#FUuumovies | All Systems Operational Normally

Watch Summer in the Forest

(193) 7.6 108 min 2017

Like countless others, Philippe, Michel, Andre and Patrick were labeled 'idiots', locked away and forgotten in violent asylums, until the 1960s, when the young philosopher Jean Vanier took a stand and secured their release - the first time in history that anyone had beaten the system. Together they created L'Arche, a commune at the edge of a beautiful forest near Paris. A quiet revolution was born. Now in his 80s, still at L'Arche and revered by some as a living saint, Jean has discovered something that most of us have forgotten - what it is to be human, to be foolish, and to be happy. SUMMER IN THE FOREST invite us to abandon the rat race and forge new friendships. Amid the ancient trees, Philippe, Patrick, Jean and the others welcome us into their lives. If there are rules to break, they will be broken. And if there is a truth to be told, they will tell it. Michel reveals his war-torn past, Andre is desperate for a date, and young David will prove himself a hero in the fight against the forces of evil.

Randall Wright

Disclaimer: This site does not store any files.

Top reviews

Saturday, 19 Sep 2020 20:54

You know, the scientific basis for the theory of evolution, one of the most popular ideas in science and, really, a very difficult one to prove scientifically. Well, according to this documentary, a German scientist, Carl Friedrich von Baeyer (Carl Edward Wagner), put his money and his reputation behind this theory. He did a series of experiments and a report that was published in 1871. So, the evolution of the first mammal to evolve into a mammal, the chimp, that is, the chimpanzee. And the study is very interesting, if you don't mind that the scientist did not know anything about the theory of evolution. You see, the theory was something of a non-starter in 1871, because it was very hard to explain. Well, Baeyer had studied the embryos and the resulting DNA in the laboratory, but the DNA was not translated into a live animal, which was very difficult to do. So, Baeyer was one of the pioneers in this field, and the idea of the experiment was to test the theory of evolution on the laboratory eggs of the chimp. And he did this experiment in 1871. The result was that the embryo, which was created from the eggs, was a chimp, and it became one of the species of the genus Homo. So, the theory of evolution and the experiment, of course, didn't work. But Baeyer was one of the pioneers in the field, so the idea was not that hard to explain. So, this documentary is really interesting because it is not so hard to explain the idea of evolution and how this theory was put forward. But, on the other hand, the way it was put forward, that the chimp was not created by the man, the man was a chimpanzee. So, this is something you can not understand and you don't understand, because it's something of a non-starter. And that was a bad idea, because it is not something that you can explain and explain, but you cannot explain. But that is something of a non-starter, but the idea of evolution is not that bad. So, this is a documentary that is interesting, but it is not as good as the idea of evolution. So, I give it a seven out of ten. I hope that some of the viewers will like this one.
Sunday, 13 Sep 2020 04:40

This is a documentary about two British teens in South Africa who decide to go on a bush trek to document their experiences during their first summer in the country. The teens are in their late teens and live in various parts of the country. They decide to make the trek to Namibia after visiting the village where they spent their childhood, where they had just been assigned a new life. Their parents are concerned about the cost of the trip and the cost of their trip. Their mom is already spending money to take them to a nearby city to get them a job so that they can take care of her sick son. One of the teens, Adam, is going to be married, so the parents are concerned about their son having a wife and child. This documentary shows them their first summer in Namibia. The way the summer begins is shown as a gradual transition from one place to another, as the teens look out for one another. After one of the teens falls sick, one of the parents takes him to a hospital, where they meet with doctors and a physician. It is a visit to an individual that has been operating on the boy for some time. The doctors tell the parents that the boy has only a few weeks left and that they have to take care of him. They are worried about the boy's long term health and that the boy has no chance of surviving. The doctors tell the parents that they must take care of the boy for a couple of months, so that the boy can have time to adjust to life in the country. They tell the parents that they must take care of the boy so that he can have some time to adjust to life in the country. The parents are then told that they must send the boy back to England for treatment. They take the boy back to England. The parents take the boy back to their home. Adam and his sister Rachel are worried about their brother. They decide that they should go and see their brother, who is supposed to be getting married soon. They return to the hospital and learn that Adam has not only died but that he has been brain dead. Adam's sister Rachel is devastated by this news and decides to go to the wedding to support her brother and her sister. She takes Adam's wallet and a cellphone with her. They are not told that Adam is brain dead and that he will never be able to communicate with them. Adam's sister Rachel is so distraught by this news that she cannot go to the wedding. Adam and his sister Rachel take a train to Namibia. Adam's sister Rachel takes a bus to the train station and asks for a ride. The train stops and the passengers board the bus and take them to Namibia. Adam's sister Rachel does not know where she is going, so she walks into a local store and asks for a bus ticket. The store clerk tells her that she needs to go to a station to get a ticket to get on a plane. She walks off the bus and into the nearest town. There, she meets the town mayor and a lady who tells her that she has to go to a hospital for an operation. The doctor says that she will have to come back in a
Friday, 17 Jul 2020 11:44

