فيلم The Founder

The Founder

The Founder is a movie starring Michael Keaton, Nick Offerman, and John Carroll Lynch. The story of Ray Kroc, a salesman who turned two brothers' innovative fast food eatery, McDonald's, into the biggest restaurant business in the...

Other Titles
Osnivač, McImperium, Fome de Poder, Ο ιδρυτής μιας αυτοκρατορίας, 速食遊戲, Hambre de poder, El fundador, Ha'meyased, Az alapító, 大创业家, Ο Ιδρυτής μιας Αυτοκρατορίας, O Fundador, ファウンダー ハンバーガー帝国のヒミツ, Zakladatel, Le fondateur, Fondatorul
Running Time
1 hours 55 minutes
480p, 720p, 1080p, 2K, 4K
History, Drama, Biography
John Lee Hancock
Robert Siegel
John Carroll Lynch, Linda Cardellini, Michael Keaton, Nick Offerman
Audio Languages
اللغة_العربية, English, Deutsch, Français, Italiano, Español, Svenska, Gaeilge, Nederlands
اللغة_العربية, 日本語, Čeština, Tiếng Việt, Português, 한국어, Australia, Filipino, हिन्दी

The story of Ray Kroc, a salesman who turned two brothers' innovative fast food eatery, McDonald's, into the biggest restaurant business in the world, with a combination of ambition, persistence, and ruthlessness.

Comments about history «The Founder» (9)

Amanda D. photo
Amanda D.

A film that has only been a while since it was released in the theater. Many of the reviews on here complain that it is boring, I would agree that this film is very boring, however, the only time I really felt a connection to this movie was after the credits. There was a lot of empty space on the screen. To me the biggest flaw is that the movie tries to do too much at once. I feel like the first act of the film was good, then it just went completely downhill. I felt like I was going through the motions and being watched, I was only hoping for a little bit of excitement that never came. However, I would recommend this movie to anyone who is looking for something different, even if it is just to watch a good drama, I believe that this movie will do that for you. If you are looking for a different film to watch, then this movie is not for you.

Keith Richardson photo
Keith Richardson

The Founder is a little gem of a movie that I would have been more excited if it was not the prequel to the first Godzilla. That said, the movie is still a very well done film that has its moments and is worth seeing. The film revolves around Dr. Ishiro Serizawa (Bill Paxton), a scientist who uses microchips to monitor the data on Godzilla. At one point, Serizawa comes across a giant antenna that was responsible for all the radio signals that Godzilla hears. He calls in the military to investigate and is told that the military are unable to get inside the bunker. He soon finds out that the military is not going to listen to him, and they leave without him. That is when Serizawa goes to work for Dr. Ryukichi Kamei (Hideki Sono) who has some very interesting ideas about the origin of Godzilla. It is also here where Serizawa becomes closer to the military, which starts to make him question the military's motives and that of Serizawa himself. Serizawa comes to the realization that the military is trying to create a monster monster in order to "clean up" the Japanese cities. As the military is not happy with Serizawa's ideas, they decide to send him off to a hospital in Mexico in order to test his technology. The first half of the film focuses on Serizawa's work and how he attempts to go against the military's ideas. The military sees the work of Serizawa as "Hollywood" and that the research of Serizawa is not as important as they believe. They also see the advances that Serizawa has made in the field of biological weapons. They send him to Japan to set up a laboratory, but he is not as successful there as he is in Japan. Serizawa realizes that he has not been successful and decides that he has a lot to learn about what makes monsters. One day, Serizawa meets with his boss, the military's chief scientist, Professor Shingen (Yusaku Nishioka). He discovers that Serizawa has been tampering with the data and that Serizawa was only able to stop a portion of the signal. The military see the change that Serizawa has made and tells him that if he continues to tamper with the data, he will be shut down. Serizawa finds out that the military's data were changed, but he is convinced that Serizawa is trying to find a way to make Godzilla evolve into a giant monster. In order to do this, Serizawa has to create a new monster in order to keep Godzilla alive and create the army to destroy Godzilla. However, Serizawa has a plan that the military will not be able to detect. Serizawa also has a new idea to control Godzilla, but as Serizawa continues to tamper with the data, he finds that Godzilla is reacting to Serizawa's ideas. The military also find out that Serizawa is trying to stop Godzilla, but Serizawa has a new idea for how to do this. Serizawa says that if the military will not stop Serizawa, Serizawa will not stop his research, but the military will be able to detect that Serizawa is interfering with the data. Serizawa is not happy with this, but the military has other ideas. Serizawa says that they will use Serizawa's technology in order to destroy Godzilla and that Serizawa will not stop until he has done this. Serizawa does not know that Serizawa's other idea to control Godzilla is actually the military's idea. In the end, Serizawa and his team succeed in killing Godzilla, but the military is able to stop Serizawa and his work. The military are now able to detect Serizawa's ideas, and they decide to let Serizawa go. Serizawa returns home to Japan to find out the truth about his work and of the military's actions. Serizawa is disappointed with the way the military is treating him, but he realizes that there is still work to be done, and he will try to change things for the better. It is also here where Serizawa discovers that there are many similarities between the Japanese Godzilla and the American Godzilla. He discovers that Godzilla has always been a monster that only destroys cities and that the Japanese Godzilla has always been the military's

Emma photo

I'm not sure that I have ever seen a movie about the founding fathers that has more than one "good" and "bad" view of the entire plot. If the historical inaccuracies in the movie were intended as a positive commentary, I think it's a terrific piece of work. It is quite easy to become cynical and cynical is how I felt while watching it. There are so many things wrong with this movie, it's hard to know where to start. For example, the "manuscript of life of John Adams" that our hero is reading in the book, the one that states that he is one of the founders of the republic, is a very different book to the one that I read when I was in college. It states that he's probably not a very good judge of character. Now, this could be true, but if the person is reading the book in question, it certainly shouldn't be stated as fact. But as an accurate piece of history, I think this is a lot of good work. My main criticism of this movie is that it was too long. I was actually thinking that I was about to watch a three hour movie. And, yes, it does take a while for the whole movie to get started, but once it does, the movie actually moves very quickly. Another problem is that the movie focuses more on the private life of the leaders of the republic than the public life of the republic. We really don't get a sense of what the republic looked like. What was the monarchy like? What was the public life like? What was the policy of the republic? For me, this was the main problem. A lot of good stuff is left out. I guess if you're a historian, you can't really find anything to criticize about this movie. I think it was an interesting story and I think it's worth watching. It's certainly better than the other movies that focus on the founders and their lives.

Timothy Burke photo
Timothy Burke

Having read the book this was not the film I had expected. However I found the film to be very well done and I found the movie to be very interesting. I found the story to be very interesting and interesting characters were created and it was very good to see Bill Gates himself. The film also had good music, good cast and a very interesting story. I think the film would have been better if it had a lot more action in it. The film was well acted by all the actors and was very entertaining. I found the film to be very interesting and interesting to watch. The film is very interesting in the way that it is told, in the way it is filmed and in the way it is acted. I really enjoyed the film and thought that it was very interesting and interesting to watch. I was not disappointed. I do recommend it.

Austin Morrison photo
Austin Morrison

If you want to know how much Marx himself paid for the privilege of reading Capital, read that book. This film is a very interesting documentary about the beginnings of Marx's thoughts and ideas. It also shows the failures of Marx's intellectual career and the creative works of Marx. The director Robert Farina, who's also the author of the novel "The Virgin Suicides" also does a great job of using the moving camera to show the thoughts and feelings of Marx. I would have liked a bit more time spent on his political ideas and ideas about anarchism and socialism. It seems that Marx himself never wanted to make a political film. In fact, one of the most important things that Marx would have wanted to do in the film is to avoid any political discussion. Marx was a political thinker, but he was not interested in political discussion. His political thought was so unique and unique that no one else ever considered it the way he thought. So when Marx wanted to write the book, he wrote the book. The film is a great way to see the thoughts and ideas of Marx and the ideas of anarchism and socialism. It is the second film I have seen this year, after "Anatomy of a Revolution", where the director Alfonso Cuaron showed the ideas of Marx. I recommend this film for people who want to know about the ideas of Marx and anarchism and about the ideas of anarchism and socialism.

Lawrence Young photo
Lawrence Young

I'm not going to lie, I had high hopes for this movie, it was billed as an Oscar winning film. I really liked the cast, particularly Will Smith and Morgan Freeman. I've always been a fan of both of them and have watched them in a number of films. I thought they did a good job in the film, although I thought "Chasing Liberty" was better in the two main roles. Although this movie does have some excellent moments, I thought it did lack something. In my opinion, it should have been better, but I will not be giving it an Oscar. In a nutshell, it's not a great film, but it is very good, I would give it a 8.5 out of 10. This is one of the few movies I've ever left the theater in after the end of the movie. Although the story was good, I would not say that it was Oscar worthy. As I said, I really liked the cast, although the performance of Will Smith was excellent, I thought that Morgan Freeman was not very believable. I also thought the way the story was told was a little contrived. I felt that if they had just told the story a little more straight forward, I think it would have been much better. I thought that the Oscar nomination was unnecessary. I would like to see this film win, but it's still a good film.

Ann photo

I was excited to see this movie because I enjoyed the first two parts. It was a great story about the founding of the US. There were some great actors in this film including Bryan Cranston. It was a good movie and I would recommend it to anyone.

Madison G. photo
Madison G.

This is a very impressive and touching movie that speaks of many issues. First of all, the fact that the book has not been published in 15 years, and that the first movie was a flop in the theaters and was a commercial failure. Secondly, the fact that many people did not read the book because they did not want to, because they did not understand it. The fact that so many people believed that slavery was bad is really interesting. The fact that, if you do not believe slavery is bad, you will find yourself against it. To quote the movie, "Once you see the realities of the institution of slavery, you will never be able to escape it."

Lawrence Meyer photo
Lawrence Meyer

Now I'm not sure if I'm a movie critic or not. I just like to watch movies. When I heard that a documentary about John Kennedy was going to be made, I had to check it out. That was when I first saw "JFK". I have to say that it was a bit too long and I had a hard time following the story. I was really looking forward to this movie and when I watched it, I didn't really like it. "JFK" was not an epic movie and I wasn't really all that impressed. But I am not sure if I would say that "Munich" was an epic movie. If you are like me and like a good movie, then I think that you will probably enjoy "JFK". There was a lot of good parts about it. Like the acting, I thought that it was great. The actors did a great job with the script and they did a great job with the story. The things that I really liked were the cinematography, the scenery, the music, and the directing. All of that combined to make a movie that was very enjoyable. The cinematography was very impressive and the story of this movie was very interesting. When I saw the movie, I had a hard time explaining what the story was about. It's about John Kennedy and the assassination. It's not really clear what he was doing and what he was doing. So I didn't really know if he was doing anything or not. But when I watched the movie, I really liked the acting and the movie. If you like movies that are interesting, then you will like this movie. If you like movies that are more action-oriented, then you probably won't like this movie. But for the majority of people, I think that this movie will be worth watching. I would rate it somewhere between a 7 and a 8. I do think that it is an interesting movie and I recommend that you watch it.