IMDb-BEWERTUNG
6,6/10
30.345
IHRE BEWERTUNG
Ein Außerirdischer muss sich als Mensch ausgeben, um seinen sterbenden Planeten zu retten, aber eine Frau und die Gier anderer Männer verursachen Komplikationen.Ein Außerirdischer muss sich als Mensch ausgeben, um seinen sterbenden Planeten zu retten, aber eine Frau und die Gier anderer Männer verursachen Komplikationen.Ein Außerirdischer muss sich als Mensch ausgeben, um seinen sterbenden Planeten zu retten, aber eine Frau und die Gier anderer Männer verursachen Komplikationen.
- Auszeichnungen
- 1 Gewinn & 4 Nominierungen insgesamt
Jim Lovell
- Capt. James Lovell, Commander of Apollo 13
- (as Capt. James Lovell)
Dort Clark
- Waiter
- (Nicht genannt)
Empfohlene Bewertungen
How you feel about this movie depends on what you want out of it. I have two disclosures to make: first, I write reviews short and sweet, with the intention of countering those people who give mediocre films 9 stars out of ten because a film speaks to them in some way that it will not speak to others. Second, I am a die-hard Bowiephile.I watched this movie over and over and over again, for the sheer love of David Bowie. That said, I don't think this is a great film. In a few ways, its terrible. Most significantly, the screenplay and direction don't match well enough to make a very coherent or intelligible movie. It feels cheap and disjointed. If you haven't read the book, it will not make much of sense. As for performances, they are hit and miss. Bowie, many say, was exactly in his element doing this film in 75/76 when he was truly an alien living in L.A, wacked out on cocaine and out of touch with real life. How much he really acted was debatable-but if you like Bowie, seeing this film is a must. There are a few great visuals, including the cover shot used for the album LOW. This movie would have been better with a different director in my opinion, but it is what it is. A snapshot in time
so, it seems to me there have been a lot of negative reviews. they break down into two categories: 1) those that say its got "too much sex". blah. grow up. 2) those who say "it's a mess". okay...we can work with that.
this really isnt a plot-based scifi like Star Wars. its not about linear events with obvious cause-and-effects, good guys and bad. its part scifi, part art film, and part trippy 70s movie. these movies dont speak with dialogue, they speak with images, and with mood (ie, "How does this sequence make you feel?" warm? uncomfortable? etc) thats just what this movie is. if you dont like these types of movies--movies in which you may have to do some interpretation--you wont like this one either. simple. its not Star Wars, people...Lucas isnt here to hold your hand.
for instance, one of the "gratuitous" sex scenes near the end, after Mary Lou has aged, was not gratuitous but in fact grotesque. it made me uncomfortable. which i am certain is exactly what it was supposed to do--to show me what a sham Newton's relationship with Mary Lou had become. it had become merely a drunken-memory, for them both... and their sex-scene-revisited depicted that, perfectly.
the whole movie is like that, speaking in general feelings and mood rather than black-and-white dialogue. and its more powerful because of it.
so...put it in perspective as you critic it. dont like romantic comedies? then youre not gonna like the latest Hugh Grant film. but that doesnt mean it isnt good. capese? (btw, i think hugh grant movies suck).
this really isnt a plot-based scifi like Star Wars. its not about linear events with obvious cause-and-effects, good guys and bad. its part scifi, part art film, and part trippy 70s movie. these movies dont speak with dialogue, they speak with images, and with mood (ie, "How does this sequence make you feel?" warm? uncomfortable? etc) thats just what this movie is. if you dont like these types of movies--movies in which you may have to do some interpretation--you wont like this one either. simple. its not Star Wars, people...Lucas isnt here to hold your hand.
for instance, one of the "gratuitous" sex scenes near the end, after Mary Lou has aged, was not gratuitous but in fact grotesque. it made me uncomfortable. which i am certain is exactly what it was supposed to do--to show me what a sham Newton's relationship with Mary Lou had become. it had become merely a drunken-memory, for them both... and their sex-scene-revisited depicted that, perfectly.
the whole movie is like that, speaking in general feelings and mood rather than black-and-white dialogue. and its more powerful because of it.
so...put it in perspective as you critic it. dont like romantic comedies? then youre not gonna like the latest Hugh Grant film. but that doesnt mean it isnt good. capese? (btw, i think hugh grant movies suck).
This movie is definitely one of my favourites. First off, the acting is wonderful. David Bowie is awesome, I could not have imagined a better choice of actor. He plays his role to perfection and with just the right emotion. Candy Clark is also incredible in her role. Then comes the plot itself. Sure the plot is a little hard to follow but it is so brilliantly rendered and the cinematography is perfect. A very strong atmosphere and mood is created and the whole thing all together is just mind-blowing. Very original. Very artistic. Go see it if you haven't already.
I would also like to add that this cult science fiction film is however not for everyone. The way it was created and the way the scenes are shot resembles an experimental film. The style is also out of the ordinary and the plot may seem to be a little strange and confusing to some. Most people either love it or hate it.
I would also like to add that this cult science fiction film is however not for everyone. The way it was created and the way the scenes are shot resembles an experimental film. The style is also out of the ordinary and the plot may seem to be a little strange and confusing to some. Most people either love it or hate it.
Maybe Starman David Bowie was born to play the title role in The Man Who Fell To Earth, an avant-garde disjointed sci fi film from director Nicolas Roeg.
Thomas Jerome Newton (David Bowie) is an alien who lands in New Mexico with some precious rings, a British passport and some rudimentary knowledge of patents. He needs to make money so he can build a rocket ship that can transport water to his dying planet.
