Disclaimer: This site does not store any files on its server.

Watch McQueen

McQueen is a movie starring Bernard Arnault, Joseph Bennett, and Detmar Blow. The life and career of fashion designer Lee Alexander McQueen: from his start as a tailor, to launching and overseeing his eponymous line and his untimely...

Genres
Documentary, Biography
Director
Peter Ettedgui, Ian Bonhôte
Starring
Bernard Arnault, Joseph Bennett, Isabella Blow, Detmar Blow

All Systems Operational

Product details

Genres Documentary, Biography
Director Peter Ettedgui, Ian Bonhôte
Writer Peter Ettedgui
Stars Bernard Arnault, Joseph Bennett, Isabella Blow, Detmar Blow
Country UK
Also Known As 時尚鬼才:McQueen, マックイーン モードの反逆児, McQueen, modets enfent terrible, Alexander McQueen - Der Film, McQueen: Muodin kauhukakara, Alexander McQueen - Il genio della moda, Alexander McQueen
Runtime 1 h 51 min
Audio Português  English  Deutsch  Italiano  Español  Français  Gaeilge  Svenska  Nederlands
Subtitles Português  日本語  Čeština  Australia  한국어  Filipino  Tiếng Việt  हिन्दी 
Quality 480p, 720p, 1080p, 2K, 4K
Description デビッド・ボウイやレディー・ガガといったアーティストをはじめ、キャサリン妃にも愛されたファッションデザイナー、アレキサンダー・マックイーンのドラマティックな生涯を追ったドキュメンタリー。1969年にロンドンの労働者階級に生まれ、23歳で失業保険を資金にファッションデザイナーとしてデビューしたマックイーンは、27歳の若さでジバンシィのデザイナーに大抜擢される。自身のブランドで展開した過激なショーから「モードの反逆児」と呼ばれる一方、ボウイやガガなどの衣装、ビョークのMV監督、プーマやティム・バートンとのコラボなど精力的に活動を展開し、34歳で大英帝国勲章を授与される。しかし、成功の絶頂の中で2010年に40歳の若さで自ら命を断ってしまう。マックイーンの波乱に満ちた人生を友人や家族たちのインタビュー、発掘されたファッションアーカイブなどから迫っていく。マックイーンの友人でもあったマイケル・ナイマンが音楽を担当。

Top reviews

Friday, 25 Sep 2020 02:29

When you're looking for a great overview of the effects of violence on children and teens in the world, you should always go to a documentary. To be honest, I really wasn't looking for a documentary at all. I've been around in the world for quite a while and know enough people to do some basic research and find out what their life is like. I got this DVD because my wife loves to read and likes documentaries so she bought it. What a waste of money! It had all the cliches of a good documentary, none of the information you really need to know for yourself. We were supposed to learn about how women are raped and even the punishment. Yet it only showed one single person being punished for something she didn't do. The pictures and videos were pretty good and the experience of watching this DVD wasn't bad. The biggest mistake they made was the idea of showing only one person. There is too much evidence to show that. That alone would have given a better documentary. Overall, this was a terrible documentary for me, and I'm a very open minded person. The only thing I really didn't like about this DVD was that it could have shown more information on violence in the world. That was all the information I really wanted to know about. It was pretty sad that they wanted to show only one person being punished for something that she didn't do. It was also sad that they didn't show the reason why they took the woman in prison. I know that it wasn't for her, but it wasn't really shown. They did mention that she had a history of domestic abuse but I think they could have added something about her history or given more information to show why she was in prison and what happened to her. It would have been better to show that her abuser was trying to use her as a tool to get out of prison. All in all, it was a terrible documentary and a waste of my money.
Sunday, 06 Sep 2020 15:34

The second documentary on the film Lionheart, this one from the director himself. The film's trailer, however, does not show his opinion. We do see him say it, however. The film is a very hard-hitting documentary, not at all a "light-hearted" documentary, but one that deals with the troubled nature of the WWII hero. We hear about his wild rambling, some of his adult days, and his most personal issues. He even says that the film was autobiographical in some way. The film has its weak points. The film doesn't give enough time to address the more negative aspects of the film's production and distribution. We see no indication that the producers were trying to pass off the film as a comedy or a drama. Most of the film is dominated by the old-school footage of the king's escapades. Some of the younger actors were not the best in their performances, but even they are not shown that much. The documentary is not without its positive points, however. Much of the narration is focused on the people, and we see how much they value the film's production. The documentary is very much in the spirit of the original, but does not attempt to do anything that it did not do in the original. There is one interesting piece of footage that is included, however, that was a major plot element in the original, and it was not shown in the documentary. However, the documentary is not without its problems. A lot of the events are based on things that were likely not true. There is also a lot of redaction of interviews, which makes the narration of the film less accessible. It was a mistake to do this, however, because it did not make the film more memorable. There are some strong points that are not shown in the documentary, such as the fight between the actor and his sister. The narration is very brief, however, and we only hear the actor talk about it. There is also some unscripted footage, and this was not good. We did not hear him talk about this part of his life. I am not sure why they chose to do this, because the film was extremely brutal, and the fight was very brutal. We did hear about it, however. The other great points of the documentary are the interviews with the actors. We see them talking about their experiences, and we hear about the issues that were important to them. It was an interesting experience. We see a lot of personal aspects of the film, such as the difficulties the actor had dealing with the Nazi-crimes that he experienced in his youth. We also see some of the artistic side of the film, and how it was portrayed in some ways. Some of the scenes are very strong, and made me almost physically ill. We hear the story of how the actor came to be in the film, and we hear the story of how the director decided to bring it to fruition. We hear the personal reasons of the actors that motivated them to be in the film. The one major criticism that is made in this documentary is that the film was edited. This was a minor complaint, and one that was made by the director himself. The editing is all here, from the soundtrack to the narration, and this made the film very easy to follow. Some of the editing may have been intentional, but not for the sake of it. The editing is here, and the editing does not bother the viewer, because the story is told in an almost documentary-like way. If you enjoy films like Saving Private Ryan or "Saving Private Ryan," then this documentary is definitely for you. But, if you are looking for something else, then this documentary is not for you.
Sunday, 30 Aug 2020 23:32

Once again, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences and the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences have scored themselves another check for having no discernible style or sensibility. Sometimes a film is absolutely essential and this is one of them. It is certainly a good film that seems to be on the verge of being something very special, but in my view it falls short of being anything approaching a "must see" and probably best ignored. Even though the film is essentially about the organization of the film industry it is also quite focused on the very core of the story. It is a tragic story but it is also a tale of a band of merry men trying to rescue a dying woman from an abusive husband and the disintegration of the American system of music production and distribution. It's a story of film making as well as of Hollywood, and the people involved in the film industry. The film opens with a section in which the two heroes are hired by a gentleman to set up a camera in the home of his sister's fiancee in order to give her a retrospective of her life. She is, in fact, the only member of the family with any love of music. The fiancee is a flamboyant woman who prances around the house in a long dress and sings in a mocking voice. Her husband has been away for a long time and she is desperate for a professional. The fiancee's father has become a formidable figure in the film industry and she is beginning to lose hope in life. The woman who is hired is a "pro" whose expertise is in the art of photo-editing films and managing sound. He is a film historian who apparently has no interest in the arts or in film at all. The man who hires the two men is a veteran film critic. He is fascinated by film and is not bothered by the fact that the men have to leave their usual professional lives behind and abandon their homes and families for the pleasure of the subject matter. He is dismissive of the men's love of the arts and their desire to save the film from commercial failure. He asks, "What is there about film that should be preserved? Why are there films worth saving?" He concludes his comments by saying, "If you're going to tell a story about film, you have to tell a good story." This is a really great example of the fear that the film industry has of it's customers. The "pros" are said to have a good deal of money and don't even think of losing it. This is how the film industry functions. Most of the films are obviously failures, but it is a good story that the people involved love. We hear how important film is and the film business is all about the art of film-making. It is just a business, but it is a good story that the people involved love. It is always difficult to find the film that matters. The question is, what is the story that matters? We see the play "The Picture of Dorian Gray" in which Dorian Gray has to live with the horrible fate of a rude doctor who has him repeatedly "purged" (lifted from his bed and given a potion that will remove his pain), and yet he still shows his anger and anger in spite of it all. The "pros" manage to make a fine film, but the story that matters is that Dorian Gray, being a man with no family and no love, must go through a terrible experience to escape a terrible fate. The story is that Dorian Gray must be saved from himself. He must overcome his pain. He must rise above his past. He must be his best. He must rise to the level of his brother. He must be the best film maker in the world. We are never told why he is supposed to have a story to tell, but we see that he has something that the film industry doesn't have. The story he has is a story of being a man with no friends, a man who has no family, a man who has no money, and no power. The film maker is his brother. His brother's story is the story of how he has succeeded at every level of the film industry. The story of his life is the story of his ability to make good films. His brother's story is the story of how he has been able to make the best films in the world. We see the brothers and their various ways to get the best out of the film. The brother of the film maker is always polite and gracious, but his brother is never just nice. He always makes the film and he always gets the best out of it. The
Saturday, 22 Aug 2020 14:29

So a while ago I wrote about how I loved Queen for many reasons, the film, the music, the clothes, and the music. With that out of the way I am now going to discuss why I loved this film so much. I've been a fan of Queen for most of my life, and my love for Queen is strong and unquestionable. Not that I haven't always appreciated it, but I don't feel like there's a limit to it. Now that I've explained my love, I'm going to give a brief history of Queen. The film itself is a very telling and honest account of Queen's history, as well as the film. Queen had a very rich history, and I felt this was an excellent way to tell it. The film begins when Queen was still young and pretty, with a husband and a baby. The film follows Queen and her friends, their family and everything about their lives, from the movies, to the music, to the clothes. There are a lot of documentaries out there about Queen, and I felt this was a great way to cover a lot of the subjects covered in documentaries. When I say Queen, I mean Queen, and the film doesn't stop there. There is a lot of music, including some great live performances. There are also some great behind the scenes footage. So, with that said, I felt this was a great way to tell the Queen story, without taking away from the documentary. The music is really the best part of the film. I loved the original soundtrack, which is really a mix of new and old material. It was a great mix of things, the original songs are all great, and the ones from the movie are also great. Some songs are a little more up to date, but overall, it's a great mix. I also loved the interview with Jim Henson. It was a really good way to tell the story, and it was very informative. I'm not really a fan of Britney Spears, but she wasn't a problem for me. I felt she was very sweet, and very talented. I also loved that the documentary didn't dwell on the singer's personal life, and focused on her music. The interview with her father was also really good. He had a lot of interesting stories about his own upbringing. The rest of the film is really good, and shows what a powerful force Queen was in the world. There's a lot of great interviews, and some great music. All of this said, the film was incredibly informative, and could be watched over and over. Overall, I really liked the film, and I would recommend it to anyone who is a fan of Queen. It's a great way to learn about the Queen story, and I felt it was an excellent way to tell the story of Queen.
Saturday, 25 Jul 2020 04:55

After watching "Moonshine Blues" I immediately wanted to see "Clowns". I decided to rent both films and be pleasantly surprised. As the documentary approaches its closing moments, the film's subjects are nearly all dead. They are all dead, long gone, when the movie ended. This documentary does a great job of showing the lives of four people who turned "ghetto" and turned their backs on the average American's in an effort to achieve something better. Each story is different, and the interviews are varied. They are not boring, but they do not provide a solid enough background on each person's story to show a real sense of sympathy. As mentioned before, it is quite the accomplishment to make all these people tell their stories and leave it up to the viewer to decide who they were. Some of the interviews are very deep, and the personal stories are almost unbelievable. I think the film itself should have been a lot longer, to really illustrate their lives and the reasons they left. The film did a very good job of showing the details of each interview. The worst part was the editing. Each interview was pulled into different parts of the film, and then the end was edited out. For me, it was a very big problem. I think the idea of showing the personal stories of these people was great, but the editing was horrible. I was constantly wondering what was going to happen next, and I lost interest. I think a better editing would have helped in this area. Overall, this was a good documentary, but the editing was terrible. It was not nearly as good as it could have been. I am not too sure what the problem was, but I do not think it was in the right place. The documentary does a good job of showing the real motivation for their decision, and they make it clear that the decision was for the best. It does not make the decision seem like the film makers were pushing for that reason. If the editing had been done better, it would have been much better. The documentary is not really about the decision of what was best for the people involved, but rather about the reason they were making the decision. It should have been more about why the decision was made, instead of just showing it. If the film makers had chosen to do that, the result would have been much better.


Write a review