IMDb-BEWERTUNG
6,1/10
1424
IHRE BEWERTUNG
Wir erhalten keinerlei Erklärungen, wenn wir uns die letzten verzweifelten Minuten im Leben dreier Männer ansehen. Sie alle sind gewalttätig gegenüber den Frauen, die sie lieben. Wir versteh... Alles lesenWir erhalten keinerlei Erklärungen, wenn wir uns die letzten verzweifelten Minuten im Leben dreier Männer ansehen. Sie alle sind gewalttätig gegenüber den Frauen, die sie lieben. Wir verstehen, dass es für die Reaktionen der Männer einen Grund gibt. Was steckt dahinter?Wir erhalten keinerlei Erklärungen, wenn wir uns die letzten verzweifelten Minuten im Leben dreier Männer ansehen. Sie alle sind gewalttätig gegenüber den Frauen, die sie lieben. Wir verstehen, dass es für die Reaktionen der Männer einen Grund gibt. Was steckt dahinter?
- Auszeichnungen
- 2 Gewinne & 7 Nominierungen insgesamt
Empfohlene Bewertungen
What a thoroughly depressing way to spend ninety minutes of your life. It all begins with a sixty something year old man on the phone ending his newspaper subscription. This is part of the three unrelated stories. The second one involves a guy sitting in a kitchen while conversing with a woman and their children. The tension is palpable, as his ex-wife speaks on the phone with her current man. Number three is a drug addict in biker shirts behaving very strangely as he watches television. He walks into a bedroom and mounts a tied up woman for a quick round of unwanted intercourse. Oh what fun those Norwegians are. He later unties the woman so that she can breast feed their screaming infant. I have no idea what the hell the point is to the three unconnected plots is supposed to be, other than that life is a great struggle and that we live in a world where sudden deadly violence may occur. The acting is fine overall, but I cannot recommend Ninety Minutes for any reason at all.
7OJT
We get no explanations when we follow three different ordinary situations which seem like ordinary and common, but we're entering the last minutes of three mens lives. We must use our own imaginations, but we understand there's a reason behind the three mens reactions, planned or not. We just don't now what lies behind. The following is anyway the same - despair.
This is definitely not for everyone. Just like the men, this film is detached. Sometimes slow, other times violent, both in pictures as well as other times in you own imagination. Nothing to watch for a troubled mind, nor for those needing the answers. Still this film has got a lot of attention for all this
We meet three men which have lost not only the meaning of life. They have lost themselves. Maybe they hate themselves for this. We really don't get to know, but they are kind of detached. Just like we feel when we hear about these tragedies after they have happened.
Eva Sørhaugs second feature after Cold Lunch (Lønsj) is a difficult film to comprehend. Still we've read and heard about it in the news. the tragedies which we all find impossible to understand and meaningless. I guess this is what Sørhaug here tries to makes us think about.
I enjoyed Cold lunch very much, and obviously more than most. I didn't feel like it was forced. 90 minutes is perhaps a step forward, but it's slow. My problem with it is not the acting, which is very good. But somehow I'm not really able to really feel for them all. Maybe we're not supposed to. Still there are scenes difficult to watch, but I'm not sure if it touches my heart.
One of the three stories does, though. A family quarreling over their kids. Mads Ousdal is doing the best job here. Still they are all men. There are not many tears shed. We might see them in a corner of their eyes, but they never really surface.
I think this makes the film difficult to like. But then again, we not supposed to, are we? I've been swaggering between a 6 or a 7, but the pace of the end, and the mark this leaves upon the viewer, make me doubt myself on to a 7 out of 10.
I started off liking the premise, and also the sections with crowds moving in the city street, but the last time the crowds came back, I found it strangely pointless. Sørhaug is still a young filmmaker, but next time I'd like more of a story behind. Im afraid I'm not sure if this is a step in the right direction. Once again; It's a difficult film to like, still it's strong stuff!
This is definitely not for everyone. Just like the men, this film is detached. Sometimes slow, other times violent, both in pictures as well as other times in you own imagination. Nothing to watch for a troubled mind, nor for those needing the answers. Still this film has got a lot of attention for all this
We meet three men which have lost not only the meaning of life. They have lost themselves. Maybe they hate themselves for this. We really don't get to know, but they are kind of detached. Just like we feel when we hear about these tragedies after they have happened.
Eva Sørhaugs second feature after Cold Lunch (Lønsj) is a difficult film to comprehend. Still we've read and heard about it in the news. the tragedies which we all find impossible to understand and meaningless. I guess this is what Sørhaug here tries to makes us think about.
I enjoyed Cold lunch very much, and obviously more than most. I didn't feel like it was forced. 90 minutes is perhaps a step forward, but it's slow. My problem with it is not the acting, which is very good. But somehow I'm not really able to really feel for them all. Maybe we're not supposed to. Still there are scenes difficult to watch, but I'm not sure if it touches my heart.
One of the three stories does, though. A family quarreling over their kids. Mads Ousdal is doing the best job here. Still they are all men. There are not many tears shed. We might see them in a corner of their eyes, but they never really surface.
I think this makes the film difficult to like. But then again, we not supposed to, are we? I've been swaggering between a 6 or a 7, but the pace of the end, and the mark this leaves upon the viewer, make me doubt myself on to a 7 out of 10.
I started off liking the premise, and also the sections with crowds moving in the city street, but the last time the crowds came back, I found it strangely pointless. Sørhaug is still a young filmmaker, but next time I'd like more of a story behind. Im afraid I'm not sure if this is a step in the right direction. Once again; It's a difficult film to like, still it's strong stuff!
Almost every Nordic movie has a very special feature - even if the beginning seems slow and the story is unfolding in short steps, the viewer is literally sucked into it and eventually feels like the time was well spent. This is also a case of 90 Minutes.
The movie takes us into distinct lives of 3 very different people. Things do not seem optimistic for any of them from the beginning and they're not going to change much. Even though we don't learn everything - there are many "whys" unanswered - we learn just enough to understand why things end how they end.
As mentioned, the beginning of the movie is as slow as can be, which lets the viewer think about the whole story more. Performances are simply stunning - you can read the emotion from the actor's face. Aksel Hennie is a big talent and seem to fit in any role. Together with great camera (which doesn't always show everything similarly as the story doesn't tell everything) makes 90 Minutes well worth spending the 90 minutes to watch it.
The movie takes us into distinct lives of 3 very different people. Things do not seem optimistic for any of them from the beginning and they're not going to change much. Even though we don't learn everything - there are many "whys" unanswered - we learn just enough to understand why things end how they end.
As mentioned, the beginning of the movie is as slow as can be, which lets the viewer think about the whole story more. Performances are simply stunning - you can read the emotion from the actor's face. Aksel Hennie is a big talent and seem to fit in any role. Together with great camera (which doesn't always show everything similarly as the story doesn't tell everything) makes 90 Minutes well worth spending the 90 minutes to watch it.
In my opinion the film was very depressing, dark , real and true . The actors made the film feel so real , there are so much horrors and abuse behind closed doors. Horrifying scenes that makes the watcher feel sympathy, anger, regret and many more emotions. Will give this film a must watch , but at the same time say that it was a "hard watch".
8.5/10 , true movie that makes the watcher Feel and wonder instead of a fast pased happy ending film.
Seen alot of films while sick , but this is the one I will recommend to people who want a film that makes you feel and reflect. Norwegian language may be hard to take serious if you're not Scandinavian.
8.5/10 , true movie that makes the watcher Feel and wonder instead of a fast pased happy ending film.
Seen alot of films while sick , but this is the one I will recommend to people who want a film that makes you feel and reflect. Norwegian language may be hard to take serious if you're not Scandinavian.
This movie is comprised of three different stories, that only connect with each other on a thematic level. The stories are all very contains (both in place and time), and there's not many characters in each of them. All of this works quite well for the film's attempt at exploring something from different angles: violence in the home. Most of the 3 stories is spent on establishing the relationships, and it works kind of for all of them. But when the movie ends, I was still in a position where I could not quite make sense of the climaxes to each story. While we've been partially explained the motivations between how the stories end, there's still a leap from what we see to what happens in some of them. That leap can be filled with a general "mental disorder", but I don't think the director aimed for it to be that simple.
That is my one and only objection with the film, as I really enjoyed the rest of it. The stories were very distinct, the characters unique, and the individual conflicts engaging. The movie has gotten some attention for its violence, which is both brutal and realistic (especially in how it's shot). I'm not sure how the actors made it seem so real, and I hope that they weren't genuinely attacking each other for the shots. Either way it worked really well.
That is my one and only objection with the film, as I really enjoyed the rest of it. The stories were very distinct, the characters unique, and the individual conflicts engaging. The movie has gotten some attention for its violence, which is both brutal and realistic (especially in how it's shot). I'm not sure how the actors made it seem so real, and I hope that they weren't genuinely attacking each other for the shots. Either way it worked really well.
Wusstest du schon
- VerbindungenReferences Der Blade Runner (1982)
Top-Auswahl
Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
- How long is 90 Minutes?Powered by Alexa
Details
Box Office
- Budget
- 10.200.000 NOK (geschätzt)
- Weltweiter Bruttoertrag
- 703.803 $
- Laufzeit
- 1 Std. 28 Min.(88 min)
- Farbe
- Seitenverhältnis
- 2.35 : 1
Zu dieser Seite beitragen
Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen