CALIFICACIÓN DE IMDb
5.7/10
27 k
TU CALIFICACIÓN
La vida de un hombre se descarrila cuando un patrón ominoso de eventos se repite exactamente de la misma manera todos los días, terminando exactamente a las 2:22 p.m.La vida de un hombre se descarrila cuando un patrón ominoso de eventos se repite exactamente de la misma manera todos los días, terminando exactamente a las 2:22 p.m.La vida de un hombre se descarrila cuando un patrón ominoso de eventos se repite exactamente de la misma manera todos los días, terminando exactamente a las 2:22 p.m.
- Premios
- 1 premio ganado y 2 nominaciones en total
Opiniones destacadas
Soapy cheese fest that don't cohere. Could well have been the script of an 80s music videoclip. Despite the decent enough production value, it can in fact be described as 90 odd minutes of two nice-looking people who fall in love trying (in vain, as far as sound story-telling goes) to find cosmic significance in their feelings. They do so through a mary-go-round story that uses all the trappings of the "stuck in a moment in time" motif without any of the logical puzzles, metaphysical ponderings, or even plain suspense that a situation like that may create. Love proper may reverberate down the ages, but this love affair's photons get trapped in the movie's scripting black hole and never make it out. Utterly forgettable.
5 points to production value but nothing more than this.
5 points to production value but nothing more than this.
In NYC, air traffic controller Dylan Branson (Michiel Huisman) has a premonition of a shooting in Grand Central Station at 2:22pm. He goes to work and nearly crashes two planes into each other at 2:22pm. He continues to encounter strange occurrences at 2:22pm. He meets art gallery owner Sarah Barton (Teresa Palmer).
There is a good idea somewhere here and these actors could have made it work. I'm still not sure if this premise makes any kind of movie sense. It would probably make more sense without the complication of the past loop. It could be more compelling. I really like the beautiful looking couple although they could have some better writing. The movie just needs to clear up the rambling premise.
There is a good idea somewhere here and these actors could have made it work. I'm still not sure if this premise makes any kind of movie sense. It would probably make more sense without the complication of the past loop. It could be more compelling. I really like the beautiful looking couple although they could have some better writing. The movie just needs to clear up the rambling premise.
So I saw this movie on HBO Max and thought it would be perfect to watch on 2/22/22. And honestly, it was kind of underwhelming. The film follows Dylan, who has something bad happen to him every day at precisely 2:22 p.m. As the film goes on, it becomes clear that these events are somehow tied into a larger event that happened at 2:22 in either the past or the future or maybe even both ;). Overall it wasn't a terrible film, but it was nothing great either. At times I was kind of bored, and I never really cared about the characters. It wasn't the worst movie in the world, though, and there was nothing terrible about it. Just nothing great either. But I'm glad I watched it on 2/22/22. Not sure if I would recommend it, though.
This movie will frustrate you at the end, where you are expecting explanations and loose ends tied up, but no - only a lot of confusion that makes absolutely no sense.
Acting was amateur. Writing was worse, and in fairness is perhaps why the actors made such a poor impression on me.
This movie has no point! Zero!
Acting was amateur. Writing was worse, and in fairness is perhaps why the actors made such a poor impression on me.
This movie has no point! Zero!
An American sci-fi drama; A story about an air traffic controller who is suspended from his job after a near miss incident, who starts to notice a reoccurence of the conditions that led to his suspension. Drawn into a complex relationship, he must figure out a way to control time itself. Pattern, repetition and predestination often feature in sci-fi fantasy movie plots, but when complicated ideas are ill-explained, it makes for difficult viewing for the circumspect viewer, even one prepared to suspend belief. The lead character is a poseur, a man of metropolitan cliché, rushing about carelessly - this runs in stark contrast to the traits one associates with an air traffic controller. The love story also feels unnatural. The stylisation of the film feels misplaced too with voiceovers that reduce the illusion further.
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaDuring its one week theatrical release from June 30 to July 6, it only made $422, making it the lowest grossing film of 2017.
- ErroresIn the opening scenes of New York the Twin Towers are clearly visible. In a later scene of New York we see the One World Trade Center.
The first scene is in the dream. At that time in the dream, the twin towers still stood.
- ConexionesReferences La jetée (1962)
- Bandas sonorasCool on Fire
Performed by Daniel Johns
Composed by Daniel Johns / Joel Little
Licensed by Sony/ATV Music Publishing (Australia) Pty Limited & EMI April Music Inc. Licensed by EMI Music Publishing Australia Pty Limited
Under license from Eleven: A Music Company Pty Ltd
Licensed courtesy of Universal Music Australia Pty Limited
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
- How long is 2:22?Con tecnología de Alexa
Detalles
Taquilla
- Total en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 422
- Fin de semana de estreno en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 294
- 2 jul 2017
- Total a nivel mundial
- USD 3,945,729
- Tiempo de ejecución1 hora 38 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 Premonición (2017)?
Responda