This strange film is a made-up documentary, detailing the future history of Denmark in four related but discrete storylines. In one, the refusal by a group of shipyard workers to work on ships carrying atomic warheads leads to sympathetic strikes around the country, and a general strike threatens. In another, the future relationship of the Common Market nations to various defense pacts such as NATO is discussed by a group of high-ranking national representatives. The third and fourth stories are closely intertwined: after a leftist group kidnaps the Danish Secretary of State, the police stretch the law as far as it will go in order to respond to the threat. ~ Clarke Fountain, All Movie Guide ‘Evening Land’ opened in Copenhagen and four other Danish cities, as well as in Stockholm, on February 18, 1977. The reaction by most of the Scandinavian critics was hostile, and the film was attacked primarily for “lacking a political base.” The Marxists expressed their dislike because the film supposedly sympathized more with the ‘terrorists’ than with the workers. One reviewer’s query - “When will Peter Watkins learn to stop frightening the public?” - echoed the sentiments of most of the conservative papers. Instead of dwelling on these negative reviews, I again turn to Joseph Gomez for his evaluation of ‘Evening Land’ (‘Peter Watkins’, Twayne Publishers, 1979 : “Those familiar with Watkins’ Scandinavian films might at first perceive Evening Land as a step backward in his cinematic development. Gone, for instance, are the complex sound-track overlays, the careful manipulation of silences, and a multilayer method of psychological investigation. It might be more appropriate, however, to consider the film as a step to the side - a parallel development of his style. In fact, Watkins stresses that he deliberately attempted to break away from what he achieved in Edvard Munch in order to establish, in Evening Land, a structure of confrontation chiefly through dialogue. The emphasis is also in directness, and thus Watkins, for the first time in his professional career, avoids the use of an off-screen narrator or a television interviewer who becomes a major character in the film. Although stylistically different from much of his other work, one of the purposes of Evening Land remains the same. Watkins again attempts to force his audience to re-evaluate film and television structures by extending them beyond their conventional, present-day “response-oriented” uses. Also, in this film, especially through the use of Martin the journalist, who loses his job as industrial correspondent, Watkins tries to alert his audience to the dangers of the misuse of media in today’s world. The great achievement of Evening Land rests with the dialectic patterns that Watkins evolves through his editing. Though the film gives a "multifaceted newsreel" impression, its structure is meticulously controlled through the editing. Watkins' dialectical organization is especially complex because it is sustained throughout the entire film, and even if one employs Sergei Eisenstein's A + B = C shot structure to analyze the editing process, the constantly shifting nuances in each term of the equation alter the meanings of the terms even within the same shot. As such, generalizations become almost impossible. The strike committee, for example, does not represent a consistent position at any one time. It is made up of numerous views which are continuously changing, and thus the terms of the dialectic shift every time a new juxtaposition is posed. These permutations multiply throughout the film, and as such, its very structure comes to reflect the difficulties of coming to understand the pressures and implications of events which affect us today. Of course, the film does not propose any kind of dogmatic solution. Watkins wants his viewers to try to understand and to evaluate the situations he depicts. Perhaps then the audience will discuss not the film, but these situations, and will arrive at decisions through an increased awareness. This is Watkins' greatest hope, and his belief in the integrity of his audience stands as the cornerstone of his methods of filmmaking. Although his film is structured entirely in dialectical terms, Watkins claims "there is an underlying motif of anxiety and passion for the state of our entire system - and the total purpose of Evening Land is summed up by its plea at the conclusion for a greater awareness of the human dilemmas facing our society." The problem with this statement is that Maj Britt's dialogue at the end of the film ... is probably not strong enough to support this claim. Poul Martinsen has indicated that he and Watkins conceived a slightly different ending which exhibited a new strength among many of the workers as they discussed how to change their tactics. Perhaps in this context, the emphasis on "the human dilemmas" would have been greater. A single take of such a sequence was shot, but it did not turn out very well, and unfortunately, financial problems did not allow for this material to be refilmed ...” In the next section Gomez criticises ‘Evening Land’ for the “unrealistic, even romanticized” portrait of the terrorist group, and concludes his review by saying: “Although it could have been a much stronger film had Watkins made the terrorists as ruthless as members of the Red Brigade, Evening Land remains practically the only serious political film about life in Western society in the late 1970s. While this fact seems to have eluded the Scandinavian critics, it was duly acknowledged in France, where the film was recognized as a major political work which "can develop analysis and true thinking" in the viewer. Most French critics went on to praise the film's technical accomplishments and its brilliant dialectic structure. At about the same time these reviews were being published, however, [the Chairman] of the Programudvalget (Danmarks Radio's board of governors), wrote Watkins a letter. Incredible as it may sound to anyone who has endured a typical evening of Danish television, [the Chairman] refused to telecast Evening Land because it did not, “in our opinion, in its form reach a standard which DR finds necessary”. Given responses such as this one, and the overall attitudes of television and film executives in Norway, Denmark, and Sweden to his work, it should not be difficult to understand why Watkins finally deemed it necessary to leave Scandinavia and to begin what would amount to another period of self-exile in his life.”

突破传统新闻播报框架，融入犀利的观点碰撞和丰富的知识储备。探寻未来趋势和事件发展走向，从而更清晰地洞察事件本质。讲述新闻、播报新闻、批判新闻、评价新闻。

暂无剧情简介

共青团员瓦西里（谢苗·斯瓦申科 Semyon Svashenko 饰）主动承担帮助农民购买拖拉机的责任，积极促进集体农庄的建立，并成为农庄的引领者和组织者。然而，他的行为引来了富农们的敌视和不满。在一个平静的夜晚，瓦西里与未婚妻在田野上欢愉地约会后准备回家，在途中被富农之子科马开枪打死。 这一事件唤起了全体村民的团结与觉醒，他们意识到了谁才是他们共同的敌人。新购置的拖拉机成为了农民们凝聚力的象征，他们用它推倒了土地上的界限。全体村民纷纷要求加入集体农庄，共同努力追求更好的生活。而杀害瓦西里的凶手科马最终也得到了他应得的惩罚，

影片讲述了一个关于印度政坛的故事。 印度的政治与选举，使得少数的人得以操控数千万人的生活，但这群人并不满足，仍汲汲营营的满足自己的野心，为此不惜暴力相向。 少数人玩弄政治、攫取利益，而其影响所及将超出你我的想象。

韩国SBS电视剧《土地》，是由李钟汉导演拍摄的52集电视剧，由金贤珠、柳俊尚、李在恩、金美淑主演，电视剧《土地》是以崔瑞熙这一主人公曲折的人生(从5岁到54岁)为主线，附加周围相关人物的故事为副，讲述了人们多种多样的人生。剧中能说能笑的演员们，将会把电视剧演的逼真生动，而且会让我们重新回顾已经走过的人生。

The Land, the least typical, least known, and most controversial of Robert Flaherty's films, depicts a vast and vague territory across the southern and midwestern United States. Here, in the period between the Depression's end and the beginning of World War II, abandoned farmhouses lined dusty roadways, and forgotten farm people had almost ceased to hope for a better life. On the face of it, The Land might have become the earthly counterpart to Pare Lorentz's The River, easily the best known and most widely praised American documentary film. But as it turned out, The Land pleased few people, least of all Flaherty himself. 源自：https://dmzdocs.com/eng/addon/00000001/program_view.asp?m_idx=102964&QueryYear=2023&c_idx=245&QueryType=B&QueryStep=2

1930年秋天，中国共-产-党领导的伟大土地革命运动，也震动了这个偏远的乡村——竹林乡。共-产-党员谢友生，领导当地贫苦农民举着红旗，打土豪、分田地，建立了革命政权。但是，由于竹林乡远离革命根据地，他们很快地就受到了反革命势力的摧残和镇压。地主谢子斋和他的弟弟恶霸二阎王又回到了竹林乡。他们把谢友生活活地烧死了。面对着亲人的死亡和革命的失败，人民并没有屈服，他们相信共-产-党总有一天还会回来的。20年以后，毛-主-席领导着中国共-产-党和中国人民解放了全中国。有着革命传统的竹林乡农民在党的领导下，和地主阶级展开了决战。临解放，二阎王带土匪上山时，把农民的粮食都抢光了。解放后，地主的走狗——混入农会当主席的谢友明又扣下救济粮不发，弄得农民们家家都揭不开锅。地主、狗腿子谢友明等人，想趁着乡长石大全和领导这里土地改革的王同志在县里开会的机会，煽动农民抢公家的仓库，让隐藏在后山上的二阎王好趁势纠结土匪武装暴动。正在这时，王同志、石大全领着队伍赶到了。王同志告诉大家：要粮食只有找地主。这就揭破了地主的阴谋。经过这次斗争以后，一心为大家的谢成刚被选为农会主席。

两位土著妇女和她们的家族奋力抗争，阻止能源公司的输油管道摧毁她们的家园和历史。

Halong继承父亲的土地后陷入两难：是将土地卖给财团来解决家中财务难题，还是保留祖先的土地和传统生活方式？