NOTE IMDb
5,1/10
1,1 k
MA NOTE
Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueAs the world rages in war and civil strife, a CIA agent arrives at a secret underground prison to interrogate a time-traveling terrorist, who she believes is responsible for the unfolding ca... Tout lireAs the world rages in war and civil strife, a CIA agent arrives at a secret underground prison to interrogate a time-traveling terrorist, who she believes is responsible for the unfolding catastrophe.As the world rages in war and civil strife, a CIA agent arrives at a secret underground prison to interrogate a time-traveling terrorist, who she believes is responsible for the unfolding catastrophe.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 2 victoires et 5 nominations au total
Avis à la une
Low level directing and bad actors. The idea of the movie seemed interesting, but the movie couldn't achieve its purpose: to execute it.
Scientific accuracy and persuasiveness: Despite its attempt at scientific use, this film falls short, offering a poorly researched and inaccurately portrayed depiction of scientific concepts.
Relatedness to the real world: The display of political intrigue fails to grasp the complexities and realities. The depiction of presidential and CIA characters lacks authenticity and fails to capture the intricacies of their roles in real-life politics and intelligence operations.
Acting and characters: Michelle Nolden. Horrible to watch. Being the main character, she's the biggest fail of the movie. If the given dialogue was bad, improve it. If she improvised, even worse. Great actors have great skills for acting. They have a high EQ and are skilled at character analysis, observation, psychological insight, subtext interpretation, and physicality. They master dialect and language, voice control, tonality, modulation, body language, improvisation, and adaptability. Michelle Nolden doesn't demonstrate any of this.
Michelle Nolden portrays her character with such inconsistency that it becomes unbearable to watch. Every scene with her in it will make you cringe and want to look away. Ultimately, she ruins the story and demolishes the potential of the movie.
Now, the other characters weren't great too, but that's what you can expect from a low tier movie. They're just good enough.
Recommendation: Warning: Do not watch.
It's not a recommended movie to watch. If you just stumble upon it and decide to watch it, you will regret it. You deserve quality, this isn't it.
Scientific accuracy and persuasiveness: Despite its attempt at scientific use, this film falls short, offering a poorly researched and inaccurately portrayed depiction of scientific concepts.
Relatedness to the real world: The display of political intrigue fails to grasp the complexities and realities. The depiction of presidential and CIA characters lacks authenticity and fails to capture the intricacies of their roles in real-life politics and intelligence operations.
Acting and characters: Michelle Nolden. Horrible to watch. Being the main character, she's the biggest fail of the movie. If the given dialogue was bad, improve it. If she improvised, even worse. Great actors have great skills for acting. They have a high EQ and are skilled at character analysis, observation, psychological insight, subtext interpretation, and physicality. They master dialect and language, voice control, tonality, modulation, body language, improvisation, and adaptability. Michelle Nolden doesn't demonstrate any of this.
Michelle Nolden portrays her character with such inconsistency that it becomes unbearable to watch. Every scene with her in it will make you cringe and want to look away. Ultimately, she ruins the story and demolishes the potential of the movie.
Now, the other characters weren't great too, but that's what you can expect from a low tier movie. They're just good enough.
Recommendation: Warning: Do not watch.
It's not a recommended movie to watch. If you just stumble upon it and decide to watch it, you will regret it. You deserve quality, this isn't it.
I read a review by another user complaining about low budget production cost. I'll remind him, 'Twelve Angry Men', was filmed in two rooms, with no special affects. I have seen tremendously budgeted films that have sucked *alls, 'Battlefield Earth', comes to mind off the top of my head.
This was a minimalistic film with the most recognizable actor being 'The Grim Reaper', from Supernatural. But I enjoyed the story.
Yes, it's low budget. No, you probably don't know any of the actors...
But...
This is a fantastic sci-fi film that will keep you guessing, keep you entertained and even give you some ideas to think about.
It's well paced, edgy and claustrophobic with an excellent story line.
The actors work hard and work well together.
No, it won't win any Oscars for anything but it will win your appreciation, of that I am sure.
But...
This is a fantastic sci-fi film that will keep you guessing, keep you entertained and even give you some ideas to think about.
It's well paced, edgy and claustrophobic with an excellent story line.
The actors work hard and work well together.
No, it won't win any Oscars for anything but it will win your appreciation, of that I am sure.
I don't understand the low ratings? Maybe it's because there's only 19 reviews? People probably won't watch due to the low rating... BUT YOU'RE MISSING OUT!
This movie is truly original. I've watched it twice now, and still found little pieces I didn't pick up the first time around. If you're looking for Hollywood effects - cars blowing up, and people shooting 30 rounds from a .22 revolver, this is not for you! If you are looking for something that stimulates the mind, adds suspense, creates many 'what-if' scenarios - this is for you.
RECOMMENDATION: Highly recommend watching if you are looking for a well-written intellectual semi-futuristic (near future) film that will hold your attention - THIS IS THE HIDDEN GEM OF THE YEAR!!!
This movie is truly original. I've watched it twice now, and still found little pieces I didn't pick up the first time around. If you're looking for Hollywood effects - cars blowing up, and people shooting 30 rounds from a .22 revolver, this is not for you! If you are looking for something that stimulates the mind, adds suspense, creates many 'what-if' scenarios - this is for you.
RECOMMENDATION: Highly recommend watching if you are looking for a well-written intellectual semi-futuristic (near future) film that will hold your attention - THIS IS THE HIDDEN GEM OF THE YEAR!!!
I had this movie on my list-to-buy for a long time, just never got convinced to take the risk. There are no critical reviews for this movie and only a few hundred reviews on IMDB. And those reviews are wildly varied from low to high.
But, I finally took a chance on this movie today and watched it. I watched the whole movie from beginning to end, and I can honestly say it's a little sad that a movie this good seems to have been ignored by so many people, probably for the same reasons as I did.
After watching this whole movie, which I'm convinced most of the people who left low ratings did not bother to do, I can say this movie has one big thing going for it: pure science fiction. Not all the science is accurate, but it's much better than most movies that are considered sci-fi. Blended with the sci-fi was some decent drama. Together, they give this movie a very strong underlying story. This story is the kind of sci-fi story I can imagine paying to read.
The budget for this movie seems kind of low, but I expected that. And it doesn't really matter for this story. The acting was surprisingly very good considering I didn't recognize anyone in it, and I kind of expect poor acting in a low budget movie, but I saw no real sign of that. There were a couple of parts that had "OK" acting, but maybe only about 5 minutes out of the whole movie.
There were a few times during the movie when it seemed like it was getting predictable, like I knew where it was going and I'd been there before. But, that's the key with movies like this -- you have to take the whole thing in before making a judgement. In the end, it was not predictable, I didn't know where it was going until I got to the end, and I was very satisfied with that ending.
So, take a chance on this movie if you are a pure sci-fi fan and/or reader. Not only was it worth the money I paid to buy it, but I'll be watching it at least one more time. I honestly didn't believe I'd be saying that when I took the chance, so I'm very happy I took it.
But, I finally took a chance on this movie today and watched it. I watched the whole movie from beginning to end, and I can honestly say it's a little sad that a movie this good seems to have been ignored by so many people, probably for the same reasons as I did.
After watching this whole movie, which I'm convinced most of the people who left low ratings did not bother to do, I can say this movie has one big thing going for it: pure science fiction. Not all the science is accurate, but it's much better than most movies that are considered sci-fi. Blended with the sci-fi was some decent drama. Together, they give this movie a very strong underlying story. This story is the kind of sci-fi story I can imagine paying to read.
The budget for this movie seems kind of low, but I expected that. And it doesn't really matter for this story. The acting was surprisingly very good considering I didn't recognize anyone in it, and I kind of expect poor acting in a low budget movie, but I saw no real sign of that. There were a couple of parts that had "OK" acting, but maybe only about 5 minutes out of the whole movie.
There were a few times during the movie when it seemed like it was getting predictable, like I knew where it was going and I'd been there before. But, that's the key with movies like this -- you have to take the whole thing in before making a judgement. In the end, it was not predictable, I didn't know where it was going until I got to the end, and I was very satisfied with that ending.
So, take a chance on this movie if you are a pure sci-fi fan and/or reader. Not only was it worth the money I paid to buy it, but I'll be watching it at least one more time. I honestly didn't believe I'd be saying that when I took the chance, so I'm very happy I took it.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesThe book titled "The Gambler" is a book written by Fyodor Dostoevsky and originally published in 1866 with 191 pages that concerns a young man in the employment of a wealthy Russian general. The story reflects Dostoevsky's own addiction to roulette and ironically finishing the short story to pay off a gambling debt.
- GaffesIt is highly unlikely that in a secure facility anyone would be able to use a cellphone inside. Also, the lights in each area - especially for prisoners - would be overhead and not in the walls where they could be accessed for various (escape) reasons, and would also throw unusual shadows in the room.
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Prisoner X?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
- Durée1 heure 28 minutes
- Couleur
- Rapport de forme
- 1.78 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant
Lacune principale
By what name was Prisoner X (2016) officially released in India in English?
Répondre