Trois amis trouvent leur nouveau colocataire mort, mais plein aux as.Trois amis trouvent leur nouveau colocataire mort, mais plein aux as.Trois amis trouvent leur nouveau colocataire mort, mais plein aux as.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Victoire aux 1 BAFTA Award
- 14 victoires et 1 nomination au total
Avis à la une
Alex, David and Juliet share a flat together and are looking for a new flat mate to help fill the flat out. They see various applicants who don't fit until they meet the mysterious Hugo who is `interesting' and takes the room. Almost a week goes by and he doesn't come out of his room once, so they break down Hugo's door to find him dead with a suitcase full of money. To keep the money, they agree to destroy Hugo's body and draw straws to see who does the cutting. David ends up doing the deed but it affects him badly and he becomes increasingly erratic and paranoid. Meanwhile two criminals are dredging the underworld looking for the money.
Any film that can pose a moral question that stays with the audience is off to a good start and needs to build on it. That is the case here with the `would you keep the money' question - the answer being `yes' in terms of the characters here. The plot then sees the greed do what greed do best - feed paranoia and divisions between the characters. It's a theme that has been done before but is still well done here. The plot has weaknesses in logic and flow - David's paranoia doesn't totally go the way that seems most likely, rather the way that the film requires. Also the film doesn't build good characters. However what it does do well is turn up tension and drama very well - as the net closes and the characters start to turn on each other.
This is where the comparatively short running time helps - it keeps the whole thing from being onscreen too long to be analysed to death while you are watching it. I didn't question the weaknesses because I was caught up in the story. It has a good pace on it although it can't keep up the speed it set with it's stylish opening credits (which have been impersonated so often since). The final act is a fitting denouncement and, like I said, even if some of it doesn't totally scan the film moves along fast enough to cover it.
Despite the lack of really developed characters, the cast do really good jobs on the whole. McGregor is great - this and Trainspotting show how great it can be, just makes it harder to see him looking miserable in the Star Wars films. Fox is also very good, although she is a lot subtler than McGregor. However it is Eccleston who steals the film, even if he is required to go further than he should have in his downward spiral; contrast his character at the start and the end of the film, he did very well to gradually go from one to the other convincingly. The support cast is made up of familiar faces who don't really do that much - McCredie, Stott, Allen and Mullan.
Overall this is not without it's flaws but it works as a tight little moral thriller that is really enjoyable while watching it. And the ending will have you in the pub or on the message boards talking about it (in a good way).
Any film that can pose a moral question that stays with the audience is off to a good start and needs to build on it. That is the case here with the `would you keep the money' question - the answer being `yes' in terms of the characters here. The plot then sees the greed do what greed do best - feed paranoia and divisions between the characters. It's a theme that has been done before but is still well done here. The plot has weaknesses in logic and flow - David's paranoia doesn't totally go the way that seems most likely, rather the way that the film requires. Also the film doesn't build good characters. However what it does do well is turn up tension and drama very well - as the net closes and the characters start to turn on each other.
This is where the comparatively short running time helps - it keeps the whole thing from being onscreen too long to be analysed to death while you are watching it. I didn't question the weaknesses because I was caught up in the story. It has a good pace on it although it can't keep up the speed it set with it's stylish opening credits (which have been impersonated so often since). The final act is a fitting denouncement and, like I said, even if some of it doesn't totally scan the film moves along fast enough to cover it.
Despite the lack of really developed characters, the cast do really good jobs on the whole. McGregor is great - this and Trainspotting show how great it can be, just makes it harder to see him looking miserable in the Star Wars films. Fox is also very good, although she is a lot subtler than McGregor. However it is Eccleston who steals the film, even if he is required to go further than he should have in his downward spiral; contrast his character at the start and the end of the film, he did very well to gradually go from one to the other convincingly. The support cast is made up of familiar faces who don't really do that much - McCredie, Stott, Allen and Mullan.
Overall this is not without it's flaws but it works as a tight little moral thriller that is really enjoyable while watching it. And the ending will have you in the pub or on the message boards talking about it (in a good way).
Juliet Miller (Kerry Fox), David Stephens (Christopher Eccleston), and Alex Law (Ewan McGregor) are three flatmates looking for someone to rent the fourth room. They are all sarcastic, sharp-tongued, and generally mean-spirited. They agree on the charismatic Hugo (Keith Allen) but don't know his criminal activities. When they discover his dead body, they also find a suitcase full of money.
Before Danny Boyle's breakthrough movie 'Trainspotting', this is his first big screen debut. The leads are not likable. They are all unlikeable selfish untrustworthy jerks. It's dark. It has three amazing performances. And it has a great Hitchcockian style. It is sharp and brilliant. It has some funny moments especially as they skewer the roommate interviews. It builds up to great tension. It's just good dark fun.
Before Danny Boyle's breakthrough movie 'Trainspotting', this is his first big screen debut. The leads are not likable. They are all unlikeable selfish untrustworthy jerks. It's dark. It has three amazing performances. And it has a great Hitchcockian style. It is sharp and brilliant. It has some funny moments especially as they skewer the roommate interviews. It builds up to great tension. It's just good dark fun.
A great modern thriller containing all the necessary ingredients of a decent suspense story: constantly growing tension, sly humor, and genuinely surprising plot twists. It's kind of like a 90s version of a Hitchcock flick (think "Rope"), and like somebody here wrote, once you start watching it you can't stop.
The plot is deliciously wicked. Just how far are you going to go for money? Will you kill for it? Are you willing to share it? Will you give up your best friends for it? How insane will a large amount of cash drive you? And in the end, and this is the most important question "Shallow Grave" rises, will it make you happy?
If there was any more violence in this movie it would turn disgusting, but Danny Boyle knows how to measure it just right. Though he doesn't quite reach the virtuosity of "Trainspotting" here, his trademarks are all present: the fast pace, the urban background beats, the enthralling camera angles and so forth.
The three leads are all great, but there's no question about who the movie belongs to: Ewan McGregor is energetic, powerful and photogenic in his portrayal of a young journalist. No wonder he became such a star.
The plot is deliciously wicked. Just how far are you going to go for money? Will you kill for it? Are you willing to share it? Will you give up your best friends for it? How insane will a large amount of cash drive you? And in the end, and this is the most important question "Shallow Grave" rises, will it make you happy?
If there was any more violence in this movie it would turn disgusting, but Danny Boyle knows how to measure it just right. Though he doesn't quite reach the virtuosity of "Trainspotting" here, his trademarks are all present: the fast pace, the urban background beats, the enthralling camera angles and so forth.
The three leads are all great, but there's no question about who the movie belongs to: Ewan McGregor is energetic, powerful and photogenic in his portrayal of a young journalist. No wonder he became such a star.
Good first feature film from director Danny Boyle and writer John Hodge. A good, solid thriller with a healthy dose of dark humor.
Interesting dynamic among the three principle characters, though their motivations toward each other could have been made more clear.
The age-old plot of ordinary people getting mixed up in an unexpected acquisition of dirty money and finding their worst tendencies coming to light is done with style and clever wit, with a couple of nice twists that I doubt anyone will see coming. (Although, I'm a little hazy on just HOW it ends up that way.)
Boyle is definitely one of the great, stand-out directors of the 90s-and-beyond crowd, in the upper ranks with Tarantino, Fincher, Ritchie, and a few others.
7/10 stars
Interesting dynamic among the three principle characters, though their motivations toward each other could have been made more clear.
The age-old plot of ordinary people getting mixed up in an unexpected acquisition of dirty money and finding their worst tendencies coming to light is done with style and clever wit, with a couple of nice twists that I doubt anyone will see coming. (Although, I'm a little hazy on just HOW it ends up that way.)
Boyle is definitely one of the great, stand-out directors of the 90s-and-beyond crowd, in the upper ranks with Tarantino, Fincher, Ritchie, and a few others.
7/10 stars
It's well performed with actors who would go onto greater things. The plot is pretty thin, insomuch as it has one. The most interesting and fascinating elements come through post viewing reflection, to consider what you would have done under these circumstances. The director is asking you to accept and believe the events that took place are plausible - are they? Or are they so implausible that the story becomes fantasy? If it's fantasy it's valueless, passing ninety minutes of your time and soon to be forgotten. If you can connect on a real world level then maybe you'll learn something about yourself you didn't know already - or at least choose to seldom acknowledge. Cinema is there to make you think and connect with the world in a different way and this film does just that for the most part.
Danny Boyle's Movies Ranked by IMDb Rating
Danny Boyle's Movies Ranked by IMDb Rating
See how IMDb users rank the feature films directed by Danny Boyle.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesSuch were the budgetary constraints on this shoot, the production had to auction off various props in order to raise enough money to buy essential film stock needed to complete the picture.
- GaffesWhen the second intruder enters the loft area to get the money from the water tank he reaches around a wooden support to turn the light switch on. The light switch is not visible to him yet he reaches for it as if he has been to the loft before.
- Citations
[Juliet, Alex and David are about to dispose of Hugo's body by rendering it unidentifiable]
Juliet Miller: I can't do it.
Alex Law: But Juliet, you're a doctor. You kill people every day.
- Crédits fousThe closing credits appear over images of the three main characters in happier times, ironically all laughing hysterically.
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Tumba al ras de la tierra
- Lieux de tournage
- North Bridge, Édimbourg, Écosse, Royaume-Uni(road scenes)
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 2 500 000 $US (estimé)
- Montant brut aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 2 079 569 $US
- Week-end de sortie aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 105 614 $US
- 12 févr. 1995
- Montant brut mondial
- 8 418 797 $US
- Durée1 heure 29 minutes
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant
Lacune principale
What is the streaming release date of Petits meurtres entre amis (1994) in India?
Répondre