[go: up one dir, main page]

    Kalender veröffentlichenDie Top 250 FilmeDie beliebtesten FilmeFilme nach Genre durchsuchenBeste KinokasseSpielzeiten und TicketsNachrichten aus dem FilmFilm im Rampenlicht Indiens
    Was läuft im Fernsehen und was kann ich streamen?Die Top 250 TV-SerienBeliebteste TV-SerienSerien nach Genre durchsuchenNachrichten im Fernsehen
    Was gibt es zu sehenAktuelle TrailerIMDb OriginalsIMDb-AuswahlIMDb SpotlightLeitfaden für FamilienunterhaltungIMDb-Podcasts
    EmmysSuperheroes GuideSan Diego Comic-ConSummer Watch GuideBest Of 2025 So FarDisability Pride MonthSTARmeter AwardsAwards CentralFestival CentralAlle Ereignisse
    Heute geborenDie beliebtesten PromisPromi-News
    HilfecenterBereich für BeitragendeUmfragen
Für Branchenprofis
  • Sprache
  • Vollständig unterstützt
  • English (United States)
    Teilweise unterstützt
  • Français (Canada)
  • Français (France)
  • Deutsch (Deutschland)
  • हिंदी (भारत)
  • Italiano (Italia)
  • Português (Brasil)
  • Español (España)
  • Español (México)
Watchlist
Anmelden
  • Vollständig unterstützt
  • English (United States)
    Teilweise unterstützt
  • Français (Canada)
  • Français (France)
  • Deutsch (Deutschland)
  • हिंदी (भारत)
  • Italiano (Italia)
  • Português (Brasil)
  • Español (España)
  • Español (México)
App verwenden
  • Besetzung und Crew-Mitglieder
  • Benutzerrezensionen
  • Wissenswertes
IMDbPro

Lautloser Regen

Originaltitel: Rain Without Thunder
  • 1992
  • PG-13
  • 1 Std. 25 Min.
IMDb-BEWERTUNG
5,0/10
343
IHRE BEWERTUNG
Lautloser Regen (1992)
Dystopian Sci-FiLegal DramaPolitical DramaDramaSci-Fi

Füge eine Handlung in deiner Sprache hinzuIt's the year 2042 and the threat is real...women are going to prison for terminating their pregnancies. An investigating reporter is determined to reveal the truth behind the convictions.It's the year 2042 and the threat is real...women are going to prison for terminating their pregnancies. An investigating reporter is determined to reveal the truth behind the convictions.It's the year 2042 and the threat is real...women are going to prison for terminating their pregnancies. An investigating reporter is determined to reveal the truth behind the convictions.

  • Regie
    • Gary O. Bennett
  • Drehbuch
    • Gary O. Bennett
  • Hauptbesetzung
    • Betty Buckley
    • Carolyn McCormick
    • Iona Morris
  • Siehe Produktionsinformationen bei IMDbPro
  • IMDb-BEWERTUNG
    5,0/10
    343
    IHRE BEWERTUNG
    • Regie
      • Gary O. Bennett
    • Drehbuch
      • Gary O. Bennett
    • Hauptbesetzung
      • Betty Buckley
      • Carolyn McCormick
      • Iona Morris
    • 21Benutzerrezensionen
    • 6Kritische Rezensionen
  • Siehe Produktionsinformationen bei IMDbPro
  • Siehe Produktionsinformationen bei IMDbPro
  • Fotos2

    Poster ansehen
    Poster ansehen

    Topbesetzung42

    Ändern
    Betty Buckley
    Betty Buckley
    • Beverly Goldring
    Carolyn McCormick
    Carolyn McCormick
    • Reporter
    Iona Morris
    Iona Morris
    • Andrea Murdoch
    Steve Zahn
    Steve Zahn
    • Jeremy Tanner
    Jeff Daniels
    Jeff Daniels
    • Jonathan Garson
    Ali Thomas
    • Allison Goldring
    Stuart Burney
    • Spencer Goldring
    Eliza Clark
    Eliza Clark
    • Piper Goldring
    Heather Lilly
    • Micka Goldring
    Alyssa Rallo Bennett
    Alyssa Rallo Bennett
    • Author Max Sinclair
    Helen Lloyd Breed
    • Alice Kappelhoff
    Katy Selverstone
    Katy Selverstone
    • Abra Russell
    • (as Katherine Selverstone)
    Frederic Forrest
    Frederic Forrest
    • Walker Point Warden
    Charles E. Gerber
    Charles E. Gerber
    • Grover Cole
    Bahni Turpin
    • 'Baby Bomb' Prisoner
    Ming-Na Wen
    Ming-Na Wen
    • 'Uudie' Prisoner
    • (as Ming Na Wen)
    John Scott
    • Health Official #1
    Andrew Spencer
    • Health Official #2
    • Regie
      • Gary O. Bennett
    • Drehbuch
      • Gary O. Bennett
    • Komplette Besetzung und alle Crew-Mitglieder
    • Produktion, Einspielergebnisse & mehr bei IMDbPro

    Benutzerrezensionen21

    5,0343
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10

    Empfohlene Bewertungen

    5Toaster1980

    Worth watching if interested in abortion debate

    I caught this movie by chance because the TV was on . . . knew nothing about it. I saw the "2042 A.D." notation at the beginning and I decided to watch it since I like science fiction.

    Only a few minutes in, the film revealed its pro-choice propagandist objective. Since I pay close attention to social issues in politics, I continued to watch. At the first commercial break I read reviews written at the time of its release, which mostly remarked that it was the most boring 85 minutes a person could experience.

    However, now after more than twenty years, the film is quite interesting -- not for its quality but for its "hits and misses" at predicting the future. For example, there is mention of economic expansion through the end of the twentieth century, followed by a pull-back causing Americans to believe that the nation needed to be reclaimed -- apparently by criminalizing abortion. The writer correctly predicted the pro-life trend in America for the next few decades, but attributed it to the wrong reasons. In reality, ever since 1973, science has provided ever-increasing evidence that life begins too soon after fertilization for most Americans to support abortion on demand even at ever-decreasing gestation periods.

    A more reasoned prediction would be that IF the unborn in America were defined as persons with the constitutional right to life (and thus Roe v. Wade overturned), it would happen BECAUSE society as a whole gravitated in the same direction (as opposed to increased polarization), and thus the extent of the punishment for illegal abortion would be less controversial than this film presents.

    Although abortion advocates may see the film as showing both pro-choice and pro-life viewpoints, I could find only one instance of a pro-life message: A Catholic priest describes the gruesome details of tearing a fetus limb-from-limb in the womb or alternatively burning it to death with chemicals. Otherwise, the film is 100% pro-choice and anti-Christian.

    The writer's prediction concerning feminism (and male/female relations) was far from the mark, at least for the first 20 years after release of the film. Certainly feminist advocacy has shifted since 1992, but to predict that women would lose so-called rights and societal stature was ridiculous -- apparently it was presented as an extreme claim in order to prompt a reaction.
    6hkg202

    well constructed premise, mediocre production values

    As a disclaimer, I should note that I am a friend of the director, who, by the way, is a wonderful person and very fun to work with. His film, however, has it's issues. The soundtrack is really terrible, and the all-interview, talking-heads format is limiting. These things, however, are obviously the result of a very small budget, not just bad filmmaking. The story was what impressed me, specifically the way Bennett describes the series of small changes in the political and religious arenas that could very plausibly lead to a reversal of Roe v. Wade. Unfortunately the film was released right after Clinton was elected, and people were feeling very comfortable and safe under a new, liberal administration. I think the purpose of _Rain Without Thunder_ is not "preach to the choir" but rather to keep the choir from growing complacent. And even if you're unimpressed with the plot, it's lots of fun to spot now-stars like Ming-Na and Steve Zahn (not to mention that woman from the Nicorette ads).
    10imdb-211

    great movie about abortion

    this is a movie everybody who's even remotely interested in abortion should see, especially male persons. the actors are brilliant (I've never seen Jeff Daniels in a movie like this...) and the story is, though filmed with modest means, very compelling, even exciting. the story takes place in a future where abortion is illegal in the USA. a young women who's pregnant goes to sweden in order to abort her baby and gets convicted for her abortion when she goes back to the states. the movie's filmed in an interesting way. it's mostly made of short scenes where the people involved directly or indirectly in the story talk about their experiences and thoughts and what has happened and why they think it has happened to a female reporter.
    9drchazan

    Scary because it could come true

    I think that most of the people who don't like this movie don't know a little bit of the background regarding one reference - Margaret Atwood's book (and movie) The Handmaid's Tale. Notice that Linda Hunt's character is from the Atwood society. Without that reference, I'm not sure everyone can understand the full weight of this film.

    Moreover, I think anyone who wants to really know if this film has a basis in reality should just look at what's happening (slowly, but apparently surely) in the USA regarding abortion laws today. Yes, this could happen in the USA and that makes it the most scary movie I've ever seen.

    A must-see for anyone who is interested in abortion issues (although pro-lifers will certainly call it bunk).
    thirstyths

    Probably closer than you think

    Sure, this film, like "Bob Roberts" and some others I could name, indulges in a bit of preaching-to-the-choir... But, then, one could argue that the drivel they peddle on CBN and those inane Tim LaHaye books do the exact same thing, for the Church Lady Crowd. What's truly scary about this film isn't its absurdity, but rather its plausibility- some of this would doubtless become reality if certain forces and groups in our society had their way. Our modern world is full of examples of once relatively progressive, modern secular states that fell into extreme repression at the hands of religious fanatics. Afghanistan is only the most blatant, recent example. For those who are "pro-life", but maybe haven't thought through the full implications of enshrining their agenda into law, I would think this film raises some pretty pertinent questions, like- would an IUD, which can prevent the implantation of a fertilized egg, be considered a "murder weapon"? Will women have to be locked up to insure that they don't commit "crimes" against their fetuses? Just how will the legal apparatus deal with regulating the sex lives and reproductive systems of millions of Americans? It's all well and good to talk about "saving the babies", but these questions will invariably come up if the radical right is able to implement it's plan of making abortion (and, for some "pro-life" groups, all forms of birth control) a crime. Everyone should see this movie. It's not a "liberal's nightmare", it's the nightmare of everyone who doesn't want Big Brother hanging out in their bodies and bedrooms.

    Mehr wie diese

    Eine herzliche Affäre
    5,4
    Eine herzliche Affäre
    Brennendes Schicksal
    6,8
    Brennendes Schicksal
    Die Augen meines Vaters
    5,7
    Die Augen meines Vaters
    Rage - Irrsinnige Gewalt
    5,5
    Rage - Irrsinnige Gewalt
    Die Maulwürfe
    5,8
    Die Maulwürfe
    Checking Out
    4,8
    Checking Out
    Sweethearts Dance - Liebe ist mehr als nur ein Wort
    5,7
    Sweethearts Dance - Liebe ist mehr als nur ein Wort
    Chasing Sleep
    6,2
    Chasing Sleep
    Marie - Eine wahre Geschichte
    6,6
    Marie - Eine wahre Geschichte
    Timescape
    6,4
    Timescape
    Noch dümmer
    5,8
    Noch dümmer
    Tödliche Sucht
    5,9
    Tödliche Sucht

    Handlung

    Ändern

    Wusstest du schon

    Ändern
    • Wissenswertes
      Ming-na Wen and Steve Zahn's film debut.
    • Crazy Credits
      If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom and yet avoid confrontation, are people who want crops without plowing up the ground; they want rain without thunder and lightning; they want the ocean without the roar of its waters - Frederick Douglass

    Top-Auswahl

    Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
    Anmelden

    Details

    Ändern
    • Erscheinungsdatum
      • 5. Februar 1993 (Vereinigte Staaten)
    • Herkunftsland
      • Vereinigte Staaten
    • Sprache
      • Englisch
    • Auch bekannt als
      • Rain Without Thunder
    • Drehorte
      • Detroit, Michigan, USA(1992)
    • Produktionsfirma
      • Taz Pictures Production
    • Weitere beteiligte Unternehmen bei IMDbPro anzeigen

    Box Office

    Ändern
    • Bruttoertrag in den USA und Kanada
      • 11.602 $
    • Eröffnungswochenende in den USA und in Kanada
      • 6.478 $
      • 7. Feb. 1993
    Weitere Informationen zur Box Office finden Sie auf IMDbPro.

    Technische Daten

    Ändern
    • Laufzeit
      1 Stunde 25 Minuten
    • Farbe
      • Color
    • Sound-Mix
      • Ultra Stereo
    • Seitenverhältnis
      • 1.85 : 1

    Zu dieser Seite beitragen

    Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen
    Lautloser Regen (1992)
    Oberste Lücke
    By what name was Lautloser Regen (1992) officially released in Canada in English?
    Antwort
    • Weitere Lücken anzeigen
    • Erfahre mehr über das Beitragen
    Seite bearbeiten

    Mehr entdecken

    Zuletzt angesehen

    Bitte aktiviere Browser-Cookies, um diese Funktion nutzen zu können. Weitere Informationen
    Hol dir die IMDb-App
    Melde dich an für Zugriff auf mehr InhalteMelde dich an für Zugriff auf mehr Inhalte
    Folge IMDb in den sozialen Netzwerken
    Hol dir die IMDb-App
    Für Android und iOS
    Hol dir die IMDb-App
    • Hilfe
    • Inhaltsverzeichnis
    • IMDbPro
    • Box Office Mojo
    • IMDb-Daten lizenzieren
    • Pressezimmer
    • Werbung
    • Jobs
    • Allgemeine Geschäftsbedingungen
    • Datenschutzrichtlinie
    • Your Ads Privacy Choices
    IMDb, ein Amazon-Unternehmen

    © 1990-2025 by IMDb.com, Inc.