Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueThe story of a clairvoyant who falls in love with a crime photographer. Soon, both become involved in the search for a pathological murderer.The story of a clairvoyant who falls in love with a crime photographer. Soon, both become involved in the search for a pathological murderer.The story of a clairvoyant who falls in love with a crime photographer. Soon, both become involved in the search for a pathological murderer.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
Avis à la une
Hollywood is full of people who have taken basic screen writing courses, people who have been forced to see everything in terms of 3-act structure and what the protagonist wants and how he acts to achieve his goals. You can't swing a dead cat in the movie biz without hitting someone who has this stuff burned into their cerebral cortex.
But somehow the producers did.
If you don't know about classic screenplay structure it's just a boring movie that seems longer than its 91 minutes, but if you do it's a fascinating series of bad decisions. I was considering adding spoilers here but I'm not even sure you can spoil this story. It's an anti-story.
The plus is that the photography is really quite lovely. If you are a trained CINEMATOGRAPHER, you might think this is pretty good.
But somehow the producers did.
If you don't know about classic screenplay structure it's just a boring movie that seems longer than its 91 minutes, but if you do it's a fascinating series of bad decisions. I was considering adding spoilers here but I'm not even sure you can spoil this story. It's an anti-story.
The plus is that the photography is really quite lovely. If you are a trained CINEMATOGRAPHER, you might think this is pretty good.
A gripping tale by Manganelli. This film is top notch. Riveting and original. I'm looking forward to seeing more of his work! Visually spectacular. Terrylene is wonderful as Laura! She brings a powerful presence to the film. All in all, a must-see movie!
I used to like thrillers over horror movies because I figured that the psychology involved meant a lot more thought needed to be put into the characters and plot line to make it work. Lately that kind of reasoning has been kind of failing me.
Not that this is a bad movie by any means. It's just kind of unnecessary. The idea is good and I'm attracted to it because of a similar situation in a Carl Hiaasen novel. A crime-scene photographer who is severely affected by the nature of his photographs decides to escape for a while, going to stay with his aunt. Unfortunately, a psychopath is loose and chasing down the photographer and his new girlfriend, who is deaf and sees visions of future crimes, a la something like In Dreams and whatnot.
I figured this movie would be interesting to see because of the idea of an "after image" affecting the photographer character and how he deals with his, erm, photographic memory, but it didn't really concentrate on that. I thought it'd be interesting seeing Louise Fletcher, the ol' Nurse Ratchet herself, in a different role than the one that terrorized Jack Nicholson in One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest. Instead, besides her being older and a bit more heavy, it's not.
I can't really say for sure that this movie is that good or that bad. On one hand, it took the time to really develop an interesting group of characters. On the other hand, most of them were archetypes and presented half of the time in slow motion to create drama. The self-reflective element of the camera or the mirror, reflected and divided imaging and the like, wasn't really there. The director obviously took a lot of time finding ways to present the action through an "other" lens, but not really for any real reason except maintaining consistency.
I want to say this to the director: good work, now go make something interesting. Maybe we just have someone who needs a bit of practice on our hands.
--PolarisDiB
Not that this is a bad movie by any means. It's just kind of unnecessary. The idea is good and I'm attracted to it because of a similar situation in a Carl Hiaasen novel. A crime-scene photographer who is severely affected by the nature of his photographs decides to escape for a while, going to stay with his aunt. Unfortunately, a psychopath is loose and chasing down the photographer and his new girlfriend, who is deaf and sees visions of future crimes, a la something like In Dreams and whatnot.
I figured this movie would be interesting to see because of the idea of an "after image" affecting the photographer character and how he deals with his, erm, photographic memory, but it didn't really concentrate on that. I thought it'd be interesting seeing Louise Fletcher, the ol' Nurse Ratchet herself, in a different role than the one that terrorized Jack Nicholson in One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest. Instead, besides her being older and a bit more heavy, it's not.
I can't really say for sure that this movie is that good or that bad. On one hand, it took the time to really develop an interesting group of characters. On the other hand, most of them were archetypes and presented half of the time in slow motion to create drama. The self-reflective element of the camera or the mirror, reflected and divided imaging and the like, wasn't really there. The director obviously took a lot of time finding ways to present the action through an "other" lens, but not really for any real reason except maintaining consistency.
I want to say this to the director: good work, now go make something interesting. Maybe we just have someone who needs a bit of practice on our hands.
--PolarisDiB
if you watch this movie expecting to see a typical Hollywood thriller, you will be disappointed. if you like artful films that don't spoon feed, you'll like "AfterImage" it's a beautifully shot film that betrays its 1.4 million dollar budget. i would like to have seen someone else in the lead (other than mellencamp) though. mellencamp just doesn't have much acting talent or screen presence and he does weigh down the story. terrylene however, is exceptional and someone i could watch all day. she jumps off the screen. billy burke is great and zelnicker's creepy.
manganelli's visuals are pretty impressive. the story's visual narrative tells more than the dialog. it's a poetic film that exploits a certain emotional logic. it stays with you in the way a dream might.
the film isn't for everyone. but neither are some of the films from David lynch, Antonioni, or Cronenberg. manganelli certainly has his signature and i am looking forward to seeing more of his work.
manganelli's visuals are pretty impressive. the story's visual narrative tells more than the dialog. it's a poetic film that exploits a certain emotional logic. it stays with you in the way a dream might.
the film isn't for everyone. but neither are some of the films from David lynch, Antonioni, or Cronenberg. manganelli certainly has his signature and i am looking forward to seeing more of his work.
I have yet to actually see the movie, although I have not heard great things about it from people who saw it. But I was able to visit the set and meet John Mellancamp (who was not very nice) and Louise Fletcher (who was nice) on the set where they were filming in Rochester, NY. They actually filmed a lot of it in the nursing home that my dad ran at the time so it was really neat to see all the makeup people and the set. The set was really neatly put together and I was impressed by all the work put into making the film and using locations in Rochester NY which is my hometown...and I do want to see the movie one of these days because some people have said that was it had some pretty neat visuals in the movie.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesKristen Royal's debut.
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
- Site officiel
- Langues
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Seeing in the Dark
- Lieux de tournage
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 1 200 000 $US (estimé)
- Durée1 heure 32 minutes
- Couleur
- Mixage
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant