[REL] Angelus (2000) [Poland]

[jezevex]

Maybe off-topic, it's hard to say...

[Image]

http://childrenincinema.com/movie.php?id=angelus-2000

http://rarefilmfinder.com/showfilm.php?id=44296

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0295168/

Like this post to see ed2k links  [699.33 MiB]

[Phuzzy4242]

The clip on Children in Cinema is certainly strange - oddball enough to pique my interest. LOL

[starfish21]

Have you not seen it Jez?

[ferdi111]

And subs for it are available at Opensubtutles (different languages, including English).
I don't know if they are in sync with the release presented here.

And that movie seems to be available at uloz too

[Phuzzy4242]

Here are the subtitles from opensubtitles.org that Art mentioned - English, Spanish, Italian, and Portugese.

Like this post to see ed2k links  [103.6 KiB]

[Phuzzy4242]

Hmm, the few children in it only have a small amount of screen time. There's an 'interesting' scene, but kids were definitely not the focus of the story. I'm moving this to Verified Off-Topic until/unless someone objects.

Strange film. Something in the vodka, I'm sure.

The English subtitles ferdi111 posted match perfectly.

[donkeykog]

I think debaser said it best.

FFS, lets not kid ourselfs that we like the movies for OT scenes.

or Mimsy

If there is underage nudity in a movie, it is IMO in any case on-topic, even if it is not a childhood movie per se, and should be posted under the respective release forum.

I have not seen this but if the scene is verified then it should be on-topic and I think I can throw Art's name in here too (I have not confirmed that with Art)

If this OT scene is verified I do think it should be ON-TOPIC. Of the millions of films, there is just not that many to make this a problem. But I do understand the initiative by Rich in 2006 to not MAKE this board ABOUT OT scenes. It is important that this board have a well-rounded theme and not one of prurient interest. But at the same time, they should not be iggyed or sent to the badlands. The 10% rule should go if it is verified to have OT scenes and NOT discussed or pointed out to be a perv film as its has been by off shooting it to the off-topic.

[starfish21]

The only thing that should go is you,not for the first time either.we're trying to move forward,cleaning up the forum,not returning to the dark days of the paeodophillic lurking members.who only want to lust at naked children.

[ptguardian]

Common sense these days is not common. We should not have to point out the fact that the movie still has a listing and an ed2k here at FLM. Keeping it off-topic tells everyone visiting that we are not solely interested in those scenes. Such scenes were mentioned for those interested but they are not everyone's interests and in turn does not label everyone here in the same manner nor does it put that label on this site (Simple concept to understand). Being labeled a pedophile site does not sit well with most people and most country's laws. If you/everyone cannot see the benefit of being discrete, subtle then perhaps trying to take the perspective of others who do may help you understand.


I have not posted much in the past year but I still visit regularly and I still find material every week. My want to contribute my finds is not as it used to be.

.

[Phuzzy4242]

We've had this conversation before and there's no need to rehash it. This film is not child-related at all even though it happens to have children in it. It also has a church in it but it's not a religious film and it has guns in it but it's not a war film. Off-topic or not, the ed2k link is still here - if someone wants to spend the time to download and watch it just to see 10 seconds of skin...