Cuando un blogger de tecnología consigue una entrevista con un gurú de la tecnología y detiene un ataque contra él, encuentra un anillo misterioso que lo lleva 57 segundos al pasado.Cuando un blogger de tecnología consigue una entrevista con un gurú de la tecnología y detiene un ataque contra él, encuentra un anillo misterioso que lo lleva 57 segundos al pasado.Cuando un blogger de tecnología consigue una entrevista con un gurú de la tecnología y detiene un ataque contra él, encuentra un anillo misterioso que lo lleva 57 segundos al pasado.
- Dirección
- Guionistas
- Elenco
- Dirección
- Guionistas
- Todo el elenco y el equipo
- Producción, taquilla y más en IMDbPro
Opiniones destacadas
Wow. I'm mind-blown.
Do you know when you are watching a science fiction movie or any movie really and you have those moments of amazement thinking "Wow! I feel like I'm getting smarter after every scene!", "This is so well written!" "This is so ingenious!"? Well, unfortunately, the complete opposite just happened...
It's remarkable how the decision makers involved in this project were able to set up this big scope involving as characters apparently two of the worlds most influential beings, the tech genius entrepreneur! And the pharmaceutical giant!, with the MIT graduate 'chosen one'!, and the movie be so ridden by basically idiotic/childish decisions and set ups. Everything just feels relentlessly cheap. How contradictory.
How to suspend your disbelief when the movie is set within such a wealthy and high-stakes scenario but you have everything surrounding your production (except Morgan Freeman) being not up to par? It just makes no sense.
Next time just tune/humble the whole thing down so that you don't have to simplify every plot point because you don't have the budget or the technical team/energy to make it.
Do you know when you are watching a science fiction movie or any movie really and you have those moments of amazement thinking "Wow! I feel like I'm getting smarter after every scene!", "This is so well written!" "This is so ingenious!"? Well, unfortunately, the complete opposite just happened...
It's remarkable how the decision makers involved in this project were able to set up this big scope involving as characters apparently two of the worlds most influential beings, the tech genius entrepreneur! And the pharmaceutical giant!, with the MIT graduate 'chosen one'!, and the movie be so ridden by basically idiotic/childish decisions and set ups. Everything just feels relentlessly cheap. How contradictory.
How to suspend your disbelief when the movie is set within such a wealthy and high-stakes scenario but you have everything surrounding your production (except Morgan Freeman) being not up to par? It just makes no sense.
Next time just tune/humble the whole thing down so that you don't have to simplify every plot point because you don't have the budget or the technical team/energy to make it.
This film is just terrible. The premise is okay but the main character is poorly written. The way he acts and his motivations are that of a 12 year old. This is as bad as that lame Jason Momoa film "sweet girl" where every point they want to portray is so on the nose that it all ends up stinking. Although I couldn't make it beyond 20 minutes of that tripe, I did make it further on this one. This script really needed another 6 or 7 rewrites. Maybe this script was written by ChatGPT? No? Or maybe it needed to be? This could've been so much better if it had been properly script doctored but we will never know.
I don't know how the team that made the movie managed to land Morgan Freeman on their lap. Whoever made that happen is the only genius on the team.
Everything else is absolutely dumb and/or low quality about this movie.
The main characters make the dumbest decisions possible. Their reasoning makes no sense.
From the cinematography perspective, it's just awful. Most outdoor scenes are way too contrasty with blown shadows. It's like they hired a team of first year art school students and put them in charge of lighting and the camera.
Audio is awful too. Many indoor scenes echo like crazy.
Zero attention to details.
Do not recommend.
3/10.
Everything else is absolutely dumb and/or low quality about this movie.
The main characters make the dumbest decisions possible. Their reasoning makes no sense.
From the cinematography perspective, it's just awful. Most outdoor scenes are way too contrasty with blown shadows. It's like they hired a team of first year art school students and put them in charge of lighting and the camera.
Audio is awful too. Many indoor scenes echo like crazy.
Zero attention to details.
Do not recommend.
3/10.
This movie is alright, but derivative.
If you like the concept, but want to see a much better movie, check out "Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time, 2010".
The acting is much better, but I don't want to totally dismiss this film.
The concept is top drawer! Combining AI with a time device, would be a total game changer.
The AI would detect danger at a speed humans aren't capable of, then throw you back 57 seconds to avoid the danger, either manually or by the AI.
It's a genius concept, used a lot in the film, less the AI, he does everything manually.
I would recommend this film on the concept alone, however, it's a waste of Morgan Freeman's talent.
But hey, everybody can use an extra paycheck, LOL!
If you like the concept, but want to see a much better movie, check out "Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time, 2010".
The acting is much better, but I don't want to totally dismiss this film.
The concept is top drawer! Combining AI with a time device, would be a total game changer.
The AI would detect danger at a speed humans aren't capable of, then throw you back 57 seconds to avoid the danger, either manually or by the AI.
It's a genius concept, used a lot in the film, less the AI, he does everything manually.
I would recommend this film on the concept alone, however, it's a waste of Morgan Freeman's talent.
But hey, everybody can use an extra paycheck, LOL!
Sure you have the legendary Morgan Freeman sandwiched in here at the beginning and end, but even he's a lost cause in this flick. Also all the action scenes are laughable. We've all seen movies with large fireball explosion where characters have to quickly run away, or instances where guns are pointed at someone's head, and times where someone gets knocked out, drugged or kidnapped.
I think the writers missed out on the element of flashback - perhaps show some scenes of Franklin's twin sister, so that we can unravel how close the siblings were and how her passing affected his life. Franklin really is a poor character because we can't tell if his heart is in the right place. He is labeled as heroic, but most of the time he uses the ring for personal gain (to gamble) and not for the greater good.
This film is neither bold nor intrepid, and Josh Hutchinson does the bare minimum here. I don't think he's cut out for an action thriller.
I think the writers missed out on the element of flashback - perhaps show some scenes of Franklin's twin sister, so that we can unravel how close the siblings were and how her passing affected his life. Franklin really is a poor character because we can't tell if his heart is in the right place. He is labeled as heroic, but most of the time he uses the ring for personal gain (to gamble) and not for the greater good.
This film is neither bold nor intrepid, and Josh Hutchinson does the bare minimum here. I don't think he's cut out for an action thriller.
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaThe film was shot in Lafayette, LA in April 2022.
- ErroresAt Cogan's grille the audience is told that a bullet grazed Franklin's right hand. It was bleeding at the conference too. Yet, when he takes off the bandage, his hand is completely fine.
- Citas
Franklin Fox: They say that life flashes before your eyes when you have a near-death experience, but I only saw my last three months.
- Bandas sonorasCreepin
Written by Cade Ellis
Performed by Cade Ellis
Produced by Oscar Beats
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
- How long is 57 Seconds?Con tecnología de Alexa
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- País de origen
- Sitio oficial
- Idioma
- También se conoce como
- 57 Seconds
- Locaciones de filmación
- Productoras
- Ver más créditos de la compañía en IMDbPro
Taquilla
- Total a nivel mundial
- USD 1,055,487
- Tiempo de ejecución1 hora 39 minutos
- Color
- 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 Canadian French language plot outline for 57 Segundos Atrás (2023)?
Responda