Steam Les quatre soeurs

Les quatre soeurs

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.

Other Titles
Vier Schwestern, Shoah: Four Sisters, The Four Sisters
Running Time
4 hours 33 minutes
480p, 720p, 1080p, 2K, 4K
History, Documentary
Ruth Elias, Ada Lichtman, Paula Biren, Claude Lanzmann
Audio Languages
日本語, اللغة_العربية, English, Deutsch, Français, Italiano, Español, Svenska, Gaeilge, Nederlands
Japanese, اللغة_العربية, Čeština, Tiếng Việt, Português, 한국어, Australia, Filipino, हिन्दी

Four interviews done in the 1970s with women who survived the Holocaust.

Comments about history «Les quatre soeurs» (19)

John May photo
John May

I'm not going to give anything away but I'll tell you what I saw. It was the first of three films to be shown at a screening of the film, I saw the second, and then I saw the final. I can't recall who was in which film. I did not like the first two. I thought it was amateurish and the dialog was annoying. I thought the film was more interesting and sad when the story of the boy and the grandmother died. It had a lot of good points, but I still thought it was a waste of time. I think I should have seen the first two films. The second one was better. I just did not like the first two. I liked the last one better. I really like this film. I like the actors. It is really a great film. I think it is a good movie. It is well made. I just think it is a little too long.

Billy West photo
Billy West

The Vietnam War is still a very real and haunting topic in the United States. This documentary, which is shown on PBS, does not portray the war as a purely American one, but as a global affair with political and military ramifications. The film shows what the war was like in Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia, Cambodia and Cambodia. It does not go into detail about the people who fought in the war, but it does show the violence, casualties and casualties caused by the war. The film shows the children of the war who died in an act of heroism. It shows how the children are struggling with the loss of their parents and the pain of what happened to them. The film also shows the importance of the war in the lives of the families of the war dead. It is a very moving documentary, and I recommend it to anyone who wants to know more about the Vietnam War.

Megan photo

For the most part, I found the documentary a little too "on the nose." The reason for this is that it was very much a "behind the scenes" kind of documentary. You could certainly tell that the main character was doing a lot of the talking. I think that if you are going to do a documentary about the life and times of the people who were involved in the tragic events of 9/11, you should be able to tell the story without them talking to you. The documentary shows the interviews and the memories of the people involved. I don't think that it was necessary to have them talk to me. I would have preferred that they have gone into the film and shown what they had been able to see and hear. This would have allowed the documentary to be an experience of it's own. In all honesty, I do think that this film was very well made. The subject matter was well presented and the subject of the film was well handled. The documentary seemed to follow the story from the beginning to the end, which is a good thing. Overall, I thought this film was well worth watching and would recommend to anyone interested in the events of 9/11. I give the film a B.

Philip Patterson photo
Philip Patterson

This is a French documentary on a woman who traveled to the Soviet Union in search of the legendary "Hobbit". I was really excited about this documentary because I have read some reviews on IMDb and that intrigued me. After seeing the movie I was pretty disappointed. I have never seen the book and I do not think that I would be interested in this. The movie was really boring and was not a documentary at all. The movie was so long and boring and I was bored. The only reason I watched it was because it was a documentary. I would not recommend this movie to anyone.

Grace Rodriguez photo
Grace Rodriguez

I thought this was a good documentary, and it had a good balance of facts and fiction. I was a bit surprised at how few people were interviewed, as there were a lot of questions about health care and insurance, but the documentary was really informative and you learn something new every time you watch it. I think the documentary shows that people are worried about their health care, and this is a bad thing. I don't think we should be paying for other people's health care, especially when they are uninsured, and this is why I think it's a good idea to have an insurance plan and a doctor. I thought the documentary gave an interesting perspective on the health care system in the US, but I also think that the main problem is that there is not enough research done on the effects of health care on health and people, and also the system is not very efficient. The documentary did a good job of covering the issues raised in the film, and I think it was well done. I think the documentary would be more informative if they had more people interviewed and more research done. I think the documentary was interesting and I would recommend it to people. It is a good documentary, and I think it is worth watching.

Samuel B. photo
Samuel B.

On the surface, La Vie en Rose looks like a documentary, but it's not. The director, Laurent Sorel, filmed the book in a visually artistic way and leaves out the things that, under conventional methods, would probably be included in a more conventional documentary. The movie is a visual feast with very little music in it. Its visual style is very much towards the minimalist, with plenty of wide shots, open spaces, and muted color tones. The director was very much in his element with this approach, and he took advantage of it in the book. It didn't seem to detract from the book, which was presented in a format that made it accessible and easy to comprehend. Despite that, La Vie en Rose had some more explicit scenes than most documentaries, and there is a nice selection of voices and artistic motifs from some of the paintings in the book. The acting in the movie was very good. Everyone does an excellent job with the material they were given. As far as the subject matter of the film is concerned, it does not focus on specific events that were represented in the book. Instead, it focuses on the experiences of each individual painter, and on how the social environment of those artists affected their work. All of the paintings were extraordinarily well photographed. They are all beautifully composed and are very impressive from a technical perspective. The costumes and sets were extremely well done, especially in the early chapters, and the buildings in Paris. Some of the photography could have been improved, but it's quite a simple fact that La Vie en Rose, like many French movies, is filmed in Paris. The acting is wonderful, the editing is very good, and the direction is very good. It was a visual feast that was definitely worth seeing, but it's not a documentary. Overall, La Vie en Rose is a very beautiful film. It's very focused, but not a documentary. It's a visual feast with great performances and an amazing visual style. It's not as gory or as dramatic as some French films, but it's still extremely entertaining. If you like movies about French painting and you like French culture, you'll love it. If you like artsy, experimental films, you'll love it. It's a beautiful film, and it's a film that you should see.

Walter Daniels photo
Walter Daniels

The film is good for the art to the subjects and their victims. The first scene with the Czech girl is pretty well done. The pictures and graphics are very interesting. One of the other highlights is the footage of the papal visits. It is one of the most chilling, for me, on the press conference, in which the Vatican's chief spokesman defended the criminal actions of the Vatican court. The other highlight is the clip of Cardinal Richelieu speaking in favor of the Vatican's treatment of the Jews, and, well, everything in between. The one advantage of this film is that it also includes interviews with other victims, like the Czech girl and the priest, who is murdered. In the Vatican, one can read a little about the other victims. One question that is to be answered is, why the Vatican hired the detective general to do a search on the Church to find evidence? The movie was better than the book, I think.

Lori P. photo
Lori P.

One of the main reasons why this documentary is so important is the emotional impact it has on those who experience it. These are the same people who watch the interviews and may not realize that it's an emotional catharsis from their own experiences. For those of us who didn't experience it as it happened, this is what we really want to see. It's a powerful and humbling experience that will stick with you. That is what documentaries are meant to do. They should be a catalyst for change and a message of hope to the world. This documentary does exactly that. It gives us hope. It is one of the best documentaries I have ever seen.

Christina Burns photo
Christina Burns

The first of the three parts in a trilogy, The Last Days of the Communist Chinese is a documentary that follows a team of Vietnamese doctors and anthropologists as they try to save the last remaining of the people who made the country what it was. The movie covers the aftermath of the Cultural Revolution, the aftermath of the US military intervention, and the rise of the Vietnam war. This film was made in the aftermath of the current US administration's desire to turn a blind eye to the violations of human rights and the destruction of Vietnam's cultural heritage. But it is the film's claim that the people of Vietnam were willing to sacrifice everything they knew for the country's freedom that is truly disturbing. If you're unfamiliar with the story of Vietnam, this is an excellent documentary that should be seen.

Vincent photo

This is a great documentary. Almost all of the details are well documented and most of the interviewees are accomplished videographers or documentary filmmakers. I enjoyed the study of the ethnic fighting in Belgium as well as a discussion of the themes of the book - prouve et gentilhomme. It's an interesting look at the relationship between the victim of ethnic conflicts and the government of the region. The documentary filmmakers also showed footage of the civil war in the former Yugoslavia. Overall, a very good documentary.

Amy photo

I've seen quite a lot of propaganda about this film so I expected a lot less of an "unfilmed" documentary, and a bit of video editing to make it look like one. What I didn't expect was to actually feel that I was a part of this journey. Yes, the film is a little long and I wish there were more of the interviews, but I love watching these interviews, especially in their raw form, and it is fascinating to see them unfold before your eyes. It's refreshing to see such human stories, in a way that makes you feel like you are actually experiencing the experience with these people. I really think that these interviews are very important and so will continue to be seen. It's sad to see so many important people who were involved in this in such a bad way, and of course it is very interesting to see the brutal fighting that is the core of so many of these stories, and a bit sad that so many were so crushed by it. The news-style style of interviewing just made it that much more powerful. However, there are many sad and sadder stories as well, of families who lost loved ones fighting, and of so many who were a part of that. So many people are already looking for peace, but it is even more sad to see how the peace and the potential for a new era is dying so quickly. One of the most important things that came out of this documentary was that there were actually human stories for the most part, but also the real stories of how this fight in that area affected a family and many other families. It is the hardest thing to learn and watch, and so many families were so torn apart by this fight, and it is so easy to feel a connection with the people who lost loved ones. It is also heartbreaking to see the lack of resources for food and medicines, but more tragic is that many children in the area are actually facing the lack of basic needs, such as clean water, and the fact that there were no hospitals in those areas. Of course it is important to hear about the atrocities that happened in that area, but it's also important to see the positive and positive effects that were happening. So many families were fighting and that really affected the community as a whole. If the documentary would have ended with just a few interviews I might have been able to turn it off, but the interviews were so powerful that I kept watching, and it gave me a sense of the incredible work that so many people are doing to try and make a better future. So many of the people who lost their lives were fighting for something that they believe in and that is one of the most important things in life. So many of the families that lost their children and loved ones fighting in that area are there to make that future for their children a better place, and if this documentary can help them, then it will be a huge success. I was extremely impressed by the interviews, and this documentary was a great way to see the progress that these people were making. I am very much looking forward to the next one.

James photo

If one can get through a 300-page book without ever reading it, then this film is one of the most enjoyable I have ever seen. It's an excellent documentary that would seem somewhat contrived if you didn't watch it. It follows the lives of so many notable people in France. On the surface, it seems a little off-the-wall, but its nearly impossible to dislike it. The film interviews many of the people interviewed, and it's very informative and entertaining. It seems like the documentary would be a little dull if one didn't watch it. It's very entertaining, and very well done. A great film!

Sharon photo

In the late 1960s, the film industry was a place of suspense, art and, most of all, high class clothing. In the United States, the fashion industry took on the role of a social force for good. Whether it be the latest sensation or a drop-dead stylish classic, there was always at least one well dressed model on screen. Most men could identify the "innocent young woman in a skirt, glasses, shoes and a top" that they had once admired. What is lacking in the fashion world, however, is a film that acknowledges the importance of fashion itself. "Street Style" does that, and does it well. Filmmaker Kenneth M. Clark has done what few directors have ever been able to do - he shows us how the fashion industry has inspired and molded the lives of millions. Not only has this film brought the industry to the forefront of American history, but it has also paved the way for a new generation to be inspired by the qualities that their grandmothers passed down to them. - MERK

Ralph K. photo
Ralph K.

