CALIFICACIÓN DE IMDb
5.2/10
11 k
TU CALIFICACIÓN
Remake de la película de 1992 sobre un par de estafadores del baloncesto que se asocian para ganar dinero extra.Remake de la película de 1992 sobre un par de estafadores del baloncesto que se asocian para ganar dinero extra.Remake de la película de 1992 sobre un par de estafadores del baloncesto que se asocian para ganar dinero extra.
- Dirección
- Guionistas
- Elenco
- Premios
- 3 nominaciones en total
Tyler Herro
- Tyler Herro
- (as Tyler Christopher Herro)
Opiniones destacadas
Where to begin? If this movie was "stand alone" it would be maybe a 3.5 star worthy made for tv movie. It could do little to be any more different from the classic Wesley Snipes and Woody Harrelson film. The two similarities are that, basketball is a theme, and one white character and one black character. Aside from that, they are not similar. It seems like the studio was so excited to license the title that they forgot to hire someone to write a script. They could have ripped the old script verbatim and it probably would have been better. Andrew Schulz' character may be the only watchable performance. That is not to say that all the acting was bad, but the plot and development would have made it impossible for a main character to stand out. Lance Reddick would be ashamed to have it dedicated to him. What a barely watchable pile of Hollywood money grab excrement.
First of all, selling this as a remake of a sensational film is a bad move. If you're not at least almost as good, you've already lost. But yeah, you probably get more views that way.
On its own, the film is OK. It's about basketball, after all, and it has one or two good scenes, such as Lance Reddick in the hospital. A 5 seems to be a fair rating to me.
In general, though, it's a good look at what's been lost in recent years. Microwave food instead of a home-cooked meal. Off-the-shelf goods instead of natural chemistry. Probably the zeitgeist of the decade. Maybe even Wesley and Woody wouldn't be able to make a film like the original WMCJ in 2023.
On its own, the film is OK. It's about basketball, after all, and it has one or two good scenes, such as Lance Reddick in the hospital. A 5 seems to be a fair rating to me.
In general, though, it's a good look at what's been lost in recent years. Microwave food instead of a home-cooked meal. Off-the-shelf goods instead of natural chemistry. Probably the zeitgeist of the decade. Maybe even Wesley and Woody wouldn't be able to make a film like the original WMCJ in 2023.
The original was more raw and a decent representation of the times.
The new version is also good representation of the times, but feels less raw and has Hollywood polish all over it. It's hilarious that this qualifies as an rated R movie when it seems more like a PG or G rated movie.
There were some laughs and the story was okay, but don't expect too many similarities or a connection to the original. The only thing that was similar was that there was a black and white guy that randomly team up to enter a 2 on 2 basketball tournament. Everything else was pretty different.
I wish Disney/Fox would stop remaking classics to make a quick buck off of fans. It's disappointing because they're ruining the memories people have of the original versions.
If you have nothing better to watch then it's a decent time filler, but don't dedicate your time to watching it.
I don't think it's a 1/10 rating, but it's certainly not above a 6/10 rating. I'd put it around a 3 or 4 out of 10 rating. The characters were likeable, so I went with 4.
The new version is also good representation of the times, but feels less raw and has Hollywood polish all over it. It's hilarious that this qualifies as an rated R movie when it seems more like a PG or G rated movie.
There were some laughs and the story was okay, but don't expect too many similarities or a connection to the original. The only thing that was similar was that there was a black and white guy that randomly team up to enter a 2 on 2 basketball tournament. Everything else was pretty different.
I wish Disney/Fox would stop remaking classics to make a quick buck off of fans. It's disappointing because they're ruining the memories people have of the original versions.
If you have nothing better to watch then it's a decent time filler, but don't dedicate your time to watching it.
I don't think it's a 1/10 rating, but it's certainly not above a 6/10 rating. I'd put it around a 3 or 4 out of 10 rating. The characters were likeable, so I went with 4.
If you've seen the original, seriously, don't waste your time. It doesn't come close!
The best thing about this was Andrew Schulz and a few of the jokes scattered throughout the film.
To be honest this misses the mark and is just an average film, I know they had to change it up compared to the original, modernise it etcetera and they did that well, although in an annoying way, in my opinion, but I'm old enough to remember the original lol...
Which is a classic and still stands up today, there was no reason for a remake. This is just an average streaming film about basketball.
I'm trying to be vague here to avoid spoilers, but it feels like there's none of the ICONIC moments from the original, a lot of content and story missed out. It doesn't even feel like it's about the 2 of them, one is an extra in the others story and now the title doesn't even make sense...
Some okay acting performances and some of the soundtrack was alright I have to admit, but other than that nothing stands out.
The original is streaming for free as well, personally I feel like I've wasted an hour and a half odd, when I could have just watched the original, but I had to find out for myself since I'm a huge Schulz fan and he's mentioned it on Flagrant.
5/10 bang average streaming film, the funny moments saved it from being lower than that!
The best thing about this was Andrew Schulz and a few of the jokes scattered throughout the film.
To be honest this misses the mark and is just an average film, I know they had to change it up compared to the original, modernise it etcetera and they did that well, although in an annoying way, in my opinion, but I'm old enough to remember the original lol...
Which is a classic and still stands up today, there was no reason for a remake. This is just an average streaming film about basketball.
I'm trying to be vague here to avoid spoilers, but it feels like there's none of the ICONIC moments from the original, a lot of content and story missed out. It doesn't even feel like it's about the 2 of them, one is an extra in the others story and now the title doesn't even make sense...
Some okay acting performances and some of the soundtrack was alright I have to admit, but other than that nothing stands out.
The original is streaming for free as well, personally I feel like I've wasted an hour and a half odd, when I could have just watched the original, but I had to find out for myself since I'm a huge Schulz fan and he's mentioned it on Flagrant.
5/10 bang average streaming film, the funny moments saved it from being lower than that!
You could watch this.. or you could go and find someone giving away the original on DVD - its sure to be out there - worst case on VHS!.
Why bother remaking a movie and not making it better? Why bother remaking a movie when the original is still understandable and relevant.
Its bad enough remaking current foreign language films because Americans cant read subtitles - but there is no logic to remaking this and so poorly. Sure - remake Gone with the Wind or The African Queen if you think you can tell the story in today's world - but making this was a waste of time and effort - and you will be wasting yours if you watch it.
Why bother remaking a movie and not making it better? Why bother remaking a movie when the original is still understandable and relevant.
Its bad enough remaking current foreign language films because Americans cant read subtitles - but there is no logic to remaking this and so poorly. Sure - remake Gone with the Wind or The African Queen if you think you can tell the story in today's world - but making this was a waste of time and effort - and you will be wasting yours if you watch it.
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaThis movie was dedicated to the late Lance Reddick.
- ErroresIn closing credits it states, "Based on the 1991 motion picture..." when in fact it was 1992.
- ConexionesReferenced in Saturday Night Live: Jack Harlow (2022)
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
- How long is White Men Can't Jump?Con tecnología de Alexa
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- País de origen
- Idioma
- También se conoce como
- White Men Can't Jump
- Locaciones de filmación
- Venice, California, Estados Unidos(VENICEBALL tournament scenes.)
- Productoras
- Ver más créditos de la compañía en IMDbPro
- Tiempo de ejecución1 hora 41 minutos
- Color
- Mezcla de sonido
- Relación de aspecto
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuir a esta página
Sugiere una edición o agrega el contenido que falta
Principales brechas de datos
What is the German language plot outline for Los blancos no saben saltar (2023)?
Responda