important that the person who is command of many people, know well the terrain.

Secondly, we have already seen that the conditions aren't easy . And that the leader has advantages but that involves also a great responsavilidad. a person like us, if do a mistake, will be punished by law. ¿But what happens if a leader makes a mistake?

In my opinion be a good leader is very complicated and subjective.I'm only sure that the law that applies has to be good for everyone. without distinction between men and women. Importantly,know divide the cake among all.