CALIFICACIÓN DE IMDb
6.4/10
29 k
TU CALIFICACIÓN
La crueldad del mundo se enfrenta al amor de dos personas diferentes que intentan salvar a la humanidad de la pobreza y la guerra.La crueldad del mundo se enfrenta al amor de dos personas diferentes que intentan salvar a la humanidad de la pobreza y la guerra.La crueldad del mundo se enfrenta al amor de dos personas diferentes que intentan salvar a la humanidad de la pobreza y la guerra.
- Premios
- 2 nominaciones en total
Jonathan Higgins
- Philip
- (as Johnathan Higgins)
Keelan Anthony
- Jojo
- (as Keelan Anthony Ray Forsythe)
Norman Mikeal Berketa
- Police Officer
- (as Norm Berketa)
- Dirección
- Guionista
- Todo el elenco y el equipo
- Producción, taquilla y más en IMDbPro
Opiniones destacadas
I agree 98% with what Mentalcritic has to say about this film. I, too, felt that Jolie's character is quite selfish and though she did what she thought was the most helpful and self-sacrificing it was in fact pointless and irresponsible. There is, however, some good that comes of films like these.
The general public who would never know of the situations portrayed in the film are now introduced to a world they may never have known existed. I have been honored to serve overseas for aid purposes and was amazed when several friends(even those who know of my experience) would ask unbelievingly "The movie is a bit extreme. Things like that don't actually happen, right?" Sadly, what Beyond Borders showed us was the milder side of the world's human rights issues. It stimulates the humanitarian in an otherwise ignorant audience.
The general public who would never know of the situations portrayed in the film are now introduced to a world they may never have known existed. I have been honored to serve overseas for aid purposes and was amazed when several friends(even those who know of my experience) would ask unbelievingly "The movie is a bit extreme. Things like that don't actually happen, right?" Sadly, what Beyond Borders showed us was the milder side of the world's human rights issues. It stimulates the humanitarian in an otherwise ignorant audience.
10strizzy_
This movie leaves you speechless, and takes you to a new emotional level. I feel this movie will not reach people like it should though... People and Middle America will pass it off and just play it up as Hollywood hype and just really not want to acknowledge what is happening in the real world... This movie is a 10 and I just hope it can bring light to subject matters that just get pushed under the carpet.
This film subject is very familiar to my country and I know many refuges in personal. I must say that Angelina Jolie made a great job in film and really in personal life like ambassador in UNHCR but I think that people in general form their opinion about some crises in general with big influence of media. The true is very often hidden behind some political or financing interests. This film try to touch this topic but I think that it is not enough. It is very sad that in every part of our life politic and high interest play the role, even when some human lives can be lost. Meny of my people lose their homes and Jobs and some of them their love ones and that is worse what can hap-en to person. Wars is ultimate evil of human race. Today in my country live almost one million refuges. I just want to say that nothing are more important than a human life and everyone must think about that.(sorry about my English)
I am appalled to see that the overall IMDb rating for this movie is only 5.2 (edit: now down to 4.9! Madness! Later edit: Ah, now it's up to 5.4 - still abysmal. Oh, and now it's up to 5.9 - going the right way, at least!). Hopefully posterity will be kinder to it than that. It is a very good, well-acted, well-written and well-filmed movie. Apparently, though, it is too subtle for many viewers.
The humanitarian situation it shows is reality. The characters may be fictional, and they may not be representative of the typical relief worker - but they aren't supposed to be. This is a story of those particular two people, and how their feelings for each other grow out of the humanitarian work they are embroiled in. There's no separating the love story from the relief efforts, because she falls in love with him because of his commitment to those efforts. It's true that, at the end in Chechnya, she is more interested in him than in the local situation, but there are two very good reasons for this: One, unlike in Ethiopia and Cambodia she was only there to find him; she wasn't involved in some relief work there, so obviously his safety was foremost in her mind. And two, and more importantly, if she managed to save him, he could have continued being the man she fell in love with; continued his courageous commitment to fight death and suffering. So, I repeat, the love story and the humanitarian subject matter of this movie cannot been separated.
And the thing about her leaving her own family; fer crying out loud, it wasn't a happy family! Her cheating husband represented, both to Angelina's character and in a wider metaphorical sense, the numbing meaninglessness of a trivial, awkward and frequently loveless domestic situation, compared to the importance of saving lives and being in the company of infinitely more inspiring people.
(And what a refreshing change to see her husband - Linus Roach - in the kind of role that so many women portray in the usual Hollywood movie, being the colorless, passive backdrop to the male hero. Gratifying to see it reversed, for once.)
The ending of the movie was unexpected, and yet, in retrospect, it couldn't have ended any other way. If the movie were serious about its subject matter - the relief efforts *as well* as the love story -, it required an end of that sort. The surviving daughter keeps the hope for an eventual happy end alive.
I'm saddened that so many people did not "get" the movie. Many of the criticisms leveled against it are of scenes that were *meant* to evoke that response, and which are addressed later in the movie. There's a development going on; the characters are growing in the course of the story, and so is the movie. Many people apparently couldn't perceive that.
This was an extremely well-structured, rare, thought-provoking and sobering type of movie that I'm thankful could get made in this day and age (and I've just bought the DVD). But what a pity it met with such an insensitive public response.
9 out of 10.
The humanitarian situation it shows is reality. The characters may be fictional, and they may not be representative of the typical relief worker - but they aren't supposed to be. This is a story of those particular two people, and how their feelings for each other grow out of the humanitarian work they are embroiled in. There's no separating the love story from the relief efforts, because she falls in love with him because of his commitment to those efforts. It's true that, at the end in Chechnya, she is more interested in him than in the local situation, but there are two very good reasons for this: One, unlike in Ethiopia and Cambodia she was only there to find him; she wasn't involved in some relief work there, so obviously his safety was foremost in her mind. And two, and more importantly, if she managed to save him, he could have continued being the man she fell in love with; continued his courageous commitment to fight death and suffering. So, I repeat, the love story and the humanitarian subject matter of this movie cannot been separated.
And the thing about her leaving her own family; fer crying out loud, it wasn't a happy family! Her cheating husband represented, both to Angelina's character and in a wider metaphorical sense, the numbing meaninglessness of a trivial, awkward and frequently loveless domestic situation, compared to the importance of saving lives and being in the company of infinitely more inspiring people.
(And what a refreshing change to see her husband - Linus Roach - in the kind of role that so many women portray in the usual Hollywood movie, being the colorless, passive backdrop to the male hero. Gratifying to see it reversed, for once.)
The ending of the movie was unexpected, and yet, in retrospect, it couldn't have ended any other way. If the movie were serious about its subject matter - the relief efforts *as well* as the love story -, it required an end of that sort. The surviving daughter keeps the hope for an eventual happy end alive.
I'm saddened that so many people did not "get" the movie. Many of the criticisms leveled against it are of scenes that were *meant* to evoke that response, and which are addressed later in the movie. There's a development going on; the characters are growing in the course of the story, and so is the movie. Many people apparently couldn't perceive that.
This was an extremely well-structured, rare, thought-provoking and sobering type of movie that I'm thankful could get made in this day and age (and I've just bought the DVD). But what a pity it met with such an insensitive public response.
9 out of 10.
I loved the movie because it opened my eyes to the world of relief work. It may not be accurate, but for some reason, it made me want to be a relief worker. I know that my work as one would not be a love a story, but what's important is that the movie showed me some characteristics about the line of work and its importance to third world countries. I also like the touch of Schumann music. He is my favorite composer. Jolie is a great actress, my favorite. I believe she held the film together. It is a delicate plot; I agree with others on that.
However, I did take note of the fact that the amount of money used to make the movie could have been more effective on third world countries if they were to buy food, medicine, and make better living environments. Yes that would have been more productive.
But I am still happy that they made the movie because it did touch a number of people. Even though I am 16 years old, I still do what I can by no longer spending money on superfulous items and saving what I have for the relief/aid program I am starting in my high school. So I must give credit to those involved in making the movie, because without it, I wouldn't be living the life I'm living. Not to make it sound like some sort of god, but I am proud of the effects that the movie brought into my life. I hope that it affected other people in the same way, both old and young.
However, I did take note of the fact that the amount of money used to make the movie could have been more effective on third world countries if they were to buy food, medicine, and make better living environments. Yes that would have been more productive.
But I am still happy that they made the movie because it did touch a number of people. Even though I am 16 years old, I still do what I can by no longer spending money on superfulous items and saving what I have for the relief/aid program I am starting in my high school. So I must give credit to those involved in making the movie, because without it, I wouldn't be living the life I'm living. Not to make it sound like some sort of god, but I am proud of the effects that the movie brought into my life. I hope that it affected other people in the same way, both old and young.
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaAll the villages in exotic locations were authentic. The crews installed real running water for the grateful villagers. Some of them had never even seen a white man until then.
- ErroresJimmy Bauford is 4 years old in the 1989 segment and 10 years old in the 1995 segment. He is played by the same child actor in both segments, and he does not age a day.
- Citas
[last lines]
Sarah Jordan: You have always been with me. Your courage, your smile, your damned stubbornness. There has never been any distance between us, and there never will be. I love you Nick. I love you.
- Créditos curiososThis film is dedicated to all relief workers and the millions of people who are victims of war and persecution. They continue to inspire us all with their courage and will to survive.
- ConexionesFeatured in Seis pies bajo tierra: The Rainbow of Her Reasons (2005)
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
- How long is Beyond Borders?Con tecnología de Alexa
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- Países de origen
- Idiomas
- También se conoce como
- Beyond Borders
- Locaciones de filmación
- Productoras
- Ver más créditos de la compañía en IMDbPro
Taquilla
- Presupuesto
- USD 35,000,000 (estimado)
- Total en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 4,430,101
- Fin de semana de estreno en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 2,076,402
- 26 oct 2003
- Total a nivel mundial
- USD 11,705,002
- Tiempo de ejecución2 horas 7 minutos
- Color
- Mezcla de sonido
- Relación de aspecto
- 2.39 : 1
Contribuir a esta página
Sugiere una edición o agrega el contenido que falta
Principales brechas de datos
What is the French language plot outline for Más allá de las fronteras (2003)?
Responda