Til Schweiger's "Keinohrhasen" was a massive commercial success in Germany, so of course id did not take too long till they came up with a second movie. The central characters are just like in the first Til Schweiger, Matthias Schweighöfer and Nora Tschirner.I thought the film started very weak with humor on great breast size and farting in people's faces, but as it went on, it got better. It never reached the level of the first movie, but all in all it's a decent outcome. There is some male-female discussion about shoes which reminded me of Loriot the way it was written. In the first film, Jürgen Vogel played himself in a cameo and here in this movie, Heiner Lauterbach and Uwe Ochsenknecht, two of Germany's most known actors over 55 play small, but funny roles.While the first film was about Schweiger's and Tschirner's characters getting together, this film is about struggles they are facing during everyday life, especially as former partners of them enter the picture. Then there is a sub-plot with Schweighöfer's character which walked the fine line between funny and cringeworthy and occasionally even crossed it for worse. The ending of this 2-hour-film was one of its weaknesses in my opinion. First of all, the fact that they sleep with their exes at exactly the same time felt weird to me and the harmonic ending seemed just rushed in and included for the sake of it. It was extremely cheesy.There is lots of music in this one, but the only kinda memorable song for me was "This Is The Life" by Amy McDonald. It was not as successful as the first, but still became the 6th most lucrative film at the box office in 2009 and number 2 if you only count German films. As a whole, I recommend "Zweiohrküken" (chicken with two ears) to people who enjoyed "Keinohrhasen" ("rabbits with no ears"). Just like its prequel, it was written and directed by Anika Decker (who has the same name like the central character) and Schweiger himself, who also directed it again. We'll see if they ever make a third one. If they do, i just hope the decrease in quality won't continue. The only thing better than the first is that Alwara Höfels (one of the biggest weaknesses of "Keinohrhasen") is pretty much nonexistent in this sequel.
Prick Up Your Ears is a 1987 British film, directed by Stephen Frears, about the playwright Joe Orton and his lover Kenneth Halliwell. The screenplay was written by Alan Bennett, based on the 1978 biography by John Lahr. The film stars Gary Oldman as Orton, Alfred Molina as Halliwell, Wallace Shawn as Lahr, and Vanessa Redgrave as Peggy Ramsay.
Film Rabbit Without Ears Torrent
When on the Moon, they drop their emotionless facade, talking and acting in a human fashion like the Gems or Admirabilis. It is revealed that they do not talk or breathe on the Land as the thick air is reminiscent of unpleasant things from their past. Their appearance also changes - they have visible pupils and irises, wear their hair down, and also have parts resembling small rabbit ears on the top of their heads.
The Lunarians have been attacking and kidnapping the Gems for thousands of years. They seem to treat the Gems without concern as mere objects to be used for their own purposes, whether using them as decorations or grinding them into dust to be spread over the Moon. When Phos was on the Moon, they encountered several Lunarians who wanted to break them for the fun of it.
Well said, Stella. During my lifetime, (I'm an Octogenarian), I've been refused Communion because I'm not (Roman) Catholic, not Orthodox; and am not 'saved' and destined for he'll. I have read much. Jesus was Jewish; His vision was for a revitalisd society or community called, in a pre- scientific age---The Kingdom of God/Heaven; it is not a place, but a state of graceful living...read Luke 17v20-21. It is Not about belief....except as 'Trust, or confidence in', but ABOUT HOW ONE LIVES IN RELATIONSHIP with one's fellow human beings.....perhaps see the Sermon on the Mount, Matthew 5-7; if one followed that for starters , fewer wars, endless law-suits, revenge, the need for food-banks, etc; lack/ denial of medi-care, etc etc might be reduced considerably. Belief is cheap. Action is costly. Jesus lost his life because he had integrity to follow his vision to the end. All scripture bears the fallible imprint of human editors. Christian history shows that it is an accretion of doctrinal concepts..doctrines are concepts. St. Paul wrote letters to house assemblies encouraging them how to act differently than the "standard" accepted in the Greco-Roman world around them. He wasn't writing scripture for the world I live in. Is 'God' so bigoted that 'he' would damn my gentle zen Buddhist friends to hell-fire because they don't believe as fact some refined concept about who Jesus really is....or isn't according to pastor X, Y, Z? For most of the West, God lives in a particular street in New York. The scriptures that lift their their hearts and spirits or make them flag or sink to the depths of despair are published each day in the world's papers, or on BBCs Business News ....there's difference between saying "Lord, Lord, we believe the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father only, and not the Son,....or from both, as the 'opposition' believes; ...and actually just putting your hands into both pockets and emptying them or your wallet without reservation to help rectify social injustice to make Jesus' Kingdom of God appear here. There is no Pro.ised Land, save in the journeyinand doing. As a famous woman Saint admonished: Christ has no body now except yours, You are his eyes, ears, mind hands and feet.....just get on with it! Stop worrying about whether Richard Rohr is destined for your imagined hell and damnation.
The problem I have with Richard Rohr's theology is exactly the problem I have with Rene Girard's. (I admire Girard to no end, a genius residing in love, a kind and gentle man, and he responded to this concern in a personal letter).The problem is the rejection of the Doctrine of Atonement. And I'm convinced many theologians reject this doctrine because they were too heavily influenced by Calvin's understanding that Satan was holding us captive in his devices and would not set us free unless Jesus paid a ransom. This is NOT the Catholic understanding. As St. John Paul II affirmed, we have individual guilt and collective guilt. Living in an age of radical, solipsistic autonomy (not relational-interconnected-autonomy, a Jewish-Catholic understanding) we have become blind to our collective guilt, historically referred to as "sinning in Adam". This means we are living in a monstrosity of sin, a collective sin, what Catholic teaching calls Original Sin, what Rohr, with Mathew Fox, also rejects. This means they have no depth-understanding of what this collective sin is made up of, how century after century a collective rebellion against God is always fomenting in this ever-expanded image and likeness of Cain, a collective human willfulness made obvious in fascism and communism in the 20th century, and how quickly we have forgotten how many Catholic theologians, philosophers, priests and nuns supported communism and fascism for so many decades, even while Stalin was intentionally starving millions of Ukrainians. It always amazes how multitudes of good people gravitate towards this ever-expanding monstrosity, as if wanting to know at some subconscious level, to experience this monstrosity in some form, to know ourselves that well in our rebellion, to see the Karma hanging over our heads, seeing how we sentenced ourselves to torture, murder and annihilation.And after the Fall, our mathematically grounded universe reveals to us that Karma is endemic to the universal human condition. It was Margaret Mead, I believe, who spent many years attempting to find what is universal in every human culture. It wasn't much, but Karma was first on the list. It's expressed in many different forms ("What goes around comes around", etc.) but it signifies this mysterious form of collective guilt that accumulates organically throughout human history because not one of us humans is separate from all other humans: we are all descended from Adam (Man & Woman) who became after their Fall Adam and Eve, divided, not whole, now and in the past and in the future, taking on this collective guilt that keeps expanding historically in our second to second experiences, making possible in the 20th century fascism and communism, demonic systems, obviously just another of Cain's many Babylons down through the centuries.And finally, God is not angry at us and demanding that his son suffer and die for the debt we owe him or the devil. The debt is a Karmic Debt we owe to ourselves in separating from God, our own logic, our own moral, massive death sentences on ourselves and others, persisting in our own moral and ethical constructs, rejecting the Father's willful ways, choosing not to be enslaved to any Other's way outside our own creations. And so it is that in the humanly constructed realm of humanity's cause & effect moral systems (Babylons of Meaning) discerned with the power of the juice from the fruit flowing through our veins, Karma becomes not God's way, but our own moral cause and effect empires generated-by-the-juice ways, what we intrinsically demand punishment for in our own worldly moral constructs established by our own senses inside our own moral systems, and why we torture, murder and annihilate each other constantly, the karmic trap we CHOSE when we decided to reject God's way and turned to Cain for guidance in constructing our own utopias with our own moral systems generated by the juice.This is what Jesus paid the price for. Not to free us from the wrath of God or Satan. But to save us from the wrath of ourselves, a pure gift, a gift we cannot do without. And look how Rohr rejects it with the same adamancy as Mathew Fox and so many others still lacking in wisdom, and thus not able to grasp the mysterious Doctrine of the Atonement.
2ff7e9595c
Comments