NOTE IMDb
6,6/10
12 k
MA NOTE
Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueA Los Angeles Deputy District Attorney is sent to protect a woman who accidentally witnessed a Mafia murder.A Los Angeles Deputy District Attorney is sent to protect a woman who accidentally witnessed a Mafia murder.A Los Angeles Deputy District Attorney is sent to protect a woman who accidentally witnessed a Mafia murder.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 1 nomination au total
James Sikking
- Nelson
- (as James B. Sikking)
M. Emmet Walsh
- Sgt. Dominick Benti
- (as M. Emmett Walsh)
Barbara Russell
- Nicholas' Mother
- (as Barbara E. Russell)
Avis à la une
The minute Gene Hackman entered the picture, this was a totally different movie. The murder had to take place, and we had to see the setup that led to it. But this turned into what seemed like an episode of a humorous TV murder mystery. Hackman did a great job and gave us plenty of laughs, even though this wasn't a comedy. Once he and Anne Archer's reluctant witness got together, it was almost a romantic comedy with two mismatched partners. And the action just kept on coming.
Along with the two fine performances of the leads, we had plenty of memorable characters. J.A. Preston's demanding district attorney, Emmet Walsh's edgy detective (who didn't stay around long, which was a shame), and an older man who gave up his suite so Caulfield and his "pregnant" wife could have their privacy. Doogie Howser's father did a great job as the main bad guy. And the woman whose name I don't remember who hoped for a romantic relationship with Caulfield.
We were always on edge as we wondered what would happen next. And there was the real excitement of action on top of the train cars. And beautiful scenery in western Canada.
I mentioned Hackman's comic abilities, but he did an amazing dramatic performance in one scene as he made it clear why he was going to so much trouble to make sure the bad guys got justice, if they could. There are so many moral dilemmas.
It was a worthy effort.
Along with the two fine performances of the leads, we had plenty of memorable characters. J.A. Preston's demanding district attorney, Emmet Walsh's edgy detective (who didn't stay around long, which was a shame), and an older man who gave up his suite so Caulfield and his "pregnant" wife could have their privacy. Doogie Howser's father did a great job as the main bad guy. And the woman whose name I don't remember who hoped for a romantic relationship with Caulfield.
We were always on edge as we wondered what would happen next. And there was the real excitement of action on top of the train cars. And beautiful scenery in western Canada.
I mentioned Hackman's comic abilities, but he did an amazing dramatic performance in one scene as he made it clear why he was going to so much trouble to make sure the bad guys got justice, if they could. There are so many moral dilemmas.
It was a worthy effort.
Gene Hackman is razor-sharp and in fine form here as a Deputy District Attorney who accompanies frightened murder witness Carol Hunnicutt (Anne Archer) on an eventful train ride through the wilds of British Columbia. You see, Carol had watched from the bathroom while mobster Leo Watts (Harris Yulin) and one of his many henchmen (Canadian character actor Nigel Bennett) rubbed out her blind date (the too briefly seen J.T. Walsh). Caulfield (Hackman) tracks Carol down, but these many henchmen are right on their heels, and turn up on the train. Said goons are confident that it's only a matter of time before they find her, although one supposed thing that Caulfield and Carol have in their favour is that the bad guys don't know what she looks like.
Veteran filmmaker Peter Hyams, well known for diversions like "Capricorn One" and "2010" remakes the 1952 film noir classic with surprisingly engaging results. It doesn't quite have the same stark atmosphere, or sense of menace, but it still displays some genuine tension, has some terrific action set pieces (especially on top of and outside the train), and also has some pretty amusing dialogue by Hyams. Hyams, who's served as his own cinematographer since the early 80s, does tend to under light scenes at times, a common element in his work. But he gives it some great pace; even though this version runs about 25 minutes longer than the 1952 one, it doesn't meander and gives us a number of compelling scenes. Particularly strong are conversations between Hackman and James B. Sikking (a regular in Hyams' filmography), who plays one of the goons, and between Hackman and Archer. The latter does a wonderful job of humanizing her, since it is possible that some people might not find her sympathetic enough before that point.
Hackman is always fun to watch, and he makes for a solid hero. Archer is a delight, as usual. J.T. Walsh has one of *his* most sympathetic roles in a movie (he was often relegated to sleazy, white-collar criminal types), and he of course is great. So is M. Emmet Walsh, even if he's also under utilized as the detective who accompanies Caulfield to Carols' hideout.
Ultimately, this movie version doesn't pull off its twists as well as the 1952 version, but it has enough entertainment value to make it well worth a viewing.
Eight out of 10.
Veteran filmmaker Peter Hyams, well known for diversions like "Capricorn One" and "2010" remakes the 1952 film noir classic with surprisingly engaging results. It doesn't quite have the same stark atmosphere, or sense of menace, but it still displays some genuine tension, has some terrific action set pieces (especially on top of and outside the train), and also has some pretty amusing dialogue by Hyams. Hyams, who's served as his own cinematographer since the early 80s, does tend to under light scenes at times, a common element in his work. But he gives it some great pace; even though this version runs about 25 minutes longer than the 1952 one, it doesn't meander and gives us a number of compelling scenes. Particularly strong are conversations between Hackman and James B. Sikking (a regular in Hyams' filmography), who plays one of the goons, and between Hackman and Archer. The latter does a wonderful job of humanizing her, since it is possible that some people might not find her sympathetic enough before that point.
Hackman is always fun to watch, and he makes for a solid hero. Archer is a delight, as usual. J.T. Walsh has one of *his* most sympathetic roles in a movie (he was often relegated to sleazy, white-collar criminal types), and he of course is great. So is M. Emmet Walsh, even if he's also under utilized as the detective who accompanies Caulfield to Carols' hideout.
Ultimately, this movie version doesn't pull off its twists as well as the 1952 version, but it has enough entertainment value to make it well worth a viewing.
Eight out of 10.
Terrific action thriller with great actors. Unfortunately, they don't have much to say because the action takes over. There isn't much time to develop a character when you're being chased up and down a mountain. Still, this is a great example of the genre. I can't help but think that it would have been a lot more successful financially with younger, hipper stars. I also think that would have ruined it.
The direction is very matter-of-fact. Some movies like this reel you in with a definite "atmosphere", stylized to death. I'm tempted to say this movie has no style at all, but that would be a disservice to Hackman and Archer, who give it all the style it needs.
The direction is very matter-of-fact. Some movies like this reel you in with a definite "atmosphere", stylized to death. I'm tempted to say this movie has no style at all, but that would be a disservice to Hackman and Archer, who give it all the style it needs.
This movie succeeds on the talent of Gene Hackman and his co-stars especially Anne Archer and James Sikking. The story is as follows Carol Hunnicutt (Archer) is a witness to a mob killing, so she hides in a remote part of Canada. los Angeles Deputy D.A Robert Caulfield (Hackman)is given the task of finding her to bring her back to L.A to testify at a Mob trial, but he accidently tells the Hit-men out to silence her - her whereabouts, so when he arrives at her remote cabin, there a helicopter full of bad guys waiting for them - so begins a enjoyably suspense chase through remote Canada, they decide to get on a Cross-Country train.. but the bad guys are also on board, so theyt spend the night trying to avoid a bullet. If it sounds familiar it's because the movie's a remake of the 1950'S RKO Picture of the same name starring Charles McGraw and Marie Windsor.
Double crosses,dirty cops and tension throughout but the script could have been better and the movie (just over 90 mins) could have been longer and the climax is slightly disappointing
otherwise it's a good early 1990's movie from Peter Hyams who's had a bit of a hit and miss career since,HIT:- Timecop (1994) and The Relic (1997) and Sudden Death (1995) - MISS:- Stay Tuned (1992) and End of days (1999)
My rating 8/10
Double crosses,dirty cops and tension throughout but the script could have been better and the movie (just over 90 mins) could have been longer and the climax is slightly disappointing
otherwise it's a good early 1990's movie from Peter Hyams who's had a bit of a hit and miss career since,HIT:- Timecop (1994) and The Relic (1997) and Sudden Death (1995) - MISS:- Stay Tuned (1992) and End of days (1999)
My rating 8/10
Gene Hackman and Anne Archer star in a good thriller that has tense moments and wonderful Canadian scenery. The story is of a frightened woman who sees a man killed and takes flight to avoid having to appear as a witness to a murder. Hackman is the resourceful district attorney who convinces Archer to return to Los Angeles and testify against the killers. The rest of the picture details a game of cat and mouse between Hackman, Archer and their pursuers who see Archer as a loose end and are determined to keep her from the courtroom. The scenes of pursuit atop the moving passenger train have been done in other films but is expertly done here without becoming a cliché. The picture does have its flaws but is a diverting film and any movie starring Hackman is certainly worth watching.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesThe cabin featured in the first act was specifically built for the movie. Peter Hyams decided to build it on top of a mountain in that particular spot while it was still covered in winter snow. After the snow melted, it turned out that the spot was a dump and it took a short while to clear it out.
- GaffesThe helicopter bringing Caulfield and Benti to the cabin has different rear windows in different shots. From the interior, it has ordinary flat windows with sliding ventilation panels -- the rectangular panel frames and tracks are visible. From the exterior, it has unventilated one-piece bubble windows which allow sightseers unobstructed views and photography.
- ConnexionsEdited into No Tomorrow (1999)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Narrow Margin?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Narrow Margin
- Lieux de tournage
- Colombie-Britannique, Canada(Exterior train shots)
- Société de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 21 000 000 $US (estimé)
- Montant brut aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 10 873 237 $US
- Week-end de sortie aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 3 628 060 $US
- 23 sept. 1990
- Montant brut mondial
- 10 873 237 $US
- Durée1 heure 37 minutes
- Couleur
- Rapport de forme
- 2.39 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant
Lacune principale
By what name was Le seul témoin (1990) officially released in India in English?
Répondre