Newton quickly makes money through his advanced business patents, he recruits a chief scientist (Rip Torn) who discovers that he is not what he appears to be and falls in love with hotel maid (Candy Clark) who also introduces him to the delights of gin & tonic.
The government intelligence service and rival businesses decide to look closely into his activities. They throw his patent lawyer and business associate (Buck Henry) out of the window and then hold Newton captive in a hotel plying him with gin.
The film plays with time as years go by and other characters age. We have flashbacks of Newton in his home planet with his family. The most memorable scenes is that of an alien with a British passport and the famous scene of Clark urinating her underwear when Newton reveals himself as an alien.
The film has a cult following but it is not a great film. It is too trippy and unstructured leading you to ask more questions than get any answers from it. Still I cannot think of anyone else who could had played the title role in that era and Bowie goes for it full frontal.
However the combination of Bowie and Roeg makes this a landmark science fiction film of the 1970s just as worthy as Close Encounters of the Third Kind.
Thomas Jerome Newton (David Bowie) is an alien who lands in New Mexico with some precious rings, a British passport and some rudimentary knowledge of patents. He needs to make money so he can build a rocket ship that can transport water to his dying planet.
Newton quickly makes money through his advanced business patents, he recruits a chief scientist (Rip Torn) who discovers that he is not what he appears to be and falls in love with hotel maid (Candy Clark) who also introduces him to the delights of gin & tonic.
The government intelligence service and rival businesses decide to look closely into his activities. They throw his patent lawyer and business associate (Buck Henry) out of the window and then hold Newton captive in a hotel plying him with gin.
The film plays with time as years go by and other characters age. We have flashbacks of Newton in his home planet with his family. The most memorable scenes is that of an alien with a British passport and the famous scene of Clark urinating her underwear when Newton reveals himself as an alien.
The film has a cult following but it is not a great film. It is too trippy and unstructured leading you to ask more questions than get any answers from it. Still I cannot think of anyone else who could had played the title role in that era and Bowie goes for it full frontal.
However the combination of Bowie and Roeg makes this a landmark science fiction film of the 1970s just as worthy as Close Encounters of the Third Kind.
The Man Who Fell To Earth is ultimately a frustrating film. The phrase 'the sum of its parts is greater than the whole' definitely applies. At times it's brilliant and original, but it's effectively brought down by its overlong running time and relentlessly obtuse presentation. It begins very promisingly but falls away in the final third, where it just loses focus and direction. Visually, as can be expected from Nicolas Roeg, it's often quite excellent, with his usual bold editing techniques in place too. The cinematography is very good and David Bowie certainly looks the part. Roeg certainly had a thing for using singers in lead roles. He also utilized Mick Jagger in Performance and Art Garfunkel in Bad Timing, and Bowie like those other two is used to good effect. He doesn't really need to act very much; Bowie in the mid 70's was an almost alien-like creature to begin with. I thought Candy Clark was very good as Mary-Lou. She brought some warmth to the proceedings which was appreciated.
Like Roeg's work in general, there is hardly any humour here. He was primarily a visionary auteur and The Man Who Fell To Earth is undoubtedly a work that allows him to express himself in a highly personal way. But unlike in Performance, Walkabout, Don't Look Now and even Bad Timing the technique never seemed to achieve an overall whole. My feeling is that I would need to re-watch this movie in order to develop a better appreciation of it. On first impressions, it's a collection of great moments within an impenetrable whole. A very strange film though.
Like Roeg's work in general, there is hardly any humour here. He was primarily a visionary auteur and The Man Who Fell To Earth is undoubtedly a work that allows him to express himself in a highly personal way. But unlike in Performance, Walkabout, Don't Look Now and even Bad Timing the technique never seemed to achieve an overall whole. My feeling is that I would need to re-watch this movie in order to develop a better appreciation of it. On first impressions, it's a collection of great moments within an impenetrable whole. A very strange film though.
Wusstest du schon
- WissenswertesThe picture was temporarily scored with music from Pink Floyd's album "The Dark Side of the Moon".
- PatzerWhen Mary-Lou takes Thomas to the hotel's fifth floor in the elevator instead of allowing him to use the stairs, she says, "It's five flights." This would be correct in the UK, but not in America; from the ground floor to the fifth floor of an American building is four flights.
- Zitate
Thomas Jerome Newton: Ask me...
Nathan Bryce: What?
Thomas Jerome Newton: The question you've been wanting to ask ever since we met.
Nathan Bryce: Are you Lithuanian?
Thomas Jerome Newton: [grins] I come from England.
Nathan Bryce: Ah, that's not so terrible.
- Alternative VersionenThe US theatrical release of the film was drastically altered. Not only were 20 minutes cut (including the gun sequence) but some scenes were rearranged and a few scenes had different camera angles.
- VerbindungenEdited into We are the Robots (2010)
Top-Auswahl
Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
- How long is The Man Who Fell to Earth?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Erscheinungsdatum
- Herkunftsland
- Sprache
- Auch bekannt als
- El hombre que cayó a la Tierra
- Drehorte
- Produktionsfirmen
- Weitere beteiligte Unternehmen bei IMDbPro anzeigen
Box Office
- Budget
- 1.500.000 $ (geschätzt)
- Bruttoertrag in den USA und Kanada
- 100.072 $
- Eröffnungswochenende in den USA und in Kanada
- 5.922 $
- 26. Juni 2011
- Weltweiter Bruttoertrag
- 167.072 $
- Laufzeit
- 2 Std. 19 Min.(139 min)
- Farbe
- Sound-Mix
- Seitenverhältnis
- 2.35 : 1
Zu dieser Seite beitragen
Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen