x

SVT Play: All Systems Operational Normally

Watch Online The Times of Bill Cunningham

Watch
4K Watch Movie
Start your 30-day free trial

Download
Magnet

Download
Torrent

(193) 6.4 74 min 2018

The Times of Bill Cunningham is a movie starring Bill Cunningham and Sarah Jessica Parker. A new feature film documentary about legendary NYTimes photographer Bill Cunningham.

Starring: Sarah Jessica Parker, Bill Cunningham

Genres: Documentary

Director: Mark Bozek

x

Disclaimer: This site does not store any files.

Product details

Audio
Subtitles
Quality	480p, 720p, 1080p, 2K, 4K
Genres	Documentary
Director	Mark Bozek
Writer	Mark Bozek
Stars	Sarah Jessica Parker, Bill Cunningham
Country	USA
Also Known As	The Times of Bill
Runtime	1H 14M
Description	A new feature film documentary about legendary NYTimes photographer Bill Cunningham.

Download documentary «The Times of Bill Cunningham»

Blu-ray
13.27 GB

Windows
4.97 GB

Customers who watched «The Times of Bill Cunningham» also watched

16 customer reviews about «The Times of Bill Cunningham»

3.5 out of 5 stars

Top reviews

Katherine Fields

Tuesday, 22 Sep 2020 23:37

I really wanted to like this film, so I was relieved when I read the comments, and heard from friends that it was a 'hate' film. And I can see why. I am glad that someone told the truth about this film. It is a story that has been told many times. It is an easy film to hate. I actually think the way the film was presented was correct. If you haven't seen it, go to the library and pick up a copy. There's some great stuff on there, from the famous 'Richest man in the World' segment. Not everyone will like the documentary style, but if you watch it with an open mind, you will be surprised at what you find. And if you want a short film, go to a friend's house. You'll be glad you did. The real answer to the question 'How is Bill Cunningham?' is 'who cares?'

Thursday, 17 Sep 2020 02:24

No doubt, Brian Eno's music for Ruhrmann, particularly his early work is the soundtrack for this film. Rufus Wainwright tells us that Eno often used his original compositions for the film soundtrack. We see, however, that Eno used them in the interviews, and so the film, taken as a whole, is a documentary, not an experience in music or film-making. It is more or less a set of interview excerpts taken from Eno's life, with an autobiographical narrative just to give an idea of how he made it. It is like taking a period in an artist's life, and then following it from that point, even if we know nothing about it. This is true, of course, of any biographical film. I have to admit that I thought it was really interesting how Eno himself describes himself in his interviews and the way he uses the phrases in the film. He has never been very straightforward in his writing, but there are certainly times in which this is done very well. But, generally speaking, the film is little more than a set of interview excerpts. You won't be disappointed. The documentary films all of the Eno films that have been made, so if you like these, you will probably like the ones shown here, too. (It may be worth noting that the interviews are not really taken from Eno's works, they are taken from other sources. I assume that this was done to maintain the "artist/researcher" aspect of the documentary.)

Sunday, 13 Sep 2020 13:42

I have been following the American documentary movie industry for a long time and have learned a lot about what they are doing. I am a bit surprised that they are not making more movies about this subject. I was a little bit shocked to hear that they are not making any new films about the history of the AIDS epidemic. I know that the CDC is trying to stop this from happening. But I hope that there are more documentaries coming out about this topic. This movie was very informative, especially about how the history of the AIDS epidemic is made up. I think that the information provided in this movie is very accurate. The subject matter was also very interesting, even though it is a bit of a sketchy subject. I think that it was very well done, and I am glad that they made a movie about this subject. I am surprised that they did not make a movie about this topic about the 60s and 70s. I think that this movie was very informative, and I think that it is very interesting. I think that there are a lot of documentaries that are not made about this topic, and I think that there should be more documentaries about this subject. I am glad that they are making this movie, and I hope that there will be more documentaries about this subject. I have a friend who is a doctor, and he is very knowledgeable about this topic, and he thinks that there is a lot of information that the public needs to know about this topic.

Sunday, 13 Sep 2020 08:21

I must say, that this movie is a real eye-opener. I never thought that a movie like this could come out. I always felt that movies like this were nothing more than some guys telling us how great movies are, and how we should see them. I saw it with my wife and we both were impressed. The movie is so different from the ones that you usually see. I do not know if it was the director, but the characters are so real that I really felt the emotions of the people that they were talking about. It was so real. I think it is a very important movie. I think it shows what is really important in life, and how the movie industry has changed. I am not a big fan of movies like this, but this movie really opened my eyes to what movies are really about.

Alexander Harper

Thursday, 10 Sep 2020 10:09

Following the recent opening of the Auschwitz Museum in Paris, the documentary "Lettre de Ville (Before the Cave)" (Under the Cross) shows the interrelationships among the different groups of the former camp. The documentary is mostly devoted to the history of Jewish prisoners. The technical conditions of the camp are shown in a realistic way, and even more important, the modern times are presented. The other big story is the history of the prisoners themselves. They are all interviewed individually and they are interviewed more than once. This is not only a means of ensuring that there is a strong continuity between each segment of the documentary but also to make them more accessible to the audience. It is a chance to look in depth into the entire story of a complex history, of which the museum was not the main focus. We hear their stories as if they are part of a documentary. With this approach, the documentary ends up to be as much a part of the history as the historical documents themselves. It is like an appendix to the documents, which form the basis of the history itself.

Tuesday, 08 Sep 2020 07:50

This is a must-see, so don't miss it. This is not the kind of documentary you would expect to be in the traditional sense of the word, but it is an enlightening documentary and perhaps a good bit of good humoured entertainment. They talk about it, and try to explain to the viewer the reasons why they like the movie. I personally found the film entertaining. I felt that the film makers were not entirely forthcoming in their explanation of how the movie was made, but that is perhaps due to the fact that the film makers have not made a movie before. They went through a long time to make the film, and they made a lot of mistakes along the way, but it did pay off. If you are a fan of the original, or are not an expert, this is a great opportunity to learn more about the history of the movie. My rating: 7 out of 10.

Tuesday, 11 Aug 2020 07:46

A long time ago, a man named Bill Cunningham (and his wife) met in London. They married and soon moved to Australia, and a very memorable meeting was happening. One of the couple's friends asked him to write about the romance. It wasn't a traditional story of the couple meeting in London. Instead it was a story of the couple meeting in Australia. After years of life in Australia, it was time to return to the UK. With her, Cunningham brought the love and companionship of home. This movie is about their reunion and a bit of a tell-all, but it was a very nice watch.

Monday, 06 Jul 2020 08:10

This documentary covers the transition from the security class of the school to the security of the school and the war between the different elements that developed and have shaped the school. The story of the age-old conflict between the faculty and the students in the school. By this time the school is surrounded by a huge wall and the great struggles between the two elements. The people behind the walls and the people who fight for their survival. From the transition of the teachers from the students, to the teachers and the students battling for their life. This documentary covers the struggle of the teachers in a school with an almost closed wall that makes it impossible to talk about anything that can be dangerous. The film was made by Kyle Gass and the father of the student who is being sued by the school. The director was Kyle Gass, the producer was Nicole Casey, the cinematographer was Corey Waddell, the editor was Nate Sorenson and the music was completed by Zac. The music was composed by Nate Sorenson and the film was shot in Brooklyn, New York. This film was shot with an off-camera and a video camera. The documentary was edited by Nicole Casey, who was the music editor. The actors were composed by Ryan Van Dyke, who was the producer, the director was David Lamb, and the executive producer was Mike Mills. This film was filmed in June 2012. I think you should check out the documentary. I recommend you to watch this documentary as well as The Sun in 2013. I also recommend to watch this documentary because it will give you an idea about the problems of the school and the other students that are in the school and that fight for their life.

Monday, 29 Jun 2020 06:55

I just finished watching this film and I have to say that I was extremely impressed. The cinematography is superb, the actors are very good, and the overall tone of the film is very uplifting. The documentary style of the film is very effective. I can't wait to see what the director does next. I also have to say that the film is very well edited and the photography is great. I highly recommend this film.

Friday, 19 Jun 2020 04:46

Bill Cunningham was one of the foremost photographers in the history of World War II and the Mediterranean theatre. His work in The Times of Bill Cunningham: Triumph of the Will: Taking Our Country Back was a fascinating look at the battle for the hearts and minds of the American people as they swung from one side to the other of the battle over Vietnam. The story, all of which I saw on film, shows how the media coverage was front and center during the Vietnam war and how this influence allowed many of the Americans who were turned off by the war to go along with the war, or in many cases to stand by and do nothing at all. It was this kind of influence on the people's conscience that finally drove this war to a stalemate in which the war came to an end and the media went home. Mr. Cunningham had a political agenda and therefore he pushed the American people to turn to the media for a common cause. The overall result was that for the first time in the history of American warfare, the military press was not the leading voice. They were used to do their jobs and to report on what happened. They didn't push for changes that didn't make sense or were without any value. If a soldier had died because the political press was too weak to report on the facts, then they would have been the first to report the deaths. By the time the press went home, a soldier who was dying was one of the few things that American soldiers cared about. This picture shows that many Americans were unwilling to leave their collective comfort zone and put their lives on the line in order to do something that was not popular with their own party leaders. This picture tells how the American people, and especially those who wanted to become leaders of the world, were blinded by their own political agenda and were blinded by the press' lack of information that was the catalyst for the Vietnam War. Many people would have been happy to go along with the decision if they had a chance to do something positive for their country. To take a different opinion was considered too risky and a risk that did not seem to pay off. If you want to see a good picture about the Vietnam war, see The Times of Bill Cunningham: Triumph of the Will: Taking Our Country Back. I hope that in the future, more films like this are made.

Monday, 08 Jun 2020 08:07

There's not much plot in this little portrait of William Catton's struggles with his alcoholism, alcoholism and what he has become, since he appears to be trying desperately to keep his demons at bay. As with his experiences, so too his wives and others, many of whom either didn't like him or couldn't help themselves. The fascinating thing about this book, despite the seriousness with which it was presented, was how effectively it kept me thinking about Bill Cunningham. The man I've grown to love, I still love, but here I was thinking about him, and I was thinking about the people he has left behind. The stories he told me of his life, and the memories they evoke, are extremely rich and really fascinating to me. I want to find out more about William Catton. It's one of the best books I've ever read, and I would love to read more of it. For those of you who didn't get to see the film, I urge you to go see it. It's absolutely fantastic.

Saturday, 06 Jun 2020 05:47

In 1957, a mysterious man came to America to help with a huge project. The project was to be a self-contained community in a small American town in the Midwest. This man, known only as "Bill Cunningham," was the resident physician and he was called by the group leaders to join them. After he joined the group, he became the top physician of the community, earning a lot of respect for the community. At that time, the community seemed to be thriving, but something went wrong. He never knew why he was being held by the government for over three years. He only knew one thing for sure; he had to come out of the program. "I can't help it," he says, "I am stuck in a bureaucratic nightmare that keeps me from spending my days happily with my wife and daughter." While Bill was imprisoned, the officials were afraid he might spread the information to the community. This movie tells the story of what happened to him in prison. The narration is in Swedish, and it is pretty hard to understand at times, but it is easy to understand what is going on. Most of the events that were shown in the film happened in 1967, the year the movie was made. The director was Tony Curran, who had previously directed three movies, "The Black Panther," "Shame," and "Carnage." Also, Curran's brother James, who was also the editor of the film, worked on the movie as well. His other brother Bill Jr. has a smaller part in the movie and that was to explain to viewers how the two brothers came to be related to each other. In this movie, the film maker gives a little history of the Swedish immigrants and the history of the communities that they formed in Sweden. When watching this movie, the audiences can see that Sweden was a very progressive country, and the history of the past generations is shown in the film. I personally think that the story of the Swedish people is very different than the people in America. I think that this movie really shows the difference of peoples in Sweden compared to the American people. I think that the people in the US are generally more prosperous than the people in Sweden. However, the history of the Swedish people is still very interesting to see.

Monday, 01 Jun 2020 15:52

I've read all of the reviews of this movie, and I am struck by the common problem: the movie was made to bring some closure to people who didn't want to see it. What this movie does is remind people that they can do something, and don't have to live vicariously through another person. It reminds people that this wasn't just a story of "one person's journey." It was an incredibly honest look into the struggles of a single mom. I found it compelling, thought-provoking, and inspirational. I am proud to have such a passionate and talented woman speak so openly about the challenges of having a young daughter in a city with few resources. The part where Ms. Cunningham talks about having to adapt to the change in housing was the most emotionally powerful. It's an emotional reminder that people are good people. Some of them can't adapt, and the one-percenter kid has to go on the path of self-destruction. That's the movie's message, and that's what this movie was trying to say.

Sunday, 26 Apr 2020 13:57

The film "The Times of Bill Cunningham" has many redeeming qualities, but it falls short of its ideal of a nice documentary. If there was a single highlight to this film, it would have to be the interviews with leading medical and science journalists and scientists. Though the film is well-made, it seems like the producers have not fully explored the medical science involved. If they had, they would have found that many of the journalists' and scientists' responses and comments in the film are incorrect. In addition, it would have helped the film to provide additional background information on some of the scientists and medical journalists. "The Times of Bill Cunningham" is essentially a collection of interviews, many of which are not actually about the topic of the film, but rather about the "science" of the scientists themselves, particularly Bill Cunningham and the theories of his research. For example, interviews with science journalist David Condon provide an opportunity to discuss a topic that is not specifically related to the subjects in the film, such as his commentary on the belief that "absence of evidence is evidence of absence." In fact, this movie is so underdeveloped that it does not provide an explanation of his views. Other examples of the deficiencies in the movie include the film's overuse of the word "propaganda," which is often used by some scientists as an insult. The use of the term is inaccurate and simply wrong. In addition, the film does not present much evidence to support the claims made by some scientists in its interviewees. In other words, some of the scientists interviewed are not even scientists, as we learn through their responses. The science contained in the film is flawed and is not supported by the science presented. Also, it is not clear to me how a scientist is supposed to know how to pronounce the phrase "religious-based illnesses," as the scientist's answers are not given. One example of a scientific point that was not properly presented was the point that you should try to evaluate the scientific evidence based on its own merits, which is presented in the film. Scientific evidence should be evaluated on its own merits, not on the basis of how it was presented in the film. Furthermore, the scientific evidence presented in the film is not particularly useful to someone interested in the topic. For example, the film shows that a genetic test for "the sick" can be more useful in identifying a predisposition to an illness, than it can be in predicting the outcome of the illness. However, this is not actually a scientific point because the genetic test can't be used to predict the outcome of a disease. This is a common mistake made by medical researchers, and it can be very confusing for the audience. Lastly, the lack of supporting scientific evidence was an oversight. One example of a scientific point that was not properly presented was the "mistake" of the origin of the skeleton. The filmmakers present the issue of the origin of the skeleton as an important scientific question that was originally posed by one of the scientists. However, the "discovery" of the skeleton was a scientific problem that was present in many of the scientific articles. Thus, this statement is not true. While the bone is undeniably skeletal, the scientists were not trying to explain away the apparent skeleton of a mouse that might have been created by the scientists by "a miracle." There is no magic that is "given" to the bones. Rather, these bones were being dug up by scientists, but were not being "treated" as "mysterious" bones because of the process. Rather, the bones were being excavated from a graveyard. The bones were not treated as "mysterious" bones because of their "surprising" and "lucky" nature. Lastly, the film states that "Christian Science practitioners aren't inherently evil." While there are certainly a few members of the Christian Science community who have been involved in acts of religious-based abuse, this statement is inaccurate. Many Christian Science practitioners are not Christian Scientists, and some of the Christian Scientists who are involved in acts of religious-based abuse were just practicing their faith. For example, many Christian Scientists who are involved in such practices are simply practicing their faith in a more peaceful way than that typically practiced by those Christian Scientists who are not involved in such practices. There are also Christian Scientists who engage in activities that may be legal and socially acceptable in certain Christian Communities, but are not acceptable in Christian Science communities. There are a number of Christian Scientists who engage in activities that are socially unacceptable and who are not Christian Scientists, such as practicing religion in a more socially unacceptable way. Some

Saturday, 25 Apr 2020 09:31

We were living in Harlem on Thanksgiving Day and after having heard nothing about the film we had been looking forward to seeing it. What a waste. The only thing the director captured in this movie were two friends. The film was boring and nothing more. The story was almost non existent. The camera shots are cheesy. Most of the time the director uses a purple filter on the camera to take you into the mood of the scene, but in this movie the filters look wrong and it makes you sick. The story seemed like a small effort to get some ad revenue. A great name for the filmmaker. What a waste of a fantastic documentary.

Johnny Reynolds

Saturday, 25 Apr 2020 08:23

This documentary tells the story of Bill Cunningham, a man who was diagnosed with HIV in 1985. He lived with the disease for the next 22 years. His life was a lonely one, and he was in constant pain. He was in a wheelchair, and his skin was slowly deteriorating. In 1988, he was given a chance at life when he was diagnosed with AIDS. This documentary tells the story of how he made the decision to give up his life. It's a powerful story, and one that needs to be told.

See all 16 reviews

Write a review