While this documentary focuses on the motivations behind taking on the historical issues in "Going Up State" the filmmakers show the various ways that some people tried to make a profit out of this film. Some of the best things about the documentary are the interviews with the people who tried to take advantage of the film. These were all people who had a lot to gain by promoting the film. This also shows the various ways that the filmmakers, and the media were being misled. The highlight of this documentary is the "How It Happened" segment. This is one of the most interesting parts of the film. The filmmakers go into great detail explaining how some of the key players in the film were able to get their hands on the film and then promote it in such a way that no one knew what to think. The fact that they were able to do this gives a lot of weight to the documentary. While I agree that there is much to be said about how the film was being promoted, I don't think this is what the documentary is about. This is a documentary about how the media has done a poor job of reporting on the history of these issues. This documentary doesn't try to answer the question "How could they not report this?" It doesn't try to answer that question and instead focuses on the issues that they did. I think the problem with the documentary is that it tries to make a lot of claims that are obviously false. I think that the filmmakers are trying to make a lot of claims that are clearly not true and instead are just trying to make a point. I think that the filmmakers should have made more of an effort to tell the story of how these people got the film and how they got into the film business. In the end, this documentary is definitely worth a look. I recommend this documentary to people who are interested in the history of this film and how the media was misleading people about the film. There is some interesting information that this documentary does have and it is certainly worth a look. The documentary does have a few flaws, but I think that the issues that are being discussed are a good enough reason to see this documentary.
Tuesday, 30 Jun 2020 08:07

I did not find this film to be a documentary at all. I did not feel that any of the individuals were attempting to push the boundaries of what they thought was the truth or could be accepted as reality. I felt that they were trying to document the 'facts' of what they were seeing and hearing. The way they tried to 'explain' this topic and how they attempted to put it in a meaningful way to the viewers was the worst part of the film for me. It was basically a documentary without any real substance or credibility to it. It was just a bunch of people who were saying what they thought was true, without any regard to the possibility that it might be false. I was quite frustrated and I feel like the filmmakers did not try to explain or explain why or how they got this information, they just had it all told for them. I understand that these individuals were trying to do the best they could, but if you are going to try to make a documentary, try to at least put some thought into it, and try to get it to some sort of 'truth' as opposed to just trying to 'tell a story'. I think the filmmakers should have really gotten more specific in the movie and had more evidence or video to back up what they were saying. It's one thing to film what you believe to be happening or to try to piece together what you are seeing. It's quite another to film something that is not happening or something that is not happening. It seemed to me that this movie had a different goal. It was supposed to be 'heartfelt' and it was supposed to show people that it is not just a fairy tale that they are told, but it's possible and there are people out there who can tell you the truth. But in the end it didn't do that. I think the filmmakers should have tried to explain what they were getting at and why they were saying it, but they failed to do so. It seemed that they just said it and never thought about it and it didn't seem like they were trying to make a documentary at all. I think it would have been much better if they had just put some 'proof' or 'evidence' to back up what they were saying. They never provided any, so you don't know if what they were saying was real or not. I don't know if I would go as far as saying that the film was a 'satire', but I would say that it was a poor and poor attempt at trying to make a documentary. The people that made the movie seemed to be in it for the wrong reasons. I do not recommend this movie.
Sunday, 31 May 2020 15:15

On a rainy Sunday morning in the woods, what I saw was what many saw during the Great Depression. During the 1920's to 1950's, the great depression was the longest recession in history. The average person in the US lost around 12% of their income, and many were unable to buy the things they needed. Many people became homeless, and many others were forced to leave their homes and take what they could to survive. It's amazing to me that people still don't see the devastation the Great Depression caused. Many don't realize that it was not the Great Depression of the 1930's, but the Great Depression of the 1930's and 40's. People did not have money in their pockets and most couldn't even afford to buy food. What I saw during the Great Depression was truly a time of extreme hardship, and it's amazing that we can see this even today. The people in this documentary did not think they were lucky to have survived, but they thought they were very lucky to be alive. The stories of many of the survivors were heart-wrenching. I think the documentary does a good job of bringing back memories of the people who lived during the Great Depression. I think it does a good job of telling the story of how the people lived during this period. I think that if more people knew about the Great Depression, then maybe people would not be as cynical and unfriendly to each other as they are today. I think this documentary was a good documentary and I would recommend it to anyone who is interested in the Great Depression.
Thursday, 28 May 2020 18:08

In this beautifully filmed documentary, Charles Lyall explains how he was able to survive the effects of the Korean War while at a U.S. Army hospital during the Korean War. Charles Lyall had served in the U.S. Army as a Rifleman in the infantry during World War II and was stationed at Camp Patterson in Oklahoma where he was treated by doctors and nurses for the effects of the war. Charles Lyall would eventually have the option of going back to the battlefield to fight in the Korean War. While at Camp Patterson, he was exposed to chemical warfare, exposure to cold and constant exposure to sandstorms and to the intense heat from the sun. In addition to the constant exposure to the desert, Charles Lyall was exposed to the highly toxic gas of Agent Orange. Charles Lyall was lucky enough to escape the Agent Orange because of the efforts of the U.S. Army Chemical Warfare Detachment to contain the poison gas. Despite the fact that Charles Lyall's battle wounds were severely infected, his skin and brain were almost completely unaffected. Charles Lyall's recovery from the horrific wounds was not expected to be successful. He would have to wait until several months after the war was over before he could fully recover. Charles Lyall's courage and courageously endured the ordeal of the war is shown in his remarkable story. In fact, Charles Lyall's story was so powerful that it was not until the late 1980s that this documentary was finally completed. The amount of work that went into this film is incredible. The production crew spent many months filming interviews with the man himself and documenting the true story of Charles Lyall. Lyall himself was also interviewed in his native Oklahoma. Charles Lyall had a dream of one day being able to go back to the battlefield to fight in the Korean War. He believed that this would bring him honor and glory. Charles Lyall's story is a reminder that the only way to survive the horrors of war is to have the courage to go back and fight again. Charles Lyall's story is a reminder that no matter what kind of war you're in, the only way to survive is to have the courage to go back to the battlefield and fight.

Write a review