En el siglo XIX, un ladrón neoyorquino cree entrar a una casa vacía pero encuentra en ella a una joven que le llega al corazón. Su relación es tan trágica como mágica.En el siglo XIX, un ladrón neoyorquino cree entrar a una casa vacía pero encuentra en ella a una joven que le llega al corazón. Su relación es tan trágica como mágica.En el siglo XIX, un ladrón neoyorquino cree entrar a una casa vacía pero encuentra en ella a una joven que le llega al corazón. Su relación es tan trágica como mágica.
- Dirección
- Guionistas
- Elenco
- Premios
- 2 nominaciones en total
- Ellis Isle Doctor
- (as Michael Patrick Crane)
- Dirección
- Guionistas
- Todo el elenco y el equipo
- Producción, taquilla y más en IMDbPro
Opiniones destacadas
Longer review: did a lot of reviews for IMDb and cannot easily recall a film that tries so hard, has such a great cast, great cinematography, yet is constantly shooting itself in the foot.
The script is ... problematic. Parts of it seem like they were written by a fifth grader. Lots of "is this really happening?" type dialog, which generally you do not ever hear in a film BECAUSE THE ONLY ONE QUALIFIED TO ASK THAT QUESTION IS THE AUDIENCE, NOT THE SCREENWRITER.
Duhhhh
Lots of miscasting. The great Crowe, who could play a phonebook if he had to, is OK as a demon. Will Smith as the devil is another matter entirely. John Hurt has to deliver dialog so weak he must have been wincing inside. Even the beautiful Jennifer Connelly seems to have been lost in the production and is relegated to astonished glances.
Farell, no slouch as an actor, has a gift for getting lost in a role and that really helps him here. He does an OK job.
The two actors who steal their scenes are Jessica Brown Findlay, who is supposed to portray a young woman whose inner beauty lights up every scene she is in .... AND SHE DOES.
And whatever animal they borrowed from the Animal Actors Union to play the magic horse does a great job too. Hopefully they gave him extra carrots as a reward.
You really need to leave critical judgement behind if you are planning on watching this. This is for example a scene at the 1:20 mark where the continuity is so out of sync with the screenplay that Farrell has to break about 75 once sacred "film rules" and deliver a short speech which is 100% backstory, just to make sense of what is happening. Ouch!
And here is a Special Bonus for the lucky IMDb reader who got this far: if you liked this film at all, here are two films that handle the same theme in a slightly different way, and you MUST SEE THEM (no, I don't get a commission if you do). Each rates a perfect "10":
1. The original HERE COMES MR JORDAN with Robert Montgomery
2. The more recent I ORIGINS
So that said, here is my take. The haters seem to fall into three major categories.
First, there are the "loved the book, hate the movie" types. Since I never read the book, I can't speak to this, other than to say, "Sorry, it's not the book, it's a movie". I always tell my kids that the medium of film is radically different than that of pulp and what "works" in one doesn't necessarily work in the other. Given that, one should go into a movie with an open mind, even if you've read the book.
Second, there are the "I never read the book, the movie didn't make sense". Now that I can talk to. I never did find myself all that confused. I think falls in large part to the fact that I never assumed the movie was supposed to be based on reality. I mean come on, given the rather obviously "fantastic" aspects of the story, it's not meant to be taken seriously. You're given an overarching concept (basically the power of love to do amazing things) and if you buy in, then the particulars are not really all that important. If you can't get beyond that, or simply don't buy into the central conceit, then you won't like the movie because it rides that wave for all it's worth.
Third are the folks who thought the movie was too schmaltzy. Now that I would at least partially agree with. That said, again, the movie doesn't try to hide the fact that it wears it's heart on it's sleeve. It's fair that if one does not go for that kind of thing, then you won't like this film.
All that said, I thought it was a "good" romantic film. My personal criticisms fall mainly on the somewhat wooden acting and the overall lack of "feel". That's right, despite all I said above there was just something about the film that just never really drew me into the characters. For some reason I never really felt truly emotionally invested in the characters. I didn't hate them, I did care, just not nearly as much as I thought I should. I also thought some of the acting was a bit forced and this might have contributed to not being able to lose myself in the characters. Almost like the actors did a good job of "acting" like the characters but never quite crossed into "being" the characters.
So if you're willing to accept the movie for what it is, an unabashedly romantic film that weaves religion as an integral part of the story, then I think that you will enjoy the film. It's not perfect by any sense of the imagination, but IMHO it's not nearly as bad as some folks are making it out to be.
The novel Winter's Tale is a romance with a supernatural overtone bathed in a tribute to New York City if it could always remain in a mystical state. The book is sometimes verbose, often funny, and heartfelt in it's depiction of love. The movie insults your intellect by ignoring the vast symbolism used in the book. Example: Time Travel - The book allows for you to understand certain characters have time traveled, while the movie insists certain characters travel only to follow others telling you that they are supernatural beings. It's NOT so. Here is exactly where the director really fowled the film. Deviating from the author's intent, turning the story into a devil's agents interplay is awkward out of place. The devil was NEVER once mentioned or implied in the original story. Yes, some devices are necessary in film to help the audience, but Pearly Soames purpose as a protagonist in the film is reduced to silly. Furthermore Pearly's reason for chasing Peter had nothing to do with Peter's love for Beverly. Pearly never met Beverly in the novel. Here is one more non-spoiler as it too won't be found in the film. In the book, Pearly's purpose for chasing Peter Lake began the moment he forced Peter Lake into his employ and Peter later turned a huge heist against Pearly. Pearly's gang was decimated for a time. From that day forward, Pearly's will to kill Peter grew in every chase that left him empty handed.
Being sold as a straight up romance or love story is almost a mistake because the film does try to encompass the much larger story surrounding the love affair. From Peter Lake's horse which has a story of his own to a wildly funny malapropian newspaper editor named Craig Binky. Other Characters such as Virginia Gamely were altered ridiculously. Virginia was from the Lake of the Coherees in the novel. In the film, she is just another New Yorker. This is where the film falls apart. The director's vain effort to include the other threaded stories inside the book are convoluted.
When you use the same title as a book for a movie it's wise to make an honest adaptation, otherwise change the name of the movie from the book entirely to avoid comparisons entirely. Then follow the guide of placing in the credits, "based on the story Winter's Tale by Mark Helprin." Director Akiva Goldsman (also wrote the screenplay) zig-zagged across both these traditional paths and the story suffered in his mash-up. Change a characters hair color, but don't change their role or destiny.
In this case Winter's Tale isn't even a director's interpretation. The book weaves a subtle supernatural element that may be so vague that the director wanted to spell it out to moviegoers. In doing so, he dumbs down the original story to the point it insults the audience, holding their hand and telling them what to think as opposed to letting the moviegoer figure things out.
Winter's Tale is condensed, filtered and sanitized of it's soul. Even without having read the novel, evidence of awkward changes for the screenplay dumb down the original subtle supernatural theme which was ironically as clear in it's message as it was abstract in it's delivery.
As a romance film there are heartfelt moments and the chemistry between Peter Lake and Beverly Penn does have enough strength to bring a tear to some audience members. Collin Farrell's soft humanity is felt quite often too. Yet, except for a candid conversation among the two men Peter Lake and Isaac Penn which draws an intellectual laugh, there is no humor to break up the tension in the film. Yes, the contrast of the book is once again worth noting. The book had meaningful characters which were lost in the movie. They were not a direct part of the love story, and as such were eliminated. Eliminating so many great elements of the original story killed the journey Peter Lake would take you through. The cinematography alone in Winter's Tale was not enough to paint the fantastic picture of the magical New York City the author intended as a character in the story. Without that fabric the mystical world Peter Lake and Beverly Penn exist is absent.
Winter's Tale is a complex supernatural love story with too many important characters to have fit into a short two or three hour film. It's not written in a manner that would translate into a part one and part two series either. Perhaps it's best medium will one day be a mini- series a network can allow to play out over five to eight episodes. It's often said that the journey is the reward and the story of Winter's Tale is a long journey that cannot be condensed. In this case, spotlighting one part of the journey is not fulfilling either.
Let's just make one thing clear to anyone that has neither read the book nor seen the movie. The love story in this film takes place in the first quarter of the novel. There are three remaining quarters to the story that thread the love story of Peter Lake and Beverly Penn into the overall journey, but their story is told early and ends early. Well, that's not entirely true. And yet it is. Now for all those clues and a tease, don't you just wonder what a book that has three quarters more to say – has to say? For my full review just search my name, Lars Hindsley and you'll find DangerMans Lair.
The story - based on Mark Helprin's ponderous 1983 novel - follows petty thief Peter Lake (Farrell) from the early 1900s through to the present day. In 1916, Peter is suddenly declared persona non grata by Pearly Soames (Russell Crowe), his frankly insane, literally demonic Irish thug of a mentor. While on the run, Peter encounters a mysterious white horse that points him in the direction of the Penn mansion. Initially looking to steal himself something nice, Peter sets aside all thoughts of pilfering treasure from the Penns when he meets and swiftly falls in love with Beverly (Downton Abbey's Jessica Brown Findlay), the beautiful, flame-haired mistress of the house who is slowly being eaten alive by consumption.
It's all very romantic, or so we're told, with a supernatural element folded into the love story: Pearly becomes convinced that Peter is destined to save a girl with titian hair, an action that would upset the teetering balance between good and evil. Indeed, Peter's burning love winds up keeping him alive for over a century, until he meets single mom/super-journalist Virginia (Jennifer Connelly) and her daughter in modern-day Manhattan. It soon becomes clear that fate, destiny and a whole lot of mystical mumbo-jumbo are at work here, and Peter will soon discover the healing and restorative powers of love itself.
To be fair, Winter's Tale is built upon a raft of quite interesting ideas. It hints at, rather than belabours, the notion of good and evil taking physical form: Pearly lurks through Manhattan, a gangster by trade and a demon by nature. When he decides to confront Peter for good and for ever, he's forced to fight on equal, mortal terms. It's a fantasy universe absolutely begging to be expanded, a fiction that could be real and is all the more tantalising for it.
But Goldsman, in juggling the various elements of his story, lets the opportunity slip him by, instead focusing on the love story in almost excruciating detail - even though he never really creates a connection between Peter and Beverly that rings true. Peter teaches Beverly how to escape her all-consuming fever by slowing her heart down, Beverly explains to Peter how she believes people rise to the stars to find their loved ones when they die - it's all intensely romantic, but hardly emotional. The film then flings a few more tropes and complications into the mix (Peter loses his memory, Peter winds up travelling through the future into our present, love will conquer all etc.), without really stopping to explain just how it all hangs together.
At least Goldsman has pulled together a cast worth watching, even when the film he's constructed around them isn't quite worth their salt. Farrell broods prettily in his boy-band haircut, clearly too old for the part but nonetheless playing it with great gusto. Paying Goldsman back for A Beautiful Mind and Cinderella Man, Crowe marches through the silliness of his raging, bonkers character with strange amounts of joy. Pearly is easily the film's best character, unless you count the one played by another of Goldsman's Facebook friends (no spoilers, but this movie star is no doubt grateful to Goldman for a script that earned him bucketfuls of acting cred many years ago).
Swimming somewhere in the reams of quite lovely footage assembled by Goldsman and his cinematographer Caleb Deschanel, there's a great movie with great ideas. Once in a while, it bursts through - in the shadowy, dank dungeon of a demon's lair, ruled by Lucifer himself; or the snow- swept sparkle of a moonlit night - but, more often than not, it turns into Winter's Tale: an emotionally distant romantic drama that goes for lush, sweeping depth but comes up curiously cold and myopic.
Not gonna lie I cried a few different times in the movie, I laughed, and felt so many other things while watching. I'm also a secret hopeless romantic so this movie is great for my fellow love story lovers. Honestly I knew from the previews it was going to have a spiritual and magical story line which I really liked. It's nice to watch films that make you think afterwards and during. So don't go expecting to see a typical story line, because that's not at all what you will get.
When you go see this movie which I definitely recommend, have an open mind and just appreciate what you're watching, honestly it's moving!
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaSteven Spielberg bought the film rights in 1983, soon after the book was released.
- ErroresAram Khachaturian's "Masquerade Suite" plays during the 1914 New Year's ball. Khachaturian wrote the suite in 1941.
- Citas
Beverly Penn: We are all connected. Each baby born carries a miracle inside. A unique purpose and that miracle is promised to one person and one person alone. We are voyagers set on a course towards destiny, to find the one person our miracle is meant for. But be warned: as we seek out the light, darkness gathers and the eternal contest between good and evil is not fought with great armies... But one life at a time.
- Créditos curiososThe opening logos for Warner Bros. Pictures, Village Roadshow Pictures, and Weed Road Pictures all end by being placed on old-fashioned paper.
- ConexionesFeatured in Film '72: Episode dated 19 February 2014 (2014)
- Bandas sonorasMasquerade Suite
Written by Aram Khachaturyan (as Aram Khachaturian)
Selecciones populares
- How long is Winter's Tale?Con tecnología de Alexa
- Is this based on a book?
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- País de origen
- Sitios oficiales
- Idioma
- También se conoce como
- Winter's Tale
- Locaciones de filmación
- Productoras
- Ver más créditos de la compañía en IMDbPro
Taquilla
- Presupuesto
- USD 60,000,000 (estimado)
- Total en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 12,600,231
- Fin de semana de estreno en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 7,297,694
- 16 feb 2014
- Total a nivel mundial
- USD 30,800,231
- Tiempo de ejecución1 hora 58 minutos
- Color
- Mezcla de sonido
- Relación de aspecto
- 2.35 : 1