SVT Play: All Systems Operational Normally

Watch Online Les quatre soeurs

(275) 8.1 273 min 2018

Les quatre soeurs is a TV series starring Claude Lanzmann, Paula Biren, and Ruth Elias. Four interviews done in the 1970s with women who survived the Holocaust.

Starring
Claude Lanzmann, Ruth Elias, Ada Lichtman, Paula Biren
Genres
Documentary, History

Disclaimer: This site does not store any files.

Product details

Audio English  Deutsch  Italiano  Español  Français  Gaeilge  Svenska  Nederlands
Subtitles 日本語  Čeština  Português  Australia  한국어  Filipino  Tiếng Việt  हिन्दी 
Quality 480p, 720p, 1080p, 2K, 4K
Genres Documentary, History
Stars Claude Lanzmann, Ruth Elias, Ada Lichtman, Paula Biren
Country France
Also Known As Vier Schwestern, The Four Sisters, Shoah: Four Sisters
Runtime 4H 33M
Description Four interviews done in the 1970s with women who survived the Holocaust.

Top reviews

Tuesday, 04 Aug 2020 10:54

The 2007 documentary "Scars of War" looks at the images of the events of September 11, 2001. Though it doesn't examine the various efforts to respond to the attacks, the film does examine the present day crisis. It also gives us a behind-the-scenes look at the White House and what was going on at the time. It does a good job of telling the story of the government response, from the first planes to the president. There is also a lot of footage of the details that were included in the final report from the 9/11 Commission. One of the most powerful and disturbing scenes is when George W. Bush is talking about the anthrax attacks. He speaks about how they're sending troops to anthrax hot spots. "The anthrax attacks will be treated as the acts of a madman," Bush says. "We're not going to deny them the legitimacy that they deserve." It was a wise decision to send troops. I know many people are quick to dismiss this as a far-left attempt to attack Bush. The White House certainly has a lot to answer for. They should have sent troops, but they didn't. The other film is "The Drowning of Thomas Wilson," a documentary that looks at how the CIA handled the investigation of Thomas Wilson, a man who had connections to terrorists. The film comes out in December and it is one that is likely to be controversial. The documentary does a great job of trying to show that the CIA really didn't do the best job of doing their job, in a lot of ways. It goes into detail of what went wrong with the investigation and the way that the CIA handled it. They also talk about the questions surrounding the CIA's involvement in the Anthrax attacks and the investigation. What is very interesting is that many of the questions the CIA is facing are the same questions that the Bush administration faces. Bush is being questioned about the campaign to kill Osama bin Laden. Bush claims that he can't answer questions about who was in charge of the campaign because there is a classified investigation. In the "Drowning of Thomas Wilson," the CIA is even confronted with questions about whether they were ever sure about the accuracy of the intelligence about the bin Laden. The CIA is also facing questions about whether they have the capability to capture the man who was responsible for the Anthrax attacks. The CIA has also been criticized for using torture techniques to interrogate suspects. The story doesn't necessarily come from a bias one way or the other. Many of the questions that the CIA is facing are being confronted by members of the media and it's easy to see why. I'd like to see more documentaries about these issues. It's good to know that there are people who are willing to say what they think. "Scars of War" is a good documentary and there is nothing wrong with it. It's very informative and it really gives you an idea of what the military was going through on September 11, 2001.
Saturday, 18 Jul 2020 07:30

Many of the reasons for using the term "terrorist" include the action taken to make terrorism appear acceptable, and thus the violence and terror associated with it are depicted. However, not all of these reasons are legitimate. This film gives us an overview of some of the more extreme forms of terrorism, and considers the questions "Why do we use terrorism?" and "How do we know that terrorism is terrorism?". It discusses three main factors that contribute to its use. These are: 1) Intimidation; 2) Hijacking; and 3) "Willful Acts of Terrorism". It notes that "willing acts of terrorism" are "much more common" than "willful acts of terrorism", but that the FBI "wanted to do so, but it was never really possible" due to the government "sudden changes in attitude" and "dramatic change in the law". It notes that the introduction of the Patriot Act and Patriot Act 2.0 "helped the FBI to get a legal basis to use terrorism as an investigative tool". The film also mentions that "there are some 'true terrorists' in the U.S. Government who are really involved in terrorism", but that there are also some "false terrorists". These are only a few of the many examples of the types of terrorist acts discussed in the film. It briefly mentions some recent terrorist acts such as the Oklahoma City Bombing and the World Trade Center Bombing. In addition, it mentions that in many "false terrorist attacks" the motives are the same as the real terrorism - the "lack of action by government leaders" - and that "there is no question that terrorist actions have contributed to a lot of the problems we are seeing today", though that the U.S. is the "most-fortunate country" in its relationship with foreign governments, including the U.K., France, Canada, and the U.S. Al-Qaida and other terrorist groups do not like the Western ideals of democracy and freedom, but they are not opposed to these ideals themselves, just as there are many countries that are not opposed to the political and economic system which has created these problems in their own countries. This is an interesting film that is a good summary of the use of terrorism, though it is not without its problems, and does not account for all the reasons for the use of terrorism. It would have been more interesting to look at the reasons for the use of terrorism - to the extent that it may be justified or to the extent that it is not - but since the film covers a good number of terrorism incidents, it is a useful summary. Overall, I give this film an 8/10, and hope that other people who have not seen it will watch it. It provides a good summary of a topic that many people who have not heard of are interested in and the film does not make the argument that "these terrorists are so evil and so evil acts must be stopped", only that terrorism is a valid tool used by government in the investigation of terrorist incidents, which is still used by many other countries. It also notes that "some of the things that the terrorists are doing and doing well, such as suicide bombings, have been described in academic papers
Wednesday, 01 Jul 2020 04:06

In the 50's, Marie-Therese Thibeau (Jennifer Jason Leigh) is the 20 year old leading lady in an amateur radio band called the Orfèche Revue. In 1972, she and her mother (Catherine Deneuve) travel to West Berlin, where she is allowed to join the German youth radio station. Marie-Therese is soon befriended by Robert de Nazir (Ethan Hawke), the radio personality behind the band. She later joins the radio station's director, Walter van Vechten (Ralph Fiennes), as well as being the voice of the band. Marie-Therese's passion for radio as a medium is expressed in her essays, in which she openly discusses her creative process. Although not always approved by the show's management, Marie-Therese proves to be very loyal to the director. After being rejected from the band, Marie-Therese reluctantly decides to quit, as she realizes the only way she can bring her family back to Germany is to go solo. Directed by Julie Delpy, a Canadian filmmaker, this documentary gives insight into one of the most influential moments in French history. Marie-Therese Thibeau was the leading female voice in the Communist Party's youth radio station during the 70's. As a young woman, she joined the band at the age of 19, which required her to be a member for at least 6 months. As the band's manager, Marie-Therese was required to hand out a program every night of the week and to attend every meeting, despite the restrictions of the group's president, Walter van Vechten (Ralph Fiennes). "In the 50's, France was a Soviet satellite. It was the last country in Europe where you had to be in a union to form a union" said Delpy, who was born and raised in the Parisian suburbs. "It was so far from the civil rights of the middle class. It was the end of the end of the Party". "I felt that radio was an expression of the Left's political thinking", she said. "I was a kid, I saw how radio was a powerful thing. I had no idea that it could be used for communist propaganda. I just didn't understand that." Delpy believes that radio has become the centre of the Communist Party's youth movement and the more they have won, the more they have focused on radio. "Radio was the closest thing to the Party" she said. "It was a place where youth went to express their discontent. It was also a symbol of the Party's power, the ability to control youth". The film is an insight into the social attitudes of France in the early 70's. We see Marie-Therese and the radio crew, in various interviews, talk about the radio station, how radio was a powerful symbol of the revolutionary youth. We see how radio has become a media platform, where the voices of the youth are decided for us. The film is a great visual treat and well made, but the film does not tell the story it should, that is to say, it doesn't give you the real story of what it means to be a radio station leader. The documentary gets
Sunday, 14 Jun 2020 00:42

The documentary tells the story of how French children are treated in a prison and how they manage to find another way of life. It shows the struggle of these children as well as the guards and some of the guards sympathize with the prisoners, but some of them don't. The prisoners receive education, they get respect from the guards, and they make their own decisions in many ways. It shows how children are taught how to adapt to the prison system, and how they manage to find a way to survive in the prison. The guards look on this documentary as a painful thing, but the prisoners see it as an opportunity to live a better life. The guards become more concerned with their own children, but the prisoners don't see it as a problem, but as an opportunity. The documentary has been a good starting point for people to get an understanding of how the prison system works in France. It shows a lot of the things that go on behind the scenes, and how the children are treated, and how the prisoners are treated. It doesn't give a clear picture of what's going on, but it does show a lot of different views on the prison system. It shows that a lot of different views about prison are out there, and it shows that sometimes people find the prison system less than what they expected. It does give the viewer an idea of what goes on behind the scenes, and it gives a good perspective on how a society is handled. This documentary can also be watched as a way to learn more about the prisoners, and how it works in prisons. If you're looking for a film about the French prison system, I'd recommend this documentary.


Write a review