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

Ver Karl Marx City

(181) 6.5 89 min 2016 Subtitles and Closed Captions

Karl Marx City is a movie starring Christa Epperlein, Petra Epperlein, and Uwe Epperlein. A filmmaker journey through the former East Germany looking into her father's 1999 suicide.

Genres
Documentary
Director
Petra Epperlein, Michael Tucker
Starring
Uwe Epperlein, Volker Epperlein, Christa Epperlein, Petra Epperlein

All Systems Operational

Product details

Genres Documentary
Director Petra Epperlein, Michael Tucker
Writer Michael Tucker, Petra Epperlein
Stars Uwe Epperlein, Volker Epperlein, Christa Epperlein, Petra Epperlein
Country Germany
Also Known As Karl Marx Stadt
Runtime 1 h 29 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 A filmmaker journey through the former East Germany looking into her father's 1999 suicide.

Download documentary «Karl Marx City»

Blu-ray
15.88 GB
DVD
5.08 GB
Windows
5.18 GB
MacOS
7.03 GB
MKV
5.33 GB
MP4
5.21 GB
H.264
5.78 GB
H.265
5.21 GB
AVI
3.01 GB
MOV
6.6 GB
DivX
7.41 GB

Customers who watched «Karl Marx City» also watched

  1. The Finest Hours
    The Finest Hours
  2. Mon garçon Available on Prime
    Mon garçon
  3. Resident Evil: The Final Chapter
    Resident Evil: The Final Chapter
  4. Memoria Available on Prime
    Memoria
  5. Holiday Inn: The New Irving Berlin Musical - Live
    Holiday Inn: The New Irving Berlin Musical - Live
  6. Mother's Day Available on Prime
    Mother's Day
  7. Are We Not Cats
    Are We Not Cats
  8. Star Raiders: The Adventures of Saber Raine Available on Prime
    Star Raiders: The Adventures of Saber Raine
  9. Moynihan
    Moynihan
  10. Playing with Fire Available on Prime
    Playing with Fire
  11. Éperdument
    Éperdument
  12. Luo shan ji dao dan ji hua Available on Prime
    Luo shan ji dao dan ji hua
  13. Red Joan
    Red Joan
  14. The Pathological Optimist Available on Prime
    The Pathological Optimist
  15. Venom
    Venom

20 customer reviews about «Karl Marx City»

3.5 out of 5 stars 3.5 out of 5 stars

Top reviews

Kathy Mills
Sunday, 28 Jun 2020 15:07

If you like documentaries on 'Marxist' history, you should watch this one. If you like documentaries on the evils of capitalism, you should watch this one. This is my first review and I hope this review helps anyone who's interested in Marxist history, because I have not read the Communist Manifesto and so I cannot comment on it. If you read this review and can, I hope that it helps you to see that this is not a documentary, but an alternative history. I think that it is possible to make a documentary that is much more interesting than this one, and I hope that I have helped you to see that.
Mildred
Saturday, 27 Jun 2020 07:49

This is one of those documentaries that you can sit down to watch, watch and think about. I didn't have any preconceived notions or know what to expect and I left the theater with some questions that I couldn't answer. The film explores the fact that during the civil rights era, many black people lived in fear of police brutality and the hate crime of murder. It also examines the various forms of discrimination that black people faced. The film covers the issue of interracial dating and that's where the film really gets interesting, because the subject matter is so far removed from the usual subject matter. If you're not a social media-savvy person, you may not understand the level of hatred that was felt by this group of people. This is a very well-filmed documentary and it covers a subject that is usually ignored or forgotten about in the United States. I loved the film because it covered a topic that is usually ignored or covered very briefly. I also loved the film because it showed the individuals' point of view, something that we usually don't see in the mainstream media. This is one of those documentaries that you can watch and think about afterwards.
Julie N.
Wednesday, 24 Jun 2020 16:55

Paul Allen is a hotshot entrepreneur who may be the next Steve Jobs. He is the poster child for the Silicon Valley phenomenon. One day, he will decide whether or not he wants to be an artist, or he will choose either of the two paths: software or advertising. This documentary is a fascinating glimpse into the man behind the empire. While this is an informative documentary, it is also a bit predictable. The film is about Allen and his business, and then it is about his evolution. This is a bit of a 'message film'. It is very similar to the Stanford Prison Experiment, in that Allen's story is revealed through interviews with the other participants. Allen and his wife are interviewed, and they give some insights into how their marriage has changed. They have become very different people, but they are both the same person in a way. The film focuses on his early days as a musician, but also looks at his artistry and career. The film shows his early work in movies, his development of the first Apple Computer, and his rise to become the most valuable company in the world. The film is surprisingly short. It is a simple narrative, but there are some really fascinating moments. One of them is when Allen describes how he changed from a ten year old to an adult, and then he shows how he then changed from an adult to a teenager. The video clips are also very entertaining. The documentary is edited very well. It is informative, but it also is very funny. The interviews are interesting, but they are also very funny. Allen is very self-deprecating, but the film is also very funny. The only real disappointment is that the film is only 86 minutes long. A few things could have been edited out. The film could have been longer and edited in a more interesting way. Allen's personal life is also a bit of a story, and this is the main focus of the documentary. There are some really interesting interviews with his daughter and son. The documentary could have focused on them. They are really interesting characters. The interview with his wife, though, is very interesting, but it is also a little dry. There are also a few things that I did not understand, like why Allen became the first Apple Computer. That was never really explained. It also was not explained why he became a billionaire. I am not sure how the documentary would have been better with more interviews with the other people in the company. Allen's early life is a fascinating story, but it is not a very interesting documentary. The film is a bit of a message film, and that is not the best word to describe it. The film is mostly a collection of short stories that are interesting, but there are also some interesting aspects of Allen's personal life. I am not sure if it is worth the money to see this documentary, but if you are in the mood for a good documentary, then it is worth the time. I would not say this is a must see film, but it is worth seeing.
Jane O.
Tuesday, 23 Jun 2020 03:40

Greenspan and Sandler have something of a knack for bringing in both the young and the old to their movies. For this particular picture, they do it again. The young and old are both in high spirits. GRAVITY was obviously made with a lot of passion and energy. But you don't see that in GRAVITY CITY. It has a very low budget and it is in no way a Hollywood production. And it is very hard to tell that. It doesn't look like one of the "Lucky 7" movies. There are no slick production design, no Hollywood star power, no cars, no cars, no cars. No stars. And it is a very low budget picture. But it is so incredibly earnest. There are no funny moments. But there is no silliness either. The passion that the two actors show for their roles is palpable. The older actors don't have a lot of screen time, but they're always effective. Both actors have a good voice and a good sense of rhythm. They make you feel that you're watching an old-time Hollywood production. A production that could have been made by any number of actors with a lot of enthusiasm and money. But it's not. GRAVITY is in many ways a film for the younger generation. It was made with a great deal of love and care, and it is a wonderful example of how art can be made today. It's also a very important document for all of us who've had to endure a lot of disrespect from our parents and teachers. But it's not a movie for the "older" generations. GRAVITY has some of the best music ever put on film. I'm not sure it was ever recorded. It is a real treat. But it is also a very earnest film. It is not an especially well-made film. It is low budget. It is an earnest film. It is a good film. It is an important film. It is a documentary about one of the most important films ever made. It is about life. It is about music. It is about youth. It is about a city. It is about the power of music. It is about a great artist and the power of music. It is a great documentary. And it is a great movie.
Patrick Stone
Monday, 08 Jun 2020 06:23

A first look at a film made with a very limited budget. It's a telling commentary on the way the American Dream is being destroyed by the economy of the world. No political agenda, just a compelling story. The film is very limited, but the message it delivers is very powerful.
Jeremy L.
Sunday, 31 May 2020 15:55

When I saw the trailer I was expecting a lot, but it didn't convince me that it would be a good film. Then I saw the film, and I was astonished by it. Although not as great as the trailer, it was still a really good documentary. There are so many aspects of the movie, but I have to mention some of them: - The actors were amazing. You felt as if you were right there with them. I thought about what I was going to say during the interviews, but they were so powerful that I couldn't. - The way they portrayed the environment was so natural and real, that you would think it was the only possible way. - You could feel that there was no need to change the environment, since you know that you are part of the environment and you can't change it. - The way they filmed the movie is really nice. You could feel the constant fear and tension in the camera. I really love how they have used the camera, and the way they are filmed. - I can't stop talking about the interviews. It was like a roller-coaster, and it made me feel all the different emotions. - The way they have chosen the subjects is really good, and they have done a great job. - The music is great. You don't have to think that it will make you feel happy or sad, or you won't like it. - I can't forget about the movie. It was really great. I think you should watch it. If you have not seen it, you should. It is an amazing documentary. It is not for everyone, but it is a really good film.
Martha F.
Friday, 22 May 2020 00:18

