CALIFICACIÓN DE IMDb
4.9/10
3.7 k
TU CALIFICACIÓN
Agrega una trama en tu idiomaA young woman comes to in a roadside diner with no idea where she is or how she got there. Split between two timelines, she gets taken on a violent journey as she seeks out the person respon... Leer todoA young woman comes to in a roadside diner with no idea where she is or how she got there. Split between two timelines, she gets taken on a violent journey as she seeks out the person responsible for her lover's death.A young woman comes to in a roadside diner with no idea where she is or how she got there. Split between two timelines, she gets taken on a violent journey as she seeks out the person responsible for her lover's death.
- Dirección
- Guionistas
- Elenco
A.C. Peterson
- Bob
- (as Alan C. Peterson)
Opiniones destacadas
Gwen (Katharine Isabelle) suddenly notices that she's at a diner in a fugue state. She has flashes of memories and troubling signs. She finds a gun in her bag and accidentally shoots the waitress. She escapes from the cops and continues her crime spree.
This is a mess. The bigger question is if it's a fitting mess. The premise is that Gwen is confused but the movie ends up confusing me. This is definitely ambitious and I can applaud that. It's just not done well. I do like the actors. I expected Isabelle to do two completely differing characterization for before in her flashbacks and after the diner. That should be the better path.
This is a mess. The bigger question is if it's a fitting mess. The premise is that Gwen is confused but the movie ends up confusing me. This is definitely ambitious and I can applaud that. It's just not done well. I do like the actors. I expected Isabelle to do two completely differing characterization for before in her flashbacks and after the diner. That should be the better path.
Every once in awhile you see a movie and get surprised at least I do. Nowadays anyone with half a brain can see a bad movie coming..... This movie had me thinking B - Grade movie. Names were not to familiar to me. Katherine Isabelle was awesome and surprised the heck out of me. Yes, it was a little bit to much to follow , here , there , this time , that time but I settled in.........on the performance of Katherine. I would say it is a must see over a lot of movies with higher billing and more famous stars. The 10 lines.........agh. Cool movie , surprisingly good actress carrying the entire movie with ease. Katherine Isabelle is stunning in more ways than one in this performance hope to see her do more.
88 starts with our main character lost and confused in a diner, and through multiple story threads we find out how she got there and where she is going. That's all I want to say about the story, because the less you know the more I think you'll enjoy the movie.
I thought 88 had a very "Memento-ish" feel to it, in that by design the viewer is very disoriented and along the way you gather information along with the main character until the inevitable "aha" moment and climax. I thought the pacing was great, the actors did a terrific job, and while I have no idea what the budget was for 88 it felt like a major feature film.
Speaking of the actors, Katherine Isabelle OWNS this movie. I want to go back and re-watch, but if I'm not mistaken she is in essentially every scene in the movie. Plain and simple, 88 doesn't work if she doesn't nail her role(s), and she plays it to perfection.
Bottom line, 88 isn't The Godfather or Apocalypse Now, it's not going to win any Oscars or make billions of dollars. But if you're looking for an exciting movie with several WTF moments and a great performance from an under-appreciated star I strongly recommend it.
I thought 88 had a very "Memento-ish" feel to it, in that by design the viewer is very disoriented and along the way you gather information along with the main character until the inevitable "aha" moment and climax. I thought the pacing was great, the actors did a terrific job, and while I have no idea what the budget was for 88 it felt like a major feature film.
Speaking of the actors, Katherine Isabelle OWNS this movie. I want to go back and re-watch, but if I'm not mistaken she is in essentially every scene in the movie. Plain and simple, 88 doesn't work if she doesn't nail her role(s), and she plays it to perfection.
Bottom line, 88 isn't The Godfather or Apocalypse Now, it's not going to win any Oscars or make billions of dollars. But if you're looking for an exciting movie with several WTF moments and a great performance from an under-appreciated star I strongly recommend it.
Well you know how you hear about this story, about this girl, that will revive an old movie plot in modern times...well this is definitely what you won't like about it.
Constant flashbacks, make you fell like a moron for not understanding the storyline.
Cops are terrible shooters in this movie, it took them three tries to shoot a guy. They finally manage to do that when he was shooting in the police precinct.
A lot of clichés from the cinema world are in this movie.
This movie gets this high of a rating, just because the main character was played right. She was sexy, hot - when angry persona, and confused, scared when normal herself - still a cliché, but the actress did a good job.
Constant flashbacks, make you fell like a moron for not understanding the storyline.
Cops are terrible shooters in this movie, it took them three tries to shoot a guy. They finally manage to do that when he was shooting in the police precinct.
A lot of clichés from the cinema world are in this movie.
This movie gets this high of a rating, just because the main character was played right. She was sexy, hot - when angry persona, and confused, scared when normal herself - still a cliché, but the actress did a good job.
-88 (2015) movie review: -88, which is already on Netflix?, is an action thriller about a girl who's former mob-ish boss kills her fiancé, so she goes nuts and tries to kill him. Only problem is that after the incident, she develops a sort-of new, mild personality that does not remember anything; an event that happens after traumatic events occasionally.
-I feel like 88 had the proper amount of cheesy and lame elements in it for me to hate on it, but then it threw in just enough good elements for me to say 'Eh' about it. So here is an 'eh' review: -The story feels new, but every element of the way they did the story, from the Reservoir Dogs past-to-present cuts, to the quick flashback cuts from EVERY MOVIE EVER, so literally the same ending as Rage. Okay, not the same, but similar. In fact, this film is 2015's Rage.
-The pace is good, but the flashbacks are even out of order, making some of them feel unnecessary, and making the film feel a little too long. For an 88 minute film.
-The acting. So Katharine Isabelle did a fine job. She was believable, but not great. She really tried hard. Christopher Lloyd did a fine job. He was believable and good, but he did not really have to try, and it shows. Tim Doiron is pretty bad. And Michael Ironside showed up in it, hurting my opinion of the film even more with his generic acting.
-The characters are all generic and cliché. Like I said, this film offers little-to-nothing new.
-The music was weird and almost Tarantino weird. Almost.
-A few of the scenes I thought were good and well done, and others I thought were student-film quality. Like 'Oh my gosh. I can't believe they are not dead.' I will give mega props to the ending. Although I totally should have known how it would end, I thought the ending helped pull the film out of the 'eh' for me. Like Rage from 2014 .
-88 is also Rated-R for language, a somewhat strong amount of underwear, and bad blood effects everywhere.
-Anyway, 88 had a few redeeming features like the actual story or the ending, but I don't think they quite make up for bad fights, lame characters (and actors), and cliché everythings. As good as the ending was, 88 is not really worth the time.
-I feel like 88 had the proper amount of cheesy and lame elements in it for me to hate on it, but then it threw in just enough good elements for me to say 'Eh' about it. So here is an 'eh' review: -The story feels new, but every element of the way they did the story, from the Reservoir Dogs past-to-present cuts, to the quick flashback cuts from EVERY MOVIE EVER, so literally the same ending as Rage. Okay, not the same, but similar. In fact, this film is 2015's Rage.
-The pace is good, but the flashbacks are even out of order, making some of them feel unnecessary, and making the film feel a little too long. For an 88 minute film.
-The acting. So Katharine Isabelle did a fine job. She was believable, but not great. She really tried hard. Christopher Lloyd did a fine job. He was believable and good, but he did not really have to try, and it shows. Tim Doiron is pretty bad. And Michael Ironside showed up in it, hurting my opinion of the film even more with his generic acting.
-The characters are all generic and cliché. Like I said, this film offers little-to-nothing new.
-The music was weird and almost Tarantino weird. Almost.
-A few of the scenes I thought were good and well done, and others I thought were student-film quality. Like 'Oh my gosh. I can't believe they are not dead.' I will give mega props to the ending. Although I totally should have known how it would end, I thought the ending helped pull the film out of the 'eh' for me. Like Rage from 2014 .
-88 is also Rated-R for language, a somewhat strong amount of underwear, and bad blood effects everywhere.
-Anyway, 88 had a few redeeming features like the actual story or the ending, but I don't think they quite make up for bad fights, lame characters (and actors), and cliché everythings. As good as the ending was, 88 is not really worth the time.
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaFittingly the runtime of the film is 88 minutes, just like the film's title.
- ErroresActress Nadia Barosso has her name spelled wrong in the credits as "Nadia Barroso".
- Créditos curiososThe end credits are in reverse order as well as scrolling from the top of the screen down rather than up from the bottom of the screen. For example, The word "Cast" appears at the bottom of the cast list and above it are the names of the two biggest stars, Katherine Isabelle and Christopher Lloyd, with the rest of the cast listed above them.
- Bandas sonorasCOME BE WITH ME LOVE
Written by Laura Cole
Performed by Laura Cole (Vocals), Ron Cole (Keys), Steve Bigas (Drums), Chris Chiarcos (Bass)
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
- How long is 88?Con tecnología de Alexa
Detalles
Contribuir a esta página
Sugiere una edición o agrega el contenido que falta