[go: up one dir, main page]

    Calendario de lanzamientosTop 250 películasPelículas más popularesBuscar películas por géneroTaquilla superiorHorarios y entradasNoticias sobre películasPelículas de la India destacadas
    Programas de televisión y streamingLas 250 mejores seriesSeries más popularesBuscar series por géneroNoticias de TV
    Qué verÚltimos trailersTítulos originales de IMDbSelecciones de IMDbDestacado de IMDbGuía de entretenimiento familiarPodcasts de IMDb
    OscarsEmmysToronto Int'l Film FestivalIMDb Stars to WatchPremios STARmeterInformación sobre premiosInformación sobre festivalesTodos los eventos
    Nacidos un día como hoyCelebridades más popularesNoticias sobre celebridades
    Centro de ayudaZona de colaboradoresEncuestas
Para profesionales de la industria
  • Idioma
  • Totalmente compatible
  • English (United States)
    Parcialmente compatible
  • Français (Canada)
  • Français (France)
  • Deutsch (Deutschland)
  • हिंदी (भारत)
  • Italiano (Italia)
  • Português (Brasil)
  • Español (España)
  • Español (México)
Lista de visualización
Iniciar sesión
  • Totalmente compatible
  • English (United States)
    Parcialmente compatible
  • Français (Canada)
  • Français (France)
  • Deutsch (Deutschland)
  • हिंदी (भारत)
  • Italiano (Italia)
  • Português (Brasil)
  • Español (España)
  • Español (México)
Usar app
Atrás
  • Elenco y equipo
  • Opiniones de usuarios
  • Trivia
  • Preguntas Frecuentes
IMDbPro
Michael Caine, Sally Kirkland, and Roger Moore in Bullseye! (1990)

Opiniones de usuarios

Bullseye!

29 opiniones
5/10

Much criticised comedy that is actually rather funnier than people give it credit for.

  • barnabyrudge
  • 21 jun 2006
  • Enlace permanente
6/10

Does not hit the bullseye, but does not miss completely either

  • gridoon2025
  • 19 abr 2013
  • Enlace permanente
5/10

"At last luck has come our way".

Not quite the bullseye, but nonetheless director Michael Winner would get enough amusement out of the pairing of English actors Michael Caine and Roger Moore in this riotously goof-ball and crude comedy caper that sees the pair playing dual roles. Two small time conman take on a job which sees them impersonating two look-alike nuclear scientists to use their identities to get into the scientific safety deposit box which is filled with millions of dollars worth of diamonds. However they are found out by the authorities, where they learn that these scientists happen to be crooked and they get caught up in the country's national security ("We're thieves, not spies").

Bumbling, cartoon-like slapstick of the lowest dominator, but I liked it a little more than its monstrous reputation. The performances are all over the shop, as an animated Caine shamelessly bellows out his lines while Moore goes about things in a dry manner. Sally Kirkland is a bright spark and Deborah Moore is a complete delight. The cast look like they are having a good time together. Then there's a clever little cameo by John Cleese along with Jenny Seagrove. The episodic plot is filled with twists and turns, as the characters bicker, find themselves being outsmarted, double-crossed and in some sort of dangerous predicament. While the board script is wittily madcap, if downright low-brow. Director Winner's arrant handling (odd camera angles) perfectly paints a local flavour to the surroundings, but the snappy comic timing can be messy and tiredly relying on the on-going gags ("What did they say?"). "Bullseye!" maybe lame, but joyfully crazy and loud comedy hokum.

"They say everybody in the world has someone somewhere who looks like they do".
  • lost-in-limbo
  • 2 ago 2011
  • Enlace permanente

'hit' rather than 'eye' in the title would be better...

Oh dear. I'm a big fan of Mr Caine and Mr Moore, and to be honest those two in the lead roles are the only reason to watch the film. Anyone lesser would have made it an utter waste of time.

The film is hackneyed with an incomprehensible plot. Films based on 'doubles' are always dodgy, so much so that even in the 30s it was considered bad plotting to use them in detective stories. At some points in the film I just didn't know who was meant to be whom, and by the time of the second 'double cross' I just lost interest.

While Caine and Moore were at times hilarious ('I come from a broken home...')a lot of the jokes and effects made me cringe. The scene where the train porter gets his head blown off had me rewinding to see if my eyes had not deceived me. That has to be the worst special effect for many years!

I also found the very obvious pitching of the film to the American audience patronising in the extreme. Tourist shots of London, Highland Games, stately homes, stuffy clubs, 'punk' taxi drivers and an unconvincing portrayal of the Queen - all this type of thing was being done far better and with greater irony by the Comic Strip team years before.

So don't expect a great plot or gags but if you like Caine and Moore, it's worth watching - just.
  • hugh1971
  • 29 oct 2002
  • Enlace permanente
2/10

A Loser For Michael Winner

Michael Caine and Roger Moore are two small-time crooks. They also look exactly like a pair of scientists who have perfected fusion power plants, are about to auction the plans to the highest bidder. They break into the scientists' safety deposit vaults and steal the money they've collected so far... and then are conscripted by British and American intelligence to steal the plans.

It's long been my opinion that if there's an exclamation point in the title, there's nothing that requires it in the movie. Director Michael Winner directs a frantic, unfunny movie from a script by Leslie Bricuse that does no credit to anyone involved. The editing pace is so fast that it cuts into laughs that aren't there, the staging is so cheap it would have made Jules White blush; when Caine is in the same scene as his lookalike, they shoot his double from the rear or cut to a separate shot, and the same for Moore. Neither Winner nor Bricuse had a writing credit after this, and if this is the best they could do at this stage of their careers, it's no coincidence.

Caine does an American accent that's flat and annoying. Moore doesn't change his delivery at all. Two actors capable of charm and comedy exhibit neither!
  • boblipton
  • 22 oct 2019
  • Enlace permanente
1/10

A Log Up The Kilt.

  • PathetiCinema
  • 14 ago 2008
  • Enlace permanente
3/10

Good comedy, for 11 year old's everywhere

I think I laughed once at this film, watched it when I was ten or eleven, because it has a scene where one dog humps another.

Other than that, I'd rather stab my eyes out with a biro than be forced to sit through it again. Go watch Monty Python instead, hell, even Dirty Rotten Scoundrels is better than this.
  • ill_behavior
  • 12 may 2003
  • Enlace permanente
4/10

Missed target

Apparently Michael Caine and Roger Moore are good friends but never worked together so they teamed up in this 1990 film. Unfortunately they ended up with Michael Winner as the director.

Winner who might had once been a decent director was on a downward spiral. He ultimately ended up being better known as a food critic and fronting car insurance adverts.

Here the duo play dodgy nuclear physicists that have invented a form of nuclear fusion but plan to sell their formula to the highest bidder and make themselves rich and double cross their backers.

However at the same time there are a couple of con men who look exactly the same as these nuclear scientists. They get hired to retrieve the formula by CIA and MI5 not before they and a former partner played by Sally Kirkland try to steal some diamonds.

Somewhere along the line Moore's real life daughter pops up now and again. Moore disguises himself as a piano tuner as well as other disguises and there are some poor jokes and some funny ones.

It is all a bit of a mish mash as if the actors were enjoying themselves too much but forgot about the audience.

The critics slated this upon release, it failed at the box office. It is amusing enough and I liked some of the humour but then again I might be easily pleased.
  • Prismark10
  • 13 oct 2013
  • Enlace permanente
2/10

It's as if the script writers also wrote for the Three Stooges or "Three's Company"....no, on second thought, they aren't THAT good!

"Bullseye!" is a movie that SHOULD have worked well. After all, it stars Michael Caine and Roger Moore AND the story idea, though unbelievable, is fun and original. But somehow the film still doesn't work...mostly because of the writing. It lacked cleverness and instead chose to be kooky and silly....making the film rather trivial instead of a must-see.

Michael Caine and Roger Moore play dual roles. They play both career criminals AND folks who are working on a power source like cold fusion. But these well respected men are also crooks....just white collar ones who live respectable lives.

Here comes a HUGE problem with the film...the notion of nearly identical strangers. And when the crooks learn they are identicals, they plan on impersonating them and raiding their safety deposit boxes, since the researchers are rich...very rich.

After successfully raiding the boxes, the pair are surprised when the government captures them and offers them an unexpected bargain. They'll be allowed to keep the stolen contents of the boxes IF they continue to impersonate the nuclear researchers. Why? Because the rich guys are ALSO crooks. They have falsely reported that their research is a failure and instead of giving the secret of cheap energy to the Americans and Brits (as per their agreement), the plan to auction it off to ANYONE who has the money...anyone.

At first, I thought that the bad thing about the movie would be having the actors play dual roles. However, this is just a small problem compared to the serious problems...the film is just dopey. It's like the writers were the same ones who wrote the "Get Smart" reunion movies and the folks who wrote Roger Moore's double-entendres when he played James Bond. I simply cannot imagine anyone liking the results....and the film is a total waste of two fine actors.

According to my wife, she thinks the actors must have been high when they signed on to make these films. While this might not be the case, it would explain a lot.
  • planktonrules
  • 26 nov 2022
  • Enlace permanente
7/10

Good, cheesy fun! - "We're Thieves, not spies"

  • mattjames1978
  • 6 jul 2006
  • Enlace permanente
2/10

Ugh

  • BandSAboutMovies
  • 10 sep 2022
  • Enlace permanente
8/10

A rather unusual Roger Moore and Michael Caine comedy

  • The-Sarkologist
  • 4 nov 2011
  • Enlace permanente
7/10

Stay out of the black & in the red nothing in this game for two in a bed!

No, this isn't the biopic of Jim Bowen & Tony Green but a good comedy with dual roles for Caine & Moore. Sometimes its good because its funny, sometimes its so bad its good. The pairing of the two British acting giants is worth 90 minutes of anyones time. This movie tries to hark back to the classic British comedies of old & succeeds in parts. If you take this film in the spirit it was made then you should be laughing & groaning in equal measures!
  • General Urko
  • 7 nov 2001
  • Enlace permanente
3/10

Baffling for its misfiring comedy

A British-American action comedy. A story about spies who force two con men to pose as scientists peddling cheap-energy fusion. This hectic caper plays out like an overlong misbegotten stage farce with its numerous costume changes, corny jokes, laboured pacing, and cut-price musical score. The job of the two leads was to convince us they had con-artist identical doubles, but it was hardly convincing. Nonetheless, it has some great location photography, and it is a vicarious pleasure to watch pals Roger Moore and Michael Caine having fun because they have a good chemistry. It's easy to believe press reports that there was a stagehand at the ready to pop the cork every time director Michael Winner shouted "cut".
  • shakercoola
  • 6 may 2018
  • Enlace permanente

So awful it's fantastic. 1 or 10 out of ten, depending on how you look at it.

One evening,while channel surfing, my friend and I came upon this film on TV. In its own way, it was more astonishing than anything by Kurosawa, David Fincher or Takeshi Kitano. We simply couldn't believe what we were watching. We sat there as dumbstruck and as open mouthed as if we were watching Elvis doing his shopping in the local Sainsburys store. How could any film be such a complete failure? Even awful films usually have some saving grace, some ray of light, that stops your viewing being a completely worthless experience - one good performance or one funny line or even just some good scenery. 'Bullseye!', however, exists entirely in a vacuum; in a cinematic black hole. The script: No good. The acting: No good. The direction: No good. The editing: No good. Even the music: No good. Yet, later, I realised that the ray of light that I'd been looking for was actually in the fact that the film was such a total, glorious misfire and, if one watches it from that perspective, it's a wonderful film. The next time it came on TV I made sure to tape it and every so often I watch it again, in awe at its uselessness. It's nothing against Michael Winner personally. I'm sure he's a lovely bloke but, as a film maker, he makes a magnificent restaurant critic.
  • TheBrothersCarruthers
  • 21 jul 2005
  • Enlace permanente
5/10

I may not have laughed a lot, but I was amused.

  • mark.waltz
  • 24 abr 2025
  • Enlace permanente
4/10

Not A Winner for Moore & Caine

By 1990 how the 1970's mighty-British had fallen, three-fold, as Michael Winner directs Michael Caine and Roger Moore in the buddy con-comedy BULLSEYE!, more confusing than unfunny, and extremely farfetched as Caine (collecting a paycheck) and Moore (constantly widening his eyes) just happen to be dead-ringers for two scientists that are also a team-up, and even more crooked...

Providing Caine a chance to reprise his popular DIRTY ROTTEN SCOUNDRELS con-artist cadence but in more of the Steve Martin goofball role, and failing, getting no help from Sally Kirkland as the straight-man-lady partner gluing both together, along with Moore's real life daughter as a CIA Agent in what's more a collection of silly scenes than one collective spy spoof, which is hardly even attempted here in the first, second, or third place.
  • TheFearmakers
  • 26 jun 2022
  • Enlace permanente
6/10

Got siller and sillier

I go along with the negative reviews. I had thought that Winner, Moore and Caine would provide a good film. This one started off well enough but it got sillier and sillier, and the last 25 minutes or so were farcical - I nearly gave up viewing it on YouTube.

Enough said.
  • Marlburian
  • 25 sep 2018
  • Enlace permanente
8/10

A Funny comedy

OK its not a oscar winner.its a Michael Winner.but this comedy has a great double act in Caine and Moore infact this is the first time i seen Moore do a comedy and he is quite excellent.a good supporting cast the script is more carry on than anything else and whats wrong with that.id sooner watch this than Trainspotting.
  • filmbuff69007
  • 29 ago 2001
  • Enlace permanente
6/10

Silly, cheesy however tons of funny gags far away as its reputation may suggest!!

The legendary Producer Menahem Golan and the action director Michael Winner team up the iconic British actors Michael Caine and Roger Moore on double acting to this weirdo-oddball comedy, the summarized plot consist two brainy scientists, the American Doctor Hicklar (Caine) and his British partner Sir John Bavistock (Moore) developing for her Majesty a new-cheaper kind of energy based of nuclear fusion, they intent to sell it for foreigners countries for high bidder.

Oddly enough both have a doppelgangers at British ground, one of them is the thief Sidney Lipton (Caine) and his crook mate Gerald Bradley-Smith (Moore), as a matter of fact Lipton just came out of prison after three years jailed, when he meets Gerald for first time blame him as tipster, plenty denied by Gerald, uncannily both share the same woman Willie (Sally Kirkland) that enforces a truce between them to make a bold plan portraying themselves as their lookalikes to reach at bank box fulfilled of diamonds.

Now came the best, meanwhile the aristocratic Sir John is a womanizer guy, so Gerald enjoys a gorgeous girls at private club, in other hand Sidney suffers due Hicklar had rather muscle man for a hard massage, worst he doesn't like meat or any alcohol booze, instead of Sidney, aftermaths suddenly came up of British secret service arresting the rogue scientists, using their doppelgangers to catch the missing formula.

Thanks for reading.

Resume:

First watch: 1995 / How many: 2 / Source: TV-Youtube / Rating: 6.5.
  • elo-equipamentos
  • 30 ene 2025
  • Enlace permanente

A real dud

This film is a real mess and that is especially disappointing considering that Moore and Caine work well together and the opening 25 minutes of the film are mildly entertaining.

The basic premise of the film is that Caine and Moore both play dual roles, firstly as an evil pairing (scientists) and as a good pairing (con-men). It's a silly premise but it works well on its own terms at first but once the evil pair are aware of what the good pair is doing, the film disintegrates. The plot becomes more and more convoluted and incomprehensible as the film goes along and therefore all the potential entertainment is extinguished. Caine and Moore aren't to blame for the film's failure as they both give good performances; the fault lies with director Michael Winner.

Even the cameo by John Cleese at the end is muffed.
  • Marco_Trevisiol
  • 24 oct 1998
  • Enlace permanente
7/10

Double fun!

This film is neither the worst nor the best comedy in the world. But I had a good moment each time I watched it! Some scenes are really funny. But the main interest for me is to see two actors that I love, Caine and Moore, just having fun together and gently making fun of the characters they've played in other movies. This spirit of derision is a treat. At no time do they take themselves seriously and I thank them for that! Such a difference with today's actors... Without being a masterpiece, this film is funny, light and entertaining. It is well worth the detour and deserves a little more lenient reviews I think. I give a 7
  • jbgeorges
  • 9 ene 2021
  • Enlace permanente
10/10

The best worst film ever made...

A lot of people who have seen this film will wonder why 10 out of 10.

However, having watched this film almost 12 times I never tire of it. Ridiculous quotes and incredibly bad acting from all involved make it so much fun. And this is what movies are about right? Simple setup - Roger Moore and Michael Caine's ex-partner conman characters are almost identical to two partnered scientists - HOW CONVENIENT! And so they set up a plan to steal the scientists secret diamond stash all the time bumbling through some goofy moments in order to set up the crime.

Written by the creative team behind the dire TV sitcom "Birds Of A Feather" I was surprised the film has some quick witty one-liners. It also has some cringe inducing scenes including what I believe is Roger Moore trying it on with his own daughter. Michael Caine is the first to point out some of the terrible films he's made so you can't really have a go but his accents are hideous.

All in all I recommend this film to anyone who just wants a laugh even if it is at the expense of two fine actors.

"Has anyone ever said you look like Mel Gibson?" Baddie shakes head. "I'm not surprised."
  • fletchfanone
  • 25 ene 2008
  • Enlace permanente
10/10

Brilliant

This film is a masterpiece - putting two of Britain's best and best loved actors together. Great comical storyline, typical Roger Moore charm and comedy with Caine bouncing off him contributing as much humour and quips throughout. Loaded all the way through and a must watch.
  • philbingham
  • 20 jun 2018
  • Enlace permanente
10/10

One of the best 'so bad it's good' movies ever

  • renaissancememe
  • 18 mar 2019
  • Enlace permanente

Más de este título

Más para explorar

Visto recientemente

Habilita las cookies del navegador para usar esta función. Más información.
Obtener la aplicación de IMDb
Inicia sesión para obtener más accesoInicia sesión para obtener más acceso
Sigue a IMDb en las redes sociales
Obtener la aplicación de IMDb
Para Android e iOS
Obtener la aplicación de IMDb
  • Ayuda
  • Índice del sitio
  • IMDbPro
  • Box Office Mojo
  • Licencia de datos de IMDb
  • Sala de prensa
  • Publicidad
  • Trabaja con nosotros
  • Condiciones de uso
  • Política de privacidad
  • Your Ads Privacy Choices
IMDb, una compañía de Amazon

© 1990-2025 by IMDb.com, Inc.