IMDb रेटिंग
5.7/10
56 हज़ार
आपकी रेटिंग
अपनी भाषा में प्लॉट जोड़ेंA funeral ceremony turns into a debacle of exposed family secrets and misplaced bodies.A funeral ceremony turns into a debacle of exposed family secrets and misplaced bodies.A funeral ceremony turns into a debacle of exposed family secrets and misplaced bodies.
- पुरस्कार
- 6 कुल नामांकन
Zoe Saldaña
- Elaine
- (as Zoë Saldaña)
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
Death At A Funeral is easily one of the funniest films I've seen in months. Those looking for something hilarious should definitely see it. It's a simple film; just a series of events and misunderstandings at a funeral. All these lead to real chaos, however. The physical and even the spoken humour is well executed. The whole cast deliver solid performances. The script is surprisingly good for a film like this. Add to this a fitting ending, and you've got one satisfying comedy. There's some gross humour, but unlike recent gross-out comedies the stuff here actually works and doesn't feel unpleasant. In addition, most gags contribute to later events in the story. Death At A Funeral is a solid Hollywood product with a star cast that manages to make every star worthwhile. It doesn't break any new ground, but it's truly hilarious.
I watched the original Death at a Funeral when it first came out and thoroughly enjoyed it, however this remake, though possessing arguably greater star power fails to live up to it's predecessor. in my opinion, it misses the mark completely, and was absolutely unnecessary. I know everyone has different taste, but this was just bad. Bad Bad Bad. It is difficult to give an unbiased review seeing as how I have watched the original, but this to me has just highlights how substandard this film is. It is as if Hollywood was trying to prove a point, but failed miserably. I have watched the original four times and still am able to laugh throughout. This was just terrible. This brings me to the question "why?" Who felt that this was necessary? I was gravely disappointed with this film and I think an apology is due to it's original writer and cast members for this atrocious remake!!.
Recommend passing on this one and watch the original released in 2007. The first version was incredibly funny. This one was barely amusing.
Despite having double the budget and some pretty big Hollywood stars the 2010 release adds nothing whatsoever, and in fact is in many ways inferior.
Not only are there some very lacklustre performances in particular from Chris Rock and Martin Lawrence as the two sons of the deceased, but the camera work in some sections is truly awful with the decision to use "handheld" or steadicam photography resulting in the picture shaking so badly in some sections that it is almost hard to watch.
Despite all this many of the best moments of the original are copied perfectly and work just as well as they did the first time around meaning that there are several good laughs to be had, but when you've got the choice of watching this or the original there's really no contest.
Distinctly average.
Not only are there some very lacklustre performances in particular from Chris Rock and Martin Lawrence as the two sons of the deceased, but the camera work in some sections is truly awful with the decision to use "handheld" or steadicam photography resulting in the picture shaking so badly in some sections that it is almost hard to watch.
Despite all this many of the best moments of the original are copied perfectly and work just as well as they did the first time around meaning that there are several good laughs to be had, but when you've got the choice of watching this or the original there's really no contest.
Distinctly average.
I had a feeling this movie wouldn't be funny at all. The previews didn't look funny but some family members wanted to see it so off we go to watch it.
For being a "comedy" I don't remember laughing at all. I guess most of the "funny" stuff is when people make mistakes in the movie. Acting was average, comedians weren't funny, but if you are a fan of slapstick movies, you may like this one.
Now, I like some slapstick actions in some comedies but to me even this one had bad or too much slapstick. I don't ever remember falling asleep at a comedy but I fell asleep at this one.
The movie could have played out the same way with a much cheaper cast but then again, maybe no one would have watched it.
For being a "comedy" I don't remember laughing at all. I guess most of the "funny" stuff is when people make mistakes in the movie. Acting was average, comedians weren't funny, but if you are a fan of slapstick movies, you may like this one.
Now, I like some slapstick actions in some comedies but to me even this one had bad or too much slapstick. I don't ever remember falling asleep at a comedy but I fell asleep at this one.
The movie could have played out the same way with a much cheaper cast but then again, maybe no one would have watched it.
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाIn the original Death at a Funeral (2007) screenplay, the character that Peter Dinklage ended up playing (named Peter) was of average height, and not written as an achondroplastic dwarf. The character was changed for him after he auditioned and was cast. He then became the only actor to reprise his role (with the name of Frank) in this remake.
- गूफ़Jeff says he's a pharmacology student. His father Duncan asks him how things are going at Pepperdine. Per their own website, Pepperdine has no pharmacology program. He is using term "pharmacology student" as a euphemism for "drug dealer."
- साउंडट्रैकLife
Written by Sly Stone (as Sylvester Stewart)
Performed by Sly and the Family Stone (as Sly & The Family Stone)
Courtesy of Epic Records
By Arrangement with Sony Music Entertainment
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
- How long is Death at a Funeral?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
- रिलीज़ की तारीख़
- कंट्री ऑफ़ ओरिजिन
- आधिकारिक साइट
- भाषा
- इस रूप में भी जाना जाता है
- Cái Chết Trong Đám Tang
- फ़िल्माने की जगहें
- उत्पादन कंपनियां
- IMDbPro पर और कंपनी क्रेडिट देखें
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- बजट
- $2,10,00,000(अनुमानित)
- US और कनाडा में सकल
- $4,27,39,347
- US और कनाडा में पहले सप्ताह में कुल कमाई
- $1,62,17,540
- 18 अप्रैल 2010
- दुनिया भर में सकल
- $4,90,50,886
- चलने की अवधि1 घंटा 32 मिनट
- रंग
- ध्वनि मिश्रण
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 2.35 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें