ÉVALUATION IMDb
6,7/10
22 k
MA NOTE
Un événement fatidique mène Mike Terry, professeur d'arts martiaux mixtes de haut niveau à travailler dans le cinéma. Bien qu'il refuse de participer à des combats, les circonstances l'amène... Tout lireUn événement fatidique mène Mike Terry, professeur d'arts martiaux mixtes de haut niveau à travailler dans le cinéma. Bien qu'il refuse de participer à des combats, les circonstances l'amènent à changer d'avis.Un événement fatidique mène Mike Terry, professeur d'arts martiaux mixtes de haut niveau à travailler dans le cinéma. Bien qu'il refuse de participer à des combats, les circonstances l'amènent à changer d'avis.
- Prix
- 1 nomination au total
Cyril Takayama
- The Magician
- (as Cyril Takata)
Caroline Correa
- Monica
- (as Caroline de Souza Correa)
Avis en vedette
For a fan of MMA like myself, I've been really drooling for a good MMA flick. To satisfy my MMA urges I've put myself through cheesy Bas Rutten flicks (The Eliminator and even The Vault), amazing documentaries (The Smashing Machine), and even rare Japanese flicks (Nagurimono). So this has been a long time coming. A well-made flick, with a well-known director and accomplished actors, this has to be good, right? Well, no, not really. But luck be true, REDBELT was a very good film.
The story follows a thoughtful Jiu Jitsu instructor who ends up running into some good luck. Unfortunately, it doesn't last long, and in order to set things right, he will need to cross examine himself and the people around him. Respect, honor, greed, back-stabbing and gratitude rule this film, turning it into an intriguing, emotional and entertaining movie.
With fantastic acting by most, smart, realistic writing, and some emotional scenes, REDBELT delivers an especially big wallop on the intimate side.
Though, with hyper editing and jerky camera-work used for the MMA scenes, the movie tends not to work as well as I would have liked. For a knowledgeable MMA fan, you'll pick up on all the moves, but for someone who doesn't know about MMA and it's techniques, it may seem like a mess.
However, the film is definitely not a mess. Yeah, the ending was a tad too unbelievable, and though the movie shines through it's writing and realistic situations, some scenes felt a little sappy. But the end of the ending was fantastic.
Red Belt doesn't fail at being an action flick; it just succeeds more so at being an entertaining drama with an MMA theme. This is an easy movie to recommend, since it's easily recommendable to all people who believe in having good morals.
The movie would have been perfect if El Guapo was in it. ;)
The story follows a thoughtful Jiu Jitsu instructor who ends up running into some good luck. Unfortunately, it doesn't last long, and in order to set things right, he will need to cross examine himself and the people around him. Respect, honor, greed, back-stabbing and gratitude rule this film, turning it into an intriguing, emotional and entertaining movie.
With fantastic acting by most, smart, realistic writing, and some emotional scenes, REDBELT delivers an especially big wallop on the intimate side.
Though, with hyper editing and jerky camera-work used for the MMA scenes, the movie tends not to work as well as I would have liked. For a knowledgeable MMA fan, you'll pick up on all the moves, but for someone who doesn't know about MMA and it's techniques, it may seem like a mess.
However, the film is definitely not a mess. Yeah, the ending was a tad too unbelievable, and though the movie shines through it's writing and realistic situations, some scenes felt a little sappy. But the end of the ending was fantastic.
Red Belt doesn't fail at being an action flick; it just succeeds more so at being an entertaining drama with an MMA theme. This is an easy movie to recommend, since it's easily recommendable to all people who believe in having good morals.
The movie would have been perfect if El Guapo was in it. ;)
Mamet discovers cinema.
Let's face it, we need as many serious writers as we can get, even pompous mannered ones. But we all know, and now Mamet himself does, that cinematic devices have almost no similarity to theatrical ones. At least in the modern era. His movies have been better radio plays than movies.
Now he decides to get serious and channels as many great cinematic traditions as he can fit in a single film.
We have the Raging Bull, flying eye sort of movie, where the camera engages in the space of the action. Scorcese hardly invented this, but he and Stallone merged it with the fight movie.
We have the Zen visual, where the character is supposed to have some transcendental value and we "see" it in the environment he sheds.
We have the modern fold where you have a public performance that validates your existence; we have the performance fold usually a sports movie, where the good guy wins, natch; we have the movie which features movie people and the writing of the movie similar to what we see; and we have the notion of the content of the medium fighting the medium itself, here TeeVee.
Mamet chooses to use all three of the big strokes and all three of the folds. It seems a bit desperate.
I think you might be better off watching Raging Bull with Ghost Dog.
Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 3: Has some interesting elements.
Let's face it, we need as many serious writers as we can get, even pompous mannered ones. But we all know, and now Mamet himself does, that cinematic devices have almost no similarity to theatrical ones. At least in the modern era. His movies have been better radio plays than movies.
Now he decides to get serious and channels as many great cinematic traditions as he can fit in a single film.
We have the Raging Bull, flying eye sort of movie, where the camera engages in the space of the action. Scorcese hardly invented this, but he and Stallone merged it with the fight movie.
We have the Zen visual, where the character is supposed to have some transcendental value and we "see" it in the environment he sheds.
We have the modern fold where you have a public performance that validates your existence; we have the performance fold usually a sports movie, where the good guy wins, natch; we have the movie which features movie people and the writing of the movie similar to what we see; and we have the notion of the content of the medium fighting the medium itself, here TeeVee.
Mamet chooses to use all three of the big strokes and all three of the folds. It seems a bit desperate.
I think you might be better off watching Raging Bull with Ghost Dog.
Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 3: Has some interesting elements.
Just when one would expect 'Redbelt' to following a predictable path we are thrown off with a twist. Mamet tells a very layered story and most of the twists make sense. There are a few plot holes and perhaps the film could have used some energy boost. The pacing is arguably a tad slow in the beginning but as the events progress the viewer gets more and more drawn in. Mamet also brilliantly involves jiu-jitsu in the main story (unlike other martial arts film where the art is used merely as a device). The film is about honour (as the principles of Jiu Jitsu goes) and sacrifice but 'Redbelt' refuses to tread the clichéd path where the protagonist forcefully preaches the message to the viewer. The fights are well choreographed. The cinematography could have been better during the fight sequences. Mamet's cast is terrific. Chiwetel Ejiofor is exceptional as the noble and dignified Mike Terry. Terry ain't the clichéd hero. He is deeply passionate about jiu-jitsu but who won't resort to anger or bloodshed to achieve his means. He is willing to help anyone and he will do it through correct measures rather than the quick but 'wrong' way. Max Martini and Alice Braga are good. Emily Mortimer is fabulous. Tim Allen stands out in a small role. 'Redbelt' tells the story of a real(istic) hero who is not willing to give up his integrity or sacrifice his honour at any cost, who truly respects his passion and understands it.
I saw this movie and was very pleasantly surprised. I really liked this movie. Although at first I didn't know why.
After all, the script, as narrative, is full of holes. Big holes. Without going into details, the initial scene with shot fired has been accurately described as full of holes as swiss cheese. Yet this scene is a key part of the movie, referenced again and again. This is not good.
The title, pictures, and promos were all fundamentally misleading. I went expecting a martial arts film. But it turns out to be a drama. If you are looking for martial arts action, you'll come away very, very disappointed. This too is not good.
The final sequence is utterly incredible. This has been pointed out again and again. This is a basic plot failure. And this too is not good.
And yet ... and yet I came away really, really feeling good about this movie I had just seen. Why?
Well, first, if you view the script not as a narrative, but as a sequence of loosely connected scenes designed to evoke one emotion or thought or the other ... like tableaux vivants, or what TS Eliot called objective correlatives ... well, it works. For example, we have a main character stripped of everything in a series of narratively impossible scenes; and yet the emotions involved in "losing everything" are conveyed powerfully and evocatively. Likewise the ending redemptive sequence is narratively incredible; but emotionally very, very satisfying. This is all to the good.
The characters, acting, and characterizations were all excellent. Chiwetel Ejiofor as Mike Terry was superb. And the Mike Terry character is simply a delight, likable, appealing, interesting. Tim Allen was successfully cast against type. Ricky Jay's Marty Brown the sports promoter is utterly slimy and yet I couldn't take my eyes off of him. After every scene, I felt like running to the restroom to wash my hands and face and ears. He is sliminess personified. But all the characters were well drawn whether likable or disgusting. All to the good.
The cinematography and scenes were well drawn and well depicted. There were some really gripping, evocative shots I especially like: such as the Tim Allen character in dark profile. All to the good.
All in all, I'd say if you like emotion and objective correlatives, I think you'll like this movie. Don't go looking for martial arts, and don't go looking for a sound narrative; but if you want good, solid punch, you've come to the right place.
After all, the script, as narrative, is full of holes. Big holes. Without going into details, the initial scene with shot fired has been accurately described as full of holes as swiss cheese. Yet this scene is a key part of the movie, referenced again and again. This is not good.
The title, pictures, and promos were all fundamentally misleading. I went expecting a martial arts film. But it turns out to be a drama. If you are looking for martial arts action, you'll come away very, very disappointed. This too is not good.
The final sequence is utterly incredible. This has been pointed out again and again. This is a basic plot failure. And this too is not good.
And yet ... and yet I came away really, really feeling good about this movie I had just seen. Why?
Well, first, if you view the script not as a narrative, but as a sequence of loosely connected scenes designed to evoke one emotion or thought or the other ... like tableaux vivants, or what TS Eliot called objective correlatives ... well, it works. For example, we have a main character stripped of everything in a series of narratively impossible scenes; and yet the emotions involved in "losing everything" are conveyed powerfully and evocatively. Likewise the ending redemptive sequence is narratively incredible; but emotionally very, very satisfying. This is all to the good.
The characters, acting, and characterizations were all excellent. Chiwetel Ejiofor as Mike Terry was superb. And the Mike Terry character is simply a delight, likable, appealing, interesting. Tim Allen was successfully cast against type. Ricky Jay's Marty Brown the sports promoter is utterly slimy and yet I couldn't take my eyes off of him. After every scene, I felt like running to the restroom to wash my hands and face and ears. He is sliminess personified. But all the characters were well drawn whether likable or disgusting. All to the good.
The cinematography and scenes were well drawn and well depicted. There were some really gripping, evocative shots I especially like: such as the Tim Allen character in dark profile. All to the good.
All in all, I'd say if you like emotion and objective correlatives, I think you'll like this movie. Don't go looking for martial arts, and don't go looking for a sound narrative; but if you want good, solid punch, you've come to the right place.
This is certainly an entertaining movie. The action was really fun to watch. There was nothing unbelievable, which was a nice change for a martial arts film. The acting was even good. The issue I had, was it was a little shaky coming down the runway. You had characters dropping out, and a little of the dialog was strange. Overall, I would recommend it. Nice to watch. On a personal preference level, not a fan of the ending, but I may be alone on that. This is not like any other film I have seen. I give it a 9 for originality. I give it a 8 for action. I give it a 7 for plot, and a 4 for ending. Thanks, I hope you enjoy(ed) the movie!!
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesIn an interview on National Public Radio's "Fresh Air," Chiwetel Ejiofor said that he thought he'd challenge David Mamet to a friendly sparring match (keeping in mind Mamet had been a practitioner of jiu-jitsu for some years compared to Ejiofor's training for a few months). They squared off, and Mamet stepped on Ejiofor's foot with all his weight. Ejiofor couldn't free his foot and was vulnerable to attack. Mamet said words to the effect that "This match is over."
- GaffesIn the program opened by Emily Mortimer's character in the tournament, a freeze frame reveals that the bios for the fighters are simply a continuous block of text referring to a fighter named "David," and the text is repeated on the left and right sides of the program.
"Blink and you'll miss it: If it's "easily missed" or you have to "view the scene frame-by-frame" then it's not a goof."
- Citations
Mike Terry: A man distracted is a man defeated.
- Bandes originalesVoce Nao Me Ve
Written by Rebecca Pidgeon and David Mamet
Portuguese translation by Luciana Souza
Published by Dwight Street Music (BMI), Bella Panorama Music (BMI) and Songs of Windswept Pacific (BMI)
All rights on behalf of Dwight Street Music, Bella Panorama Music administered by Songs of Windswept Pacific
Performed by Luciana Souza
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et surveiller les recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Redbelt?Propulsé par Alexa
- Is 'Redbelt' based on a book?
- Why is the movie called "Redbelt"?
- How does the "fix" actually work? It's a con, so there must be a catch.
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Site officiel
- Langues
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Redbelt
- Lieux de tournage
- société de production
- Consultez plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 7 000 000 $ US (estimation)
- Brut – États-Unis et Canada
- 2 345 941 $ US
- Fin de semaine d'ouverture – États-Unis et Canada
- 63 361 $ US
- 4 mai 2008
- Brut – à l'échelle mondiale
- 2 674 090 $ US
- Durée1 heure 39 minutes
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 2.39 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant
Lacune principale
By what name was Ceinture rouge (2008) officially released in India in English?
Répondre