In the aftermath of the Great Depression, a group of intellectuals and businessmen, led by John Maynard Keynes, set up a Foundation for Economic Education in response to the bitter and sometimes violent recriminations from both political parties. The groups' aim was to produce a research paper to set out the state of the art in economics in Britain and America. It was to be entitled, "What Is Capitalism?" And, indeed, the three leaders of the group were, as is the case with most works of history, leftwing liberals. Keynes, the founder, was an opponent of the Tory party, and his beliefs were that the only way to establish a stable economic system was by a competitive market economy. Keynes, his closest friend and collaborator, was an advocate of Keynesian economics. Their work is a powerful argument for the kind of economy that the Third World desperately needs to create. For the British economist, the system must be based on private property, so that production can be done efficiently. On the other hand, the American and French leaders, like many of the other characters in this film, argued for socialism, and many of them were all-around socialists. The British members of the group were all very pragmatic people. For Keynes, the only way to win elections was by stimulating demand and spending. The problem was that Keynes's economic ideas were not mainstream in Britain at the time, and he needed a partner in his efforts. So, in 1935, Keynes and one of his colleagues, James Mill, began to recruit American businessmen, to work on a book which would be called "The American Economic Journal". The book was an attempt to reform the economics of America. It was the brainchild of the American economist, Irving Fisher, who had a great deal of success in the early 20th century. Fisher, a native of the American West Coast, was convinced that the system of public ownership and regulation of the economy was the way to achieve a balanced system. Fisher was also convinced that the system of government control in Britain was a dangerous and inefficient institution. Fisher had gone to America in 1931, and in the early 1930s, had brought to the attention of the leaders of the American economy a piece of paper which outlined the kind of economic system he wished to see in the US. Fisher was a supporter of a laissez-faire capitalism, and the British intellectual would eventually see his ideas realised by a group of American businessmen who set up the American Economic Journal in 1936. Keynes and Mill were both convinced that a laissez-faire capitalism was the way to achieve economic stability, and the way to win the American elections. Unfortunately, they failed to come to a consensus on which system to favour. Some left-wing liberals wanted the market system, and others wanted state ownership of the economy. Keynes and Mill were split. Keynes, who was an all-round socialist, wanted to leave the market economy alone, while Mill was a realist who thought that the whole system had to be reformed. The film shows both sides of the argument, but the end result is that neither side of the debate is particularly well represented. To an American, the film makes it sound as though the American Economic Journal was a secret society, and that it was dominated by the likes of the Koch brothers and Michael Moore. This is not the case
Andrea Aguilar
Tuesday, 19 May 2020 15:20

In the film, Jon Avnet (of the NY Times) is interviewed by the filmmaker. He is asked to explain his life. In my opinion, Avnet is the best interviewer in the world. I don't think he is too brilliant, but it's obvious that he is interested in the subject matter, and is honest and forthright. The best part of the film is the interview. Avnet is witty, intelligent, and entertaining. He gives us insight into his thoughts on the way society operates. He does not spoon feed us. He is not afraid to say what he thinks, and he explains it with candor and passion. The best part of the film is his interview. It's an interview you will not forget.
Brian R.
Friday, 15 May 2020 17:08

"The Garden of Eden" is a period film from a great artist, an artist that lived in a period of time when life was simpler and the world was more perfect. This film is about how one man's personal crusade to save the natural world is not based on scientific or political ideology but on a simple belief. This film is a great example of a man, one who is willing to risk the well-being of his family for his beliefs. It is a film that makes you understand the struggles of many people during this period in history, and to understand that the world was not the way it is today. The Garden of Eden was written in a very unique way that keeps you engaged throughout the film. You see the world, and you see the people who lived in it, and you see the problems that existed, and you see the solutions that were proposed. The dialogue is very well written and very well put together. This film has a great sense of humor and is a very entertaining movie to watch. I rate this film a 7 out of 10.
Judy S.
Wednesday, 13 May 2020 21:56

The premise of this documentary is quite simple, it was based on the idea that "Socialism is an economic system which pits the proletariat against the bourgeoisie in order to rule the world." It's quite a typical but nonetheless compelling story of a group of people trying to find their way through the system and escape it. The interviews are very interesting. Most of them are journalists, but there are some actors as well. I really liked the way they made it look like they were actually participating in the situation. I especially liked the director, who really put some effort into it. The idea that most of the interviews are from people in a small town or town can also be explained by this: the whole story of socialism is rather spread out across Europe, and most of the interviews were from people who did not live in any of these places. Still, it is very interesting to see the way the concept of socialism was communicated to the people of this small town. The documentary is quite an interesting documentary, but it can be a bit confusing and it can be a bit overwhelming. If you have the chance to see it, I recommend it. I did not see it in a cinema, but I would definitely recommend it to watch.
Charles Contreras
Friday, 08 May 2020 16:16

This documentary about the life and work of a famous and complex German writer is worth a look for anyone interested in the history of the field of literary criticism. Some of the highlights include lectures by the director of the exhibition, interviews with some of the most important figures in the field, and a very nice documentary track on the film. The more I watch, the more I like this film. The interviewer is a scholar at the University of Hamburg who talks with a great deal of enthusiasm about the way she uses her research in order to make a film. She shows how the main sources for her work were either stolen from or plagiarized from other scholars, and how she reacts to these issues and the inevitable fact that she has to defend her own work in front of a bunch of non-experts. The topics covered are important, and they cover topics in the history of literary criticism that are not normally covered. A word of warning: it is not a factual documentary. There is a long (at least 3 hours long) discussion about the film that goes on way too long and is a bit confusing, but that should be expected. I highly recommend this film to anyone interested in German literature and the history of criticism. This film is very enjoyable to watch.
Amanda B.
Friday, 01 May 2020 21:21

A good documentary which shows how many of the major environmental movements of the past 40 years have largely been either ignored or significantly undermined by the business interests they were fighting. The viewer is treated to a great amount of footage from the events that changed the way we live today, the environmental movement itself, and the impact of what happened in the mid-80's on environmental issues today. Some of the most powerful footage is from the tailings dam scandal, as well as the Church Committee hearings and the Dow Chemical scandal. The film does an excellent job of showing how the environmental movement has been co-opted by corporate interests in order to protect the environment. What's most fascinating about this film is that it really shows the energy and passion that is still out there. These activists really did put their lives on the line for what they believed in. Although it may not be easy for everyone to stomach the documentary, it is well worth seeing.
Grace Lucas
Thursday, 30 Apr 2020 13:54

It's an entertaining documentary about the founding of the American country, the need for a democratic form of government and the negative effect of the war in Vietnam. The first part of the movie tells the story of the original settlers, the Pilgrims, who arrived in the New World. It includes the impact that the war in Vietnam had on them and the efforts they made to find a home in the New World. It also includes an exploration of the founding fathers, as well as the impact of the Civil Rights Movement. The second part of the film focuses on the country itself, as a whole and how it has developed since then. It also includes a look at the economy and the role that corporations have played in the country. The film is a great and informative introduction to the history of the United States.
Christine R.
Sunday, 26 Apr 2020 15:42

This documentary features the story of a film crew who traveled to Amsterdam to document the production of 'City', the film by Baz Luhrmann about a real-life incident in the city's history. The crew, led by Nick Cave and Stephen Trask, were not film critics, nor did they seek out film critic as a career. Instead, they were interested in film, music and being part of a cultural phenomenon. 'City' is one of the most visually dazzling films of recent years. It is also, at times, intensely emotional, and the film is frequently funny. It is a movie about the art and science of film, as well as the people who make it. While the subject matter is interesting and the actors are very good, the film is far from being a masterpiece. It is too long, too much talking, and the performances are not nearly as good as the film itself.
Kevin Russell
Saturday, 18 Apr 2020 13:20

Based on a series of interviews with many people involved with the film, including those who worked on the film, I thought this was a really interesting documentary. Many people are interviewed about how the film was made, and what the film actually meant to them. Most of the people were amazed by how the film came about, how it was a collaboration between several different groups. It was especially interesting to hear the many people who worked on the film, including those who worked on the actual filming of the film. I would recommend this film for people who are interested in the film or those who were involved with it. It is definitely worth seeing.
Raymond W.
Thursday, 02 Apr 2020 16:07

I went to see this movie because it was on the news and I have always been interested in Marx and the Bolshevik Revolution. What I got was an interesting film that gave a lot of good facts and information about the people and society in the time that Marx was alive. But I also saw it as an opportunity to tell the audience that it is not always the Russians who were the victims of the Bolsheviks. In fact, the Bolsheviks had only one goal: to break up the Soviet Union and make Russia a country in which the rich and powerful could live in the shadows and not be in control of the people. The film didn't say that the Russians were the main victims but it did say that their history and their culture was destroyed and their lives were in danger. There is no doubt that the Russians suffered greatly in the Soviet Union. But the film did not mention that it was the Russians who were the real victims of the Bolsheviks and that they were the ones who lost their culture and their way of life. The Russians were the ones who suffered the most in the Soviet Union. I think that the only reason that the movie was made was to make money. It was like an advertisement for the Russian movie industry and it was not the most important reason. I would like to know why this movie was made and how it was going to be rated by the critics. I believe that a film like this should be made more often in order to get more people to see it. Otherwise, the people who like the movie will be the ones that will complain and will demand that they get their money back. I give this movie a 7/10.
Angela Herrera
Thursday, 02 Apr 2020 15:27

John Pilger is an extremely knowledgeable person who specializes in the last forty years of world history. He is well versed in both political and economic systems and their effect on the environment. But, at the same time, he is willing to listen to anyone who has the nerve to tell him the truth about the environment, especially when it involves the destruction of nature. When I first heard that the WWF was going to be filming an environmental film, I thought that it would be one of those documentaries that would only exist as a footnote to the other films. It was not. The documentary is not about nature, but about human behaviour and the environment. The problem is that it doesn't matter if the film is about the environmental destruction of nature, or about human behaviour. This film is about nature and the destruction of it. The film is also about human behaviour and the destruction of human behaviour. The film is about how we are destroying the planet, and it is also about how we are destroying our own lives. It is a very important film, and is well worth watching. But, be prepared to be slightly surprised.
Scott S.
Thursday, 02 Apr 2020 14:59

The infamous Swedish filmmaker Ingmar Bergman is in the early stages of his career, when he was working as a composer and screenwriter. At this stage he is also a self-professed Marxist who teaches in a Marxist college. This is the best I can say about this documentary. It's mostly about how he felt about Marx. But the film doesn't even tell us anything about his thoughts on socialism or the other socialisms of his day. It seems that the director is more interested in what the Marx-critics think of Bergman's films than what Bergman thinks of them. The best part is the film's discussion of Bergman's films. The best of the best are mentioned, but he also has some of the worst of them. He didn't even give his opinion on the best one. One of the worst ones is, of course, "City of Joy." It's basically a review of Bergman's "The Seventh Seal." One of the better ones is the discussion of "What's Up, Doc?" And then there is also a discussion of the one that is most probably his favorite. "The Seventh Seal." That's the one where Bergman criticizes Hitchcock. Bergman criticizes Hitchcock for being able to make films. Bergman claims that Hitchcock was always able to use the camera to create great effects. He also says that Hitchcock's films are great because he can always keep his audience entertained. Bergman doesn't really explain anything about these films, and he doesn't explain anything about Bergman's philosophy, either. What we do get is Bergman's insight into cinema, his thoughts about the importance of art, and how he felt about it. We also get a look at the many other films that he has directed, like "City of Joy" and "The Virgin Spring." He doesn't give any examples of how they are good, but he does say that they are good for the same reason that he likes them. Bergman talks about his favorite films of all time, including "The Seventh Seal" and "Gandhi." It's hard to tell if the film is any good. It has the same formulaic plot as "City of Joy." It has the same music, and the same actors, and the same good-looking guy. The only difference is that the "city" in "City of Joy" is a real city and not a theater. "City of Joy" was made during Bergman's lifetime. It's his farewell film. The only thing that I really enjoyed about "City of Joy" was that I got to hear the original soundtrack. In this film, we are given a new soundtrack. That's really the only reason that I enjoyed this film. The film is OK, but it's not very good.
Keith T.
Thursday, 02 Apr 2020 14:49

The German play, 'A Thousand Clowns', based on an 1892 play by Rudyard Kipling, depicts the fortunes and travails of a small group of people in a fictional small town. In the present day, and particularly in post-reform Germany, the town of Sacher-Masoch has become synonymous with the institution of bondage. It is a place where children are separated from their parents for years at a time, and where children are trained to become slaves, and where men are beaten into submission, in the belief that they will be used for the 'other side'. This film, based on a play by Rudyard Kipling, is a chilling, yet insightful account of the impact of slavery on the lives of a small group of German slaves. It is a disturbing and compelling story, but what makes the film so compelling is the honest portrayal of the horrors and cruelty that was inflicted on these young people. The cinematography is absolutely beautiful and the performances are all superb. I believe that there has never been a better, and more emotional, documentary about the impact of slavery on humanity than this one. I recommend it highly.
Jacob S.
Thursday, 02 Apr 2020 04:45

I wanted to give this documentary a high rating, because the topics explored in it are interesting and important. But it just seemed to be too long. There's no real flow to it, and it starts out with interesting things, but then just stops and just kind of repeats itself. Some of the more well-known people interviewed in the documentary make it seem as if they're just trying to hype up the documentary as if it's going to be really good, but they're just being vague. As far as what the film actually says, I really don't know. I think it's worth seeing, but I wouldn't pay to see it.
See all 20 reviews
 Write a review