Deux agents de la C.I.A. se livrent une bataille épique lorsqu'ils découvrent qu'ils sortent avec la même femme.Deux agents de la C.I.A. se livrent une bataille épique lorsqu'ils découvrent qu'ils sortent avec la même femme.Deux agents de la C.I.A. se livrent une bataille épique lorsqu'ils découvrent qu'ils sortent avec la même femme.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 1 victoire et 6 nominations au total
Abigail Spencer
- Katie
- (as Abigail Leigh Spencer)
Dominique Brownes
- Hong Kong Beauty
- (as Dominique Bourassa Brownes)
Avis à la une
Hey, this isn't Citizen Kane. But it's funny, the actors are all good, and even though the premise is pretty silly--two secret agent types pursuing the same woman--the writers milked the possibilities about as much as they could without getting mindlessly stupid. The principals don't try to assassinate each other, merely to undermine one another's efforts, and the story works. Also, it doesn't hurt in a Rom-Com that Reese Witherspoon looks gorgeous throughout--as I suppose do Chris Pine and Tom Hardy for those more inclined in that direction--and the supporting cast is equally charming, with Chelsea Handler and Abigail Spencer especially deserving of kudos. What's not to like?
This Means War frustrates me. It has three excellent leads who all give great performances and pretty solid action and stunts, but the story failed this movie altogether. This Means War establishes Hardy and Pine as two inseparable friends that are even closer than family but spend the rest of the film easily dividing and pitting them against each other over a girl they just met. It makes Witherspoon's character feel like she is really hurting these guys' lives, but it's all played as not that big of a deal. And when she ultimately chooses one of them over the other, the guys forgive each other like nothing happened and then jump to characters talking about marriage. I'm old-fashioned regarding loyalty and romance, so this movie irritated my pet peeve. It's not as bad as my rating might imply, but I'm irked.
I almost started off hating this movie before I had seen it; I thought the trailer looked like crap, with horrible comedic dialog and premises, but I took the chance on free screening tickets, figuring I could make fun at worst. The film opens with shooting at the hip action and stays pretty entertaining in comedy and delivery. Witherspoon's character's sister (Chelsea Handler) and their interactions are lots of fun. Chris Pine does a good job being semi-typecast and the movie doesn't take itself too seriously. It's way better than expected and I wouldn't have been upset had I paid full price for it. Like a review I read said, it's a romantic movie that guys won't have to be dragged to. Is it a great movie? No. Is it a fun valentines movie? Yes.
Cartoony romp has a slick surface but not much underneath. What it does have are three charming actors who work hard to buoy it with their personality and charisma. Tom Hardy and Chris Pine work well together, actually their chemistry with each other is much stronger than either share with their female co-star. Reese is ditsy and sweet but whoever was in charge of her hair should be ashamed, it looks distractingly like straw. The director's roots in music videos are painfully obvious and he does nothing to smooth out the many kinks in the borderline creepy plot. Wasted in nothing parts are Til Schweiger a good actor stuck in a standard villain part that must have been larger in the original script and Angela Bassett, a great actress in a stick figure part that is so far beneath her abilities it's a crying shame. Rosemary Harris is thankfully on hand briefly to brighten a few scenes. Silly and painless you'll forget it as soon as it's over. All involved have made better films and will again.
It wasn't as bad as most of the people writing reviews have said. I found it entertaining, to a certain point. After "tuck" has his date, there was no need for the other one to jump right in, it doesn't happen in real life up to a point, I'm guessing. I'm not giving anything away, it's all in the bio. The actors, at least Tom, was way above the silliness, and you can tell he wasn't enjoying this movie as much as his more serious roles. He is too good of an Actor for this movie and his talent is wasted. Chris comes off as this creepy- older- smooth- operator and that just doesn't go away, a normal woman would have picked that up in a heartbeat. I didn't pause or fast forward, which is a plus, but I really wouldn't recommend the movie if you are truly wanting a feel-good Rom-Com. I agree that Reese wasn't her best, or if she is, she's NOT my kind of actor. Again, I have to go with it being just too silly. It would have made a better movie if one of the guys had had to choose, and not the other way around. She wasn't believable, and quite frankly, Tom was too good for this movie.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesThe skyline city in the opening scene is not Hong Kong, but Shanghai.
- GaffesTuck's son Joe is missing two of his upper front teeth when meeting with Lauren in the school. In the next scene, Joe is missing two of his lower teeth.
- Versions alternativesUS theatrical version was cut for some sex jokes to achieve a more commercial PG-13 rating. International theatrical versions were uncut. However, the cut version was used for home video releases worldwide.
- ConnexionsFeatured in The Tonight Show with Jay Leno: Épisode #20.83 (2012)
- Bandes originalesShake It, Shake It
Written by Ted Caplan
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
- Langues
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- ¡Esto es guerra!
- Lieux de tournage
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 65 000 000 $US (estimé)
- Montant brut aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 54 760 791 $US
- Week-end de sortie aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 17 405 930 $US
- 19 févr. 2012
- Montant brut mondial
- 156 491 279 $US
- Durée
- 1h 43min(103 min)
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 2.35 : 1
- 2.39 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant