CALIFICACIÓN DE IMDb
6.1/10
49 k
TU CALIFICACIÓN
Tras la agresión sexual que sufre su mujer, un hombre contrata los servicios de un grupo de justicieros para que le ayuden a ajustar cuentas. Después descubre que quieren un favor a cambio.Tras la agresión sexual que sufre su mujer, un hombre contrata los servicios de un grupo de justicieros para que le ayuden a ajustar cuentas. Después descubre que quieren un favor a cambio.Tras la agresión sexual que sufre su mujer, un hombre contrata los servicios de un grupo de justicieros para que le ayuden a ajustar cuentas. Después descubre que quieren un favor a cambio.
- Premios
- 1 nominación en total
Wayne Pére
- Cancer
- (as Wayne Pere)
Renwick D. Scott II
- Kid 1
- (as Renwick Dwight Scott)
Opiniones destacadas
After his wife (January Jones) is assaulted, a husband (Nic Cage) enlists the services of a vigilante group to help him settle the score. Then he discovers they want a "favor" from him in return.
This is neither Cage's best film or his worst. It is also not his best hair, or his worst. In fact, I may have to give Cage some credit... his acting was far better than this film ended up calling for.
Not that the movie is all bad. Had it been a novel, it would have been a best-selling thriller. But it sort of crumbles as a film for one reason: plot holes. Simon and his cronies are just too powerful, know too much, too soon. It is not adequately explained, and the logical answers that the audience might dream up without evidence only leads to an even wilder conspiracy... in short, try not to think too much while watching this.
The action is good, the humor is decent, and the suspense is top notch -- it is the most tension you will ever feel while watching a man buy a candy bar. But it just does not add up. Good acting, good action and suspense do not make a movie if the story itself is not complete. In short, this film's biggest problem is the lack of a script doctor. A few tweaks, a tightening of events, this could have been a blockbuster and demanded a franchise or sequel.
This is neither Cage's best film or his worst. It is also not his best hair, or his worst. In fact, I may have to give Cage some credit... his acting was far better than this film ended up calling for.
Not that the movie is all bad. Had it been a novel, it would have been a best-selling thriller. But it sort of crumbles as a film for one reason: plot holes. Simon and his cronies are just too powerful, know too much, too soon. It is not adequately explained, and the logical answers that the audience might dream up without evidence only leads to an even wilder conspiracy... in short, try not to think too much while watching this.
The action is good, the humor is decent, and the suspense is top notch -- it is the most tension you will ever feel while watching a man buy a candy bar. But it just does not add up. Good acting, good action and suspense do not make a movie if the story itself is not complete. In short, this film's biggest problem is the lack of a script doctor. A few tweaks, a tightening of events, this could have been a blockbuster and demanded a franchise or sequel.
What did the rabbit do? You'll know if you watch(ed) the movie. But this movie does not have answers for everything. There are plot holes and real inconsistencies all over the place. Plus Nicolas Cage is not really ideal for the main role. He's too normal. I should say his character is too normal.
Jennifer Carpenter is credited but not really that much in the movie. There are subplots that come and go, plus there is one thing that I think remains unresolved. The "inciting incident" (let's call it that), that kick starts all the rest. But again, if you start questioning things, you might as well not watch the movie at all, because you won't like it. Try to enjoy the action, the suspense even if you have seen this formula a dozen (or more) times!
Jennifer Carpenter is credited but not really that much in the movie. There are subplots that come and go, plus there is one thing that I think remains unresolved. The "inciting incident" (let's call it that), that kick starts all the rest. But again, if you start questioning things, you might as well not watch the movie at all, because you won't like it. Try to enjoy the action, the suspense even if you have seen this formula a dozen (or more) times!
id give it a 6 at best. kinda reminds me of Taken..but its a Nicholas cage movie, fans of him will like the movie no doubt. the movie has gaping plot holes and more than a couple of moments doesn't make sense in that i feel that important events were cut out. the film really cuts corners where it shouldn't, the sequences are really awfully put together. but the camera action was OK, it has this realistic vibe you remember from Taken, but do not be mistaken, the story itself is far from realistic. Also i have to mention that the end was also unsatisfying in the sense that made you curious but not in a good way because the movie itself didn't deserve that kind of ending it should have kept going. instead it amplifies its story where there is too little to amplify in the first place.
Nicholas Cage has participated in ambivalent movies, but this one is definitely among the better ones. And he is pleasantly complemented by Guy Pearce whose character is controversial to the end. Development of events and characters is logical, and viewers have - similar to various characters - constant dilemmas what kind of standpoint to take up with, as the background issue is serious, and good intentions get out of control quite fast. I felt that it must be horrible if you can trust nobody during peacetime.
Recommended to all desiring to spend a thrilling time in front of TV or at the cinema.
Recommended to all desiring to spend a thrilling time in front of TV or at the cinema.
Although a number of reviews play down this film, I thoroughly enjoyed it. I quite like Nicholas Cage, ever since Con Air - he seems to play the laid back, slightly relaxed good guy to whom it all just gets a bit too much. You are quickly engaged with the theme of the film although I have to say I find it difficult to imagine Mr. Cage as a High School English lecturer. No massive brain power needed to follow the story line which moves at a satisfying pace.
In this, at times, quite plausible film he again enjoys the hard done by guy but you find yourself drawn along with him almost feeling for him.
A very nice way to spend 105 minutes and well worth your viewing time. a definite 7.
In this, at times, quite plausible film he again enjoys the hard done by guy but you find yourself drawn along with him almost feeling for him.
A very nice way to spend 105 minutes and well worth your viewing time. a definite 7.
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaOriginally was titled "The Hungry Rabbit Jumps".
- ErroresWhen Will bought the bar from the vending machine, the first two numbers were 11. This should have made the same sound when pressed. Instead, it made two different sounds, and it appeared his fingers moved not to touch 1 twice.
- Citas
[last lines]
Will Gerard: He just scratched the surface and I thought someone should finish it.
Gibbs: I'll give it a look.
[walking away]
Gibbs: The hungry rabbit jumps, eh?
- ConexionesFeatured in Projector: Justice (2011)
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
- How long is Seeking Justice?Con tecnología de Alexa
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- País de origen
- Sitio oficial
- Idioma
- También se conoce como
- Seeking Justice
- Locaciones de filmación
- Productoras
- Ver más créditos de la compañía en IMDbPro
Taquilla
- Presupuesto
- USD 17,000,000 (estimado)
- Total en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 411,746
- Fin de semana de estreno en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 249,912
- 18 mar 2012
- Total a nivel mundial
- USD 14,089,528
- Tiempo de ejecución
- 1h 45min(105 min)
- Color
- Mezcla de sonido
- Relación de aspecto
- 2.35 : 1
Contribuir a esta página
Sugiere una edición o agrega el contenido que falta