It was three years ago when I went to the Copenhagen World Documentary Film Festival and the film "The Animal Conquest" was featured in the opening. The image of the female reproductive system, the people doing everything to the animals, the destruction of the forest, the extinction of many species, was a strong one. "The Animal Conquest" is the real deal, one of the most important documentaries I've ever seen. It's not just an environmental activist documentary, nor a documentary for the youth. It's not just an argument. "The Animal Conquest" really presents an issue in an interesting way. I have always been impressed by Marge Van Doren, a well known Danish film director. With "The Animal Conquest" she managed to bring a situation that has been systematically ignored. It is an absurd situation, and with an argument. It is not an argument that is exclusively important. It is a very significant argument that has been ignored. I really recommend you to see "The Animal Conquest" if you don't have a chance to see it at the upcoming festivals.

Virginia S. photo
Virginia S.

According to one viewer, "Guillame", known for his progressive political and social views, lives in a 12 x 12 room, and is a follower of "LeFevre" (Albert Camus) in his art. Guillame's father is a business man. His mother is an activist. His grandfather, a psychologist, "likes black people, too". This is only one among many. What Guillame wants to tell us is the way that the different faiths view their brothers. From the "Quadrioceles" (no, not the other quadriolar system): Atheists, agnostics and Christians, or the Christian-buddhist divide. We start with the stories of the Quakers and to the far-right-wing Prudence-Leconte. For a documentary-style film, it is exceptional to be able to tell the whole story from the perspective of people who actually lived their lives. This is the only documentary film that I can remember, where I didn't just hear the voices of these "intellectuals", but actually got a feel for the way their minds work. There are lots of "spoils" of making a documentary about Quakers, and of being able to create such a non-biased picture. The biggest reward comes from having a very clear and coherent picture of who these people are. This film has an "educational" value, if you want to go for that: "The Virgin of Guillamene", "The World of Guillame" and "Christianity Without Borders" are the ones I can recall. However, one really big surprise came from this documentary. It is not the images, the words or the interviews. It is the manner in which they are told. These are not theatrical pieces, but real-life stories of Quaker brothers. The different moods in this documentary are different in each brother. For example, when Guillame narrates a story of his own childhood, his voice is sometimes soft and quiet, sometimes loud and enthusiastic, sometimes laid back and quiet. When he narrates the story of his father, the expression of the story is always emotional, and sometimes instead of being sad, he is overwhelmed with sadness. This tells us a lot. We don't know which kind of the brothers are who they are. As an example, the one who tells the story of his mother is very lucid and friendly, while the one who tells about his grandmother is very simple and controlled. The same can be said about the brothers who narrate about Quaker history, such as Humble Pie, with his short and quick remarks. In conclusion, this is a very personal documentary that is different in each of the brothers' stories, but it also has an education value. It is certainly not the most important documentary, but it is the most "important" documentary of all time. It shows us that there is much more to life than reading about it on Wikipedia, and it is well worth watching.

Jonathan photo

The White Helmets of the White Helmets of the White Helmets is a top 10 action film to watch. This documentary is packed with interviews with the main characters and what they have to go through. Many have their own stories of those on the front lines and those on the front lines having to see their friends or family being killed in front of them. The White Helmets do what they are required to do to save civilians from the bombings, killings and even systematic torture of civilians as they flee their homes. The White Helmets are made up of volunteers all around the world but even so, you have the impression that some are going to be in it just for the money, while others know that it is their duty and that they have to do it to protect civilians from the killing, torture, or genocide that is taking place around them in the Middle East. To my opinion, this documentary is very interesting, but you should probably read some of the other reviews before you watch it. You will probably learn some of the truth about what they have to go through and also learn how that relates to other organizations and governments that are perpetrating these atrocities.

Sarah H. photo
Sarah H.

With a few scenes, Bergman tries to explain to us how he did his films. This is an accessible, interesting and very much interesting film, but not really for those who have no interest in culture and arts, but for those who like the idea of seeing and thinking about the meaning of the film, and Bergman in particular, to learn about his films. Bergman tries to explain why he likes his movies, that can easily be understood by almost anyone, and it's not a hard lesson to learn. Although it's hard to get a full grasp of the whole idea of Bergman's films, watching this film will definitely put you in the right frame of mind for that. It's hard to explain Bergman's films, that are very complex and full of meaning, because his films are certainly more art than anything else. But this film gives us the view, and we can learn that it's a beautiful, beautiful movie.

Amy C. photo
Amy C.

As one of the hundreds of German words on Wikipedia, I'd heard of the film before. On one hand, you could probably add it to the list of the top 100 words on Wikipedia. On the other hand, if you wanted to see it in a cinema, where they would probably not have a second language (Spanish), you'd be wasting your money. I did see the film in a cinema, but only just because it was advertised as a "deluxe" film (a film that looks a lot more expensive than it is). And it turned out to be a lot more expensive than I thought it would be, even if I was looking forward to a better picture. It's a small film with very few things to say. It's simply a story of two people who had to kill the entire family of one man (Dorff), and then they had to deal with a tragedy of their own. None of the footage is more than 3 seconds long. The picture looks great, the camera work is fine and solid, but the characters are limited. They all have their weaknesses and are absolutely flat. The people seem to be playing these characters for laughs. They all seem to be doing it in a very self-absorbed way. A woman starts saying, "I have one question." She says it a thousand times. This doesn't work. You want to know what that question is. It is never addressed. I'm not saying it is a bad film. The people do an excellent job. They look bored, bored, bored. It does remind me of the end of "The Godfather". Except that, the violence in "The Godfather" isn't just murder, it is what they have to do to survive. In "The Godfather" we see the cost of a war on people. We see the change in their life after. The story of "The Godfather" is the exact opposite, it is the change in the life of people after that war. In "The Godfather", the money and the power of the people is what holds the whole thing together. In "The Godfather", we see only what was going on inside the men's lives. We don't see what happened outside of them, because we don't know any better. In "The Godfather", violence was made up by the men, or carried out by the women. In "The Godfather", it is not possible to have two police officers killing the same man at the same time. In "The Godfather", one man couldn't be there for everything, and so it is the whole world. In "The Godfather", there are so many police officers that they can arrest the entire world. In "The Godfather", there are so many times when the men are killed that they are driven insane by the murders, and so they kill even more. The people in "The Godfather" become so stupid that they forget to ask one another what was going on, but the film depicts that they talk about it constantly, because they are so caught up in their own stupidity. In "The Godfather", you knew that something was happening, and you didn't know how. In "The Godfather", you know what is going to happen, and you don't know how, but you still go ahead with what you have to do. This is the way I think about a movie, it's the same way that I think about my life. I'm still not sure what to do, and I'm only able to follow the bad things with a piece of paper, and sometimes the pieces of paper slip and fall and I have to jump to catch them. And as the day gets longer and longer, I have to think, what if I jump to catch this piece of paper? I could have never watched this film, and I still don't know what to do with it. I'm not sure if it's better than a book or a film, but I like it a lot. It isn't a very good film, but it is a very good film, and it's worth seeing. This is how I feel about a film, nothing special, nothing extraordinary, and I'm glad I saw it. I think you can get a lot more from a film if you know what you're getting. And that's what I think about movies, and it's the same thing I think about other things in my life. I just can't get caught up in what I am doing, or what I'm thinking about. I try to find something interesting to do with my time, and I just don't get bored of the same old things. I watch movies to help me find a new thing to do. I do get bored of these things and I have to think what I should do to avoid that boredom. That's how I like movies. I like movies because it gives me something

James P. photo
James P.

Criminally underrated! I'm surprised that some of the negative reviews are by people who would never pay to see this documentary. This is not a documentary about World War 2. It's about the heroism of the Spanish Civil War and how the war and the war dead affected both sides. I'm not going to ruin the film for you but I would like to say that it doesn't shine a light on the Japanese side but what the Spanish did to the Japanese and vice-versa. While I don't agree with the bias of the reviewers (just my own opinion) I did enjoy the film. The amount of footage and details is great and the film flows well. The Spanish Civil War is one of the defining events in history and the film documents it beautifully. It's not a documentary and it's not a history lesson but it does serve a purpose. I give this film an 8.