CALIFICACIÓN DE IMDb
5.2/10
11 k
TU CALIFICACIÓN
La historia de un hombre adulto que experimenta todos los cambios y efectos de la pubertad en un periodo de tres semanas tras la extirpación de un tumor que le presionaba la pituitaria.La historia de un hombre adulto que experimenta todos los cambios y efectos de la pubertad en un periodo de tres semanas tras la extirpación de un tumor que le presionaba la pituitaria.La historia de un hombre adulto que experimenta todos los cambios y efectos de la pubertad en un periodo de tres semanas tras la extirpación de un tumor que le presionaba la pituitaria.
- Dirección
- Guionistas
- Elenco
- Premios
- 2 premios ganados en total
Diana Lyubenova
- Marilyn
- (as Diana Lubenova)
Opiniones destacadas
First off, let me state that I don't like movies like this. The only reason I watched this movie was because I saw Brittany Snow was in it. And honestly, she killed it. I loved her character as Michelle. She was so sweet, and her performance, along with the great J.k. Simmons, really carried this film.
However, the rest of the film left a lot to be desired. The film's premise was interesting enough (And supposedly, the movie is loosely based on the life of Ken Baker. Baker told his son that a third was pure fiction, a third was partially true, and a third was straight out of his life). An adult going through puberty could be funny. But honestly, it felt like they forced all the sexual jokes, which is sad because I thought the start of the film was really sweet. Also, going through puberty doesn't make you a jerk. The main character is a straight jerk. But then again, all the men in this movie are selfish jerks.
I didn't have high hopes for this film going to end, and I left disappointed. But if you have nothing else to do, give it a watch if only for Brittany Snow.
However, the rest of the film left a lot to be desired. The film's premise was interesting enough (And supposedly, the movie is loosely based on the life of Ken Baker. Baker told his son that a third was pure fiction, a third was partially true, and a third was straight out of his life). An adult going through puberty could be funny. But honestly, it felt like they forced all the sexual jokes, which is sad because I thought the start of the film was really sweet. Also, going through puberty doesn't make you a jerk. The main character is a straight jerk. But then again, all the men in this movie are selfish jerks.
I didn't have high hopes for this film going to end, and I left disappointed. But if you have nothing else to do, give it a watch if only for Brittany Snow.
This film is okay for adults but no children please. Not really my cup of tea but some really liked it.
I don't really get why this movie got so much hate. I almost didn't watch it because of all the negative reviews. I'm not a huge fan of overly stupid humor, but I found this to be quite funny. I compare it to Role Models for the level of humor. I saw at least one other reviewer state that the supporting cast was excellent, and it truly was. It was worth the watch alone for the lead's two best friends. An easy watch, not long or tedious, funny dialogue and banter, some good cameos and supporting cast. IMDB doesn't let me do half star ratings but a solid 6.5/10 for me.
I turned into this because it seemed like a good premise and there were like 500 stars in this thing. I was a bit confused by the start of this movie. We are introduced to Peter Newmans, a therapist. For me though, this part went on wayyyy too long. But it is to establish that Peter has no sexual desires and, due to that, a very successful life as a sex addiction therapist. Eventually at about the half way point Peter is hurt and goes to the ER and during the examination it comes to light that he has a tumor on his pituitary gland and has not "matured" properly. I have a bit of a problem buying that this was never discovered by a doctor before this or brought to the doctor's attention. After removal of his tumor puberty decends on Peter and his perfect asexual life - confusing and upsetting just about everyone. The second half of this movie is played for crass laughs - when it should have been played for heartfelt humor about what would happen to a 30 year old entering puberty. I thought everyone tried and there was good talent, but it was the script and writing.
Okay, so here's the thing -- I watched this film over a week ago, and I'm still thinking about it. Why? Because I get riled up over films that are SO CLOSE to being good, but just... aren't.
The Late Bloomer definitely falls into this category. There are bits of dialogue and interactions between characters which are genuinely top-notch comedy, and the supporting cast put in one of the best ensemble performances I've seen in ages. Seriously. Kumail Nanjiani in particular is fantastic, and J.K. Simmons continues to be the best supporting actor in Hollywood right now.
Buuuuuut... there are six writing credits listed, and it's likely that therein lies the problem. The moments of brilliance are almost completely overshadowed by other bits of writing which are, at best, trite, and at worst completely cringe-worthy. The last twenty minutes or so of the film legitimately don't even make sense, and are among the worst I've seen all year. It really feels like something that was cobbled together from different people who had different ideas of what the film should be, and maybe some of those people were... incorrect.
So yeah, I wish this film was as good as it could have been. A lot of inspired performances and great dialogue that deserved better than what this ends up being.
The Late Bloomer definitely falls into this category. There are bits of dialogue and interactions between characters which are genuinely top-notch comedy, and the supporting cast put in one of the best ensemble performances I've seen in ages. Seriously. Kumail Nanjiani in particular is fantastic, and J.K. Simmons continues to be the best supporting actor in Hollywood right now.
Buuuuuut... there are six writing credits listed, and it's likely that therein lies the problem. The moments of brilliance are almost completely overshadowed by other bits of writing which are, at best, trite, and at worst completely cringe-worthy. The last twenty minutes or so of the film legitimately don't even make sense, and are among the worst I've seen all year. It really feels like something that was cobbled together from different people who had different ideas of what the film should be, and maybe some of those people were... incorrect.
So yeah, I wish this film was as good as it could have been. A lot of inspired performances and great dialogue that deserved better than what this ends up being.
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaThe movie is loosely based of of the life of Ken Baker. Baker told his son that a third was pure fiction, a third was partially true, and a third was straight out of his life.
- ErroresIn the beginning of the movie, when Peter is talking to Michelle in her kitchen, his wine glass switches hands and then completely disappears from his hand.
- Citas
James Newmans: I think the biggest change we go through is discovering the difference between acting like a man and being a man.
- ConexionesReferences El padrino (1972)
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
- How long is The Late Bloomer?Con tecnología de Alexa
Detalles
Taquilla
- Presupuesto
- USD 3,500,000 (estimado)
- Tiempo de ejecución1 hora 30 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 The Late Bloomer (2016) officially released in Japan in Japanese?
Responda