Das Leben eines Mannes ist aus den Fugen geraten, wenn sich ein ominöses Muster von Ereignissen jeden Tag auf genau die gleiche Weise wiederholt und genau um 14.22 Uhr endet.Das Leben eines Mannes ist aus den Fugen geraten, wenn sich ein ominöses Muster von Ereignissen jeden Tag auf genau die gleiche Weise wiederholt und genau um 14.22 Uhr endet.Das Leben eines Mannes ist aus den Fugen geraten, wenn sich ein ominöses Muster von Ereignissen jeden Tag auf genau die gleiche Weise wiederholt und genau um 14.22 Uhr endet.
- Auszeichnungen
- 1 Gewinn & 2 Nominierungen insgesamt
Empfohlene Bewertungen
Keeping this short, I don't understand why there's so many negative reviews of this flick. I see a repeating pattern for genre movies such as this, in that the sex & explosions popcorn actioner crowd seem to take it personally when they don't understand what's going on.
Above average movies such as this and other hidden gems like "Predestination" get an unfair rap from the instant gratification legions, who seemingly don't like any pointed reminders that they're stupid.
Good casting, locations, cinematography and a breathtaking soundtrack used to the best possible effect make this a welcome addition to the stable of movies that you wouldn't usually watch because of all the naysayers, but are glad you did once you do. Yeah, there's some minor plothole issues and the pacing was a bit confusing at times, but the good far outweighs the bad.
Watch it.
Above average movies such as this and other hidden gems like "Predestination" get an unfair rap from the instant gratification legions, who seemingly don't like any pointed reminders that they're stupid.
Good casting, locations, cinematography and a breathtaking soundtrack used to the best possible effect make this a welcome addition to the stable of movies that you wouldn't usually watch because of all the naysayers, but are glad you did once you do. Yeah, there's some minor plothole issues and the pacing was a bit confusing at times, but the good far outweighs the bad.
Watch it.
Soapy cheese fest that don't cohere. Could well have been the script of an 80s music videoclip. Despite the decent enough production value, it can in fact be described as 90 odd minutes of two nice-looking people who fall in love trying (in vain, as far as sound story-telling goes) to find cosmic significance in their feelings. They do so through a mary-go-round story that uses all the trappings of the "stuck in a moment in time" motif without any of the logical puzzles, metaphysical ponderings, or even plain suspense that a situation like that may create. Love proper may reverberate down the ages, but this love affair's photons get trapped in the movie's scripting black hole and never make it out. Utterly forgettable.
5 points to production value but nothing more than this.
5 points to production value but nothing more than this.
The star of this film are the screenwriters; Nathan and Stein, who take an incomplete idea and run with it. Unfortunately, when you rush, you sometimes make mistakes. This is one of those times. It is a real shame, and I am sure both writers will have a productive future. But this effort falls short due to the inability of the writers to clearly convey what they are writing about. The character of the air traffic controller is well-developed, but not anyone else. To get an effective chemistry for the audience, one must develop the TWO characters at the same time; not just one and then introduce another one much later. That device does not work, and helps to eventually ruin any connection the audience might have with the later character. This flaw is not the only reason the film is not successful. The premise of time travel (and this is a time travel film in the sense that Groundhog Day was a time travel film) is a difficult premise to work around as a film. Groundhog Day was successful because it had a great actor, Murray, and great comedy situations. This film has no sense of humor, nor does it have any sense of impending repeating events. The audience is intrigued, but then loses interest when there are no compelling examples before the final event of the phenomenon. A good try, but no cigar.
I have to admit I don't understand the extreme negativity in some of the reviews.....especially considering the amount of uninspired garbage in movie theaters these days.
Now, 2:22 is not a masterpiece, and like most movies it has weaknesses, but its strength is that it builds a sense of suspense without the usual car chases and urban shoot outs that seem to please the ADD crowds so much. The acting is solid (not Oscar material but better than hinted at in many reviews), the direction and special effects are very polished, and, more importantly, the slow accretion of mysterious details and surreal circumstances make it far more interesting, IMO, than most movies currently on offering. I think this movie also does a good job, overall, of hinting at parts of the ending but at the same time maintaining a sense of suspense about how exactly the mysterious events and patterns noticed by the main character will come together.
This is not a realistic thriller, with a clear cut plot and an ending that explains every minor thread or detail in its story, or a relentless action movies with plenty of explosions and other events that ultimately mean nothing, or a bloated love story with SF elements. Hence, I think, the disappointment of some viewers.
The way I see it this is a movie that, despite its imperfections, evolves into a subtle, psychological thriller that hints at man's endless fascination with patterns (in our Universe, in our life, in history etc) and at our sense of wonder of how we fit in it. A movie that while providing us with an interesting story also asks us to add to the plot our own interpretation of the events, and our own sense of wonder about the mystery of our existence.
Now, there is no doubt that other movies on similar topics are superior (12 monkeys and Groundhog day come to mind, among others), but I still think this is one of the few movies worth watching I've seen this year, despite its limitations. At least it asks the watcher to actually engage his brain instead of just switching off and let the explosions roll on until the cardboard cutout bad guy/guys are vanquished.
Now, 2:22 is not a masterpiece, and like most movies it has weaknesses, but its strength is that it builds a sense of suspense without the usual car chases and urban shoot outs that seem to please the ADD crowds so much. The acting is solid (not Oscar material but better than hinted at in many reviews), the direction and special effects are very polished, and, more importantly, the slow accretion of mysterious details and surreal circumstances make it far more interesting, IMO, than most movies currently on offering. I think this movie also does a good job, overall, of hinting at parts of the ending but at the same time maintaining a sense of suspense about how exactly the mysterious events and patterns noticed by the main character will come together.
This is not a realistic thriller, with a clear cut plot and an ending that explains every minor thread or detail in its story, or a relentless action movies with plenty of explosions and other events that ultimately mean nothing, or a bloated love story with SF elements. Hence, I think, the disappointment of some viewers.
The way I see it this is a movie that, despite its imperfections, evolves into a subtle, psychological thriller that hints at man's endless fascination with patterns (in our Universe, in our life, in history etc) and at our sense of wonder of how we fit in it. A movie that while providing us with an interesting story also asks us to add to the plot our own interpretation of the events, and our own sense of wonder about the mystery of our existence.
Now, there is no doubt that other movies on similar topics are superior (12 monkeys and Groundhog day come to mind, among others), but I still think this is one of the few movies worth watching I've seen this year, despite its limitations. At least it asks the watcher to actually engage his brain instead of just switching off and let the explosions roll on until the cardboard cutout bad guy/guys are vanquished.
A story about mysterious set of events that continue happening to one man at 2:22 every single day. Michiel Huisman stars is an air traffic controller from New York losing his job after experiencing a weird flash of light causing him to blank out at 2:22. The plot tells about his experiencing more and more weird events at the same time after he meets a woman, played by Teresa Palmer. This appears being quite a unique idea for a film story overall it's not easy to understand what is exactly going on. Is it the movie the stars or about this guy? Is it something else? The full cast includes Sam Reid, Maeve Dermody, Remy Hii, and Simone Kessell. To sum up an original idea but the result is nothing more than a barely decent entertainment.
Wusstest du schon
- WissenswertesDuring its one week theatrical release from June 30 to July 6, it only made $422, making it the lowest grossing film of 2017.
- PatzerIn the opening scenes of New York the Twin Towers are clearly visible. In a later scene of New York we see the One World Trade Center.
The first scene is in the dream. At that time in the dream, the twin towers still stood.
- VerbindungenReferences Am Rande des Rollfelds (1962)
- SoundtracksCool on Fire
Performed by Daniel Johns
Composed by Daniel Johns / Joel Little
Licensed by Sony/ATV Music Publishing (Australia) Pty Limited & EMI April Music Inc. Licensed by EMI Music Publishing Australia Pty Limited
Under license from Eleven: A Music Company Pty Ltd
Licensed courtesy of Universal Music Australia Pty Limited
Top-Auswahl
Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
- How long is 2:22?Powered by Alexa
Details
Box Office
- Bruttoertrag in den USA und Kanada
- 422 $
- Eröffnungswochenende in den USA und in Kanada
- 294 $
- 2. Juli 2017
- Weltweiter Bruttoertrag
- 3.945.729 $
- Laufzeit1 Stunde 38 Minuten
- Farbe
- Sound-Mix
- Seitenverhältnis
- 2.39 : 1
Zu dieser Seite beitragen
Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen