CALIFICACIÓN DE IMDb
4.8/10
1.5 k
TU CALIFICACIÓN
Agrega una trama en tu idiomaIn the 1960s, two hippies go off into the jungle to evade the FBI. When they come back to New York in the 1980s, their fellow hippie friends have become rich yuppies.In the 1960s, two hippies go off into the jungle to evade the FBI. When they come back to New York in the 1980s, their fellow hippie friends have become rich yuppies.In the 1960s, two hippies go off into the jungle to evade the FBI. When they come back to New York in the 1980s, their fellow hippie friends have become rich yuppies.
- Dirección
- Guionistas
- Elenco
Nick Wyman
- Dr. Abbott
- (as Nicholas Wyman)
Aaron Russo
- The Fish
- (voz)
Opiniones destacadas
The lame gags and jokes fall flat, the actors practically phone in their lines, and the long and frequent preaching about the evils of corporations and conservatives really gets annoying. If you want to be lectured about the ozone hole, AIDS, the burning Cuyahoga River, the homeless, and the virtues of loopy 1960s-style pothead activism, then this is the movie for you. But if you want laugh-out-loud humor, then rent something else.
"Rude awakening" is a creative "fish out of water" scenario, including a talking, pot smoking fish. Eric Roberts and Cheech Marin escape to a South American utopia, avoiding the Vietnam War, but returning twenty years later to help stop another war. Problem is the "Hippie Movement" has moved on to materialistic endeavors. Thus the stage is set for Roberts and Marin trying to adjust to their friends cop out lives. The supporting cast here is excellent, with Julie Hagerty, Louise Lasser, and especially Buck Henry and Cindy Williams as the "Stools". Disillusioned by the apparent lack of interest for their "save the world" cause, Roberts and Marin refuse to give up, and eventually succeed. The movie is a great nostalgia trip for the right audience. - MERK
Classic tale of two stoners dropping out to have a good time in the jungle for twenty years and then coming back to find the whole world has been taken over by a terrible sickness known as the eighties - yup, they all wear stupid clothes and talk and do a load of rubbish, while the real men from the sixties have all kiinds of trouble fitting in and showing people the value of slobbing around, caning it and having fun without dressing up like Rebecca DeMornay in Weird Science. This film carries a very important message for us all about avoiding eighties style and values, but, like the other guy said, don't watch it in a serious mood, this is a hilarious comedy classic NOT a horror flick, after all.
This appeared at a convenient point in time for pop culture self-examination through the movies; the narrative intent is that we can review the 1980s through the lens of 1960s thinking.
It starts off with a 'reprogramming' of a dropout via LSD and movie indoctrination. This could have been something clever...instead it deteriorates by hallucinating through "Up In Smoke" and Leone westerns.
The 'ideal world' is depicted as "Woodstock", with the main characters stolen out of "Easy Rider". They take an excursion through "Salvador" and "The Mosquito Coast".
The whole thing, production-wise, staggers about in a manner as clumsy as "Where the Buffalo Roam" and "Animal House". It resolves through "Deer Hunter", "Stripes" and the Beatles' 'Revolution'.
The point of all this is to tear down the detached, colorless, sexless, 'boozh-wa' 1980s and reindoctrinate the audience to 'the truth' with the 'romantic' drug of the movie. An audience is assembled in the movie to first provoke (in us)the intended feeling of 'guilt', and the second time to sublimate into 'activism'.
As I wrote earlier, it's just not clever. The problem is, it doesn't know how to target the comedic center. Everything ends up as a target, including Roberts because he doesn't know how to play this in a smart way -- there's no winking at the viewer. The producers thought this was 'affirming', oblivious to the joke on themselves.
It starts off with a 'reprogramming' of a dropout via LSD and movie indoctrination. This could have been something clever...instead it deteriorates by hallucinating through "Up In Smoke" and Leone westerns.
The 'ideal world' is depicted as "Woodstock", with the main characters stolen out of "Easy Rider". They take an excursion through "Salvador" and "The Mosquito Coast".
The whole thing, production-wise, staggers about in a manner as clumsy as "Where the Buffalo Roam" and "Animal House". It resolves through "Deer Hunter", "Stripes" and the Beatles' 'Revolution'.
The point of all this is to tear down the detached, colorless, sexless, 'boozh-wa' 1980s and reindoctrinate the audience to 'the truth' with the 'romantic' drug of the movie. An audience is assembled in the movie to first provoke (in us)the intended feeling of 'guilt', and the second time to sublimate into 'activism'.
As I wrote earlier, it's just not clever. The problem is, it doesn't know how to target the comedic center. Everything ends up as a target, including Roberts because he doesn't know how to play this in a smart way -- there's no winking at the viewer. The producers thought this was 'affirming', oblivious to the joke on themselves.
I cannot understand why this movie is not rated higher. I have seen this movie several times and it gets funnier and better each time. It is unique and if you are a Baby Boomer that attended university during the 70's, it will bring back some beautiful and nostalgic memories of period of youthful innocence and curiosity that so quickly came and then disappeared. It was an age of new thoughts and philosophies that were lost to our Boomer generation during the oncoming greed and corruption that arose in the selfish "Yuppie" 80's. If you have not seen it ... I recommend you watch it with someone who lived through this time period. Further, if you have seen it before and failed to take it in and appreciate its a unique capturing of a special time in our Boomer generation, try it a second time and perhaps you will get it...because it is definitely there and worth a second chance.
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaCut from the film was a scene where Cheech Marin has an acid flashback during which he imagines the three FBI agents to be Bob Hope, Ronald Reagan, and Henry Kissinger.
- ErroresThe story catches up with Fred and Jesus's commune 20 years later, but there's not a gray hair to split among them.
- Citas
[talking to a multicolored statue]
Jesus Monteya: Hey, I'm really into colored chicks, man.
- Créditos curiososBefore closing credits: "This picture is dedicated to all the people who care about the planet.
BE GOOD"
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
- How long is Rude Awakening?Con tecnología de Alexa
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- País de origen
- Idioma
- También se conoce como
- The Guatemalan Papers
- Locaciones de filmación
- Productoras
- Ver más créditos de la compañía en IMDbPro
Taquilla
- Presupuesto
- USD 10,000,000 (estimado)
- Total en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 3,169,719
- Fin de semana de estreno en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 1,121,542
- 20 ago 1989
- Total a nivel mundial
- USD 3,169,719
- Tiempo de ejecución1 hora 40 minutos
- Color
- Relación de aspecto
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuir a esta página
Sugiere una edición o agrega el contenido que falta
Principales brechas de datos
By what name was Rude Awakening (1989) officially released in India in English?
Responda