NOTE IMDb
4,2/10
1,6 k
MA NOTE
Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueAn examination of the malevolent London underworld with its despicable criminal underground. Ray (Mick Rossi) just finished an eight-year prison sentence after getting set up. Now he is back... Tout lireAn examination of the malevolent London underworld with its despicable criminal underground. Ray (Mick Rossi) just finished an eight-year prison sentence after getting set up. Now he is back on the streets to settle the score.An examination of the malevolent London underworld with its despicable criminal underground. Ray (Mick Rossi) just finished an eight-year prison sentence after getting set up. Now he is back on the streets to settle the score.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 2 victoires au total
Avis à la une
Mick Rossi gets out of prison after eight years. He's taken the fall, hasn't talked about his accomplices to get a better deal. His reward is a hit job in Los Angeles. But he will discover that there are no rules, no loyalties, and no honor among thieves. And the cops are just as dirty.
This is a dirty, gritty, poorly realized movie, but one thing it does have is the realization, after eighty years of making movies about criminals, is that they don't do it out of a sense of anything but what they get out of it. There are n loyalties carried over from childhood, no Runyonesque malapropisms, just raw viciousness as portrayed by some fine performers like Val Kilmer, Gabriel Byrnes, Vinnie Jones, Anthony Lapaglia, Bruno Kirby, and Roy Dotrice.
This is a dirty, gritty, poorly realized movie, but one thing it does have is the realization, after eighty years of making movies about criminals, is that they don't do it out of a sense of anything but what they get out of it. There are n loyalties carried over from childhood, no Runyonesque malapropisms, just raw viciousness as portrayed by some fine performers like Val Kilmer, Gabriel Byrnes, Vinnie Jones, Anthony Lapaglia, Bruno Kirby, and Roy Dotrice.
If you like 87 minutes of British actors dropping f-bombs over and over this is the film for you. Otherwise it's a pretty boring, pointless crime drama.
New contender for worst movie ever. Do not be misled by Val Kilmer's name appearing in the credits, he appears for all of one minute. Reminiscent of Executive Decision's posters who made it appear as though Steven Segal played a central role in the film (even though he disappeared after 5 minutes).
The film has no plot, no story, no point. Worst of all, it has no ending. To date I had listed U-Turn as worst movie ever, but I think Played has taken the bottom spot. It reads as a gangster thriller, but none of the scenes are backed up. They appear more like events that follow each other rather than integral parts of a story. No climax is built up, the love story is stated but never portrayed. Characters dart in and out before any portrayal is required. All in all a complete waste of time.
Best advice: DO NOT WATCH.
The film has no plot, no story, no point. Worst of all, it has no ending. To date I had listed U-Turn as worst movie ever, but I think Played has taken the bottom spot. It reads as a gangster thriller, but none of the scenes are backed up. They appear more like events that follow each other rather than integral parts of a story. No climax is built up, the love story is stated but never portrayed. Characters dart in and out before any portrayal is required. All in all a complete waste of time.
Best advice: DO NOT WATCH.
I'm not sure what I was expecting from this movie, especially since reviews have stated that much of the script was improvised. The film seemed fairly tightly-scripted to me...perhaps this is a tribute to the cast or director.
I also expected to be put-off by the limited screen time of the major names in the movie. To the contrary, I found it refreshing to have good actors in such small, but crucial, roles. This is the only way to avoid making movies into star vehicles that sacrifice story and direction for the sake of glorifying one or more of the lead characters.
On the other hand, the plot left a bit to be desired. There are quite a few loose ends that never get tied up, including the massive loose end right before the final credits roll. There's a difference between being ambiguous and simply stopping the story in the middle of an arc. This is your basic 2.5-act movie.
Overall, I enjoyed the movie and the characters. There's virtually no character development, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. This is worth watching if you enjoy "small" stories about tragedy and get a kick out of a bunch of well-know actors suppressing their desire to be the center of attention.
I also expected to be put-off by the limited screen time of the major names in the movie. To the contrary, I found it refreshing to have good actors in such small, but crucial, roles. This is the only way to avoid making movies into star vehicles that sacrifice story and direction for the sake of glorifying one or more of the lead characters.
On the other hand, the plot left a bit to be desired. There are quite a few loose ends that never get tied up, including the massive loose end right before the final credits roll. There's a difference between being ambiguous and simply stopping the story in the middle of an arc. This is your basic 2.5-act movie.
Overall, I enjoyed the movie and the characters. There's virtually no character development, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. This is worth watching if you enjoy "small" stories about tragedy and get a kick out of a bunch of well-know actors suppressing their desire to be the center of attention.
As others have said, do not be mislead by the name cast. nearly all the major name actors have very little screen time.
It is the first major role for Mick Rossi (he also did the screenplay)
This film had a small budget & it shows.
The production values are nil.
The acting is only so-so.
The script is chock full of the F word & variations of same plus other choice vulgarisms.
I cant say I hated this film, Its just not good just mediocre.
Ratings ** (out of 4) 52 points (out of 100) IMDb 4 (out of 10_
It is the first major role for Mick Rossi (he also did the screenplay)
This film had a small budget & it shows.
The production values are nil.
The acting is only so-so.
The script is chock full of the F word & variations of same plus other choice vulgarisms.
I cant say I hated this film, Its just not good just mediocre.
Ratings ** (out of 4) 52 points (out of 100) IMDb 4 (out of 10_
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesVal Kilmer talks to his mother on a cell phone while remaining in character when she accidentally called him during the filming of a scene in a car. The director liked Kilmer's improvisation so much the scene was kept.
- GaffesWhen Ray goes to meet Riley at a hotel or condo to pick up the CCTV tape Charlie has been brought to LA for, the room door has no knob: only a UK-style door pull, so this scene was probably shot in the UK.
- Crédits fousChris the Maggot played by Nigel Mead
- ConnexionsReferences Batman (1966)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Played?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Sites officiels
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Jugando sucio
- Lieux de tournage
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 2 500 000 $US (estimé)
- Durée
- 1h 27min(87 min)
- Couleur
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant