IMDb रेटिंग
4.3/10
49 हज़ार
आपकी रेटिंग
अपने वैज्ञानिक पिता के गायब होने के बाद, तीन अनोखे जीव उन्हें खोजने के लिए मेग, उसके भाई और उसके दोस्त को अंतरिक्ष में भेजते हैं.अपने वैज्ञानिक पिता के गायब होने के बाद, तीन अनोखे जीव उन्हें खोजने के लिए मेग, उसके भाई और उसके दोस्त को अंतरिक्ष में भेजते हैं.अपने वैज्ञानिक पिता के गायब होने के बाद, तीन अनोखे जीव उन्हें खोजने के लिए मेग, उसके भाई और उसके दोस्त को अंतरिक्ष में भेजते हैं.
- निर्देशक
- लेखक
- स्टार
- पुरस्कार
- 5 जीत और कुल 17 नामांकन
David Oyelowo
- The It
- (वॉइस)
सारांश
Reviewers say 'A Wrinkle in Time' has received mixed reviews, with criticisms targeting its disjointed plot, heavy reliance on CGI, and perceived lack of coherence. Many felt it failed to capture the essence of the book. Performances from the adult cast were often criticized, though young actors like Storm Reid were praised. Stunning visuals, themes of love and family, and a diverse cast were highlighted positively.
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
Great actors with very poor script. Rendering poor performance. Even my 10 yr old daughter was bored and wanted to leave early.
We wondered why we were the only ones in the theatre.
A real disappointment
By the time "Wrinkle" reached its climactic scenes, where the stakes are highest and the resolution hangs in the balance, it carried so much forward momentum that I had to keep waking myself up so I wouldn't snore and bother the other theater patrons.
Yeah...it was like that.
Look, I'll admit: I've never read the book (shame on me, I guess, as a lifelong lover of SF and general metaphysical weirdness), so I can't judge DuVernay's "A Wrinkle In Time" as an adaptation of L'Engle's literary favorite. But I CAN measure it as a film that wants to tell a story, and on that scale...um...
...
Uy. Never is there a real sense of conflict with which to engage: the tone and mood are so lovey-dovey, from stem to stern, that the film never feels like it's progressing in any meaningful way. The galaxy-gobbling threat doesn't, and isn't. Good performers are wasted on one-note characters (be they whimsical space-nymphs or oh-so-precious baby geniuses) in puzzling costumes and -- were those hairdos? I think they were hairdos. I mean, they were where hair is supposed to be. Expensive FX fill the screen in service to a plot that *drifts* through its paces instead of *advancing*. If there was variance in the musical score, I missed it (but I think I didn't, because I think there wasn't). Michael Peña is asked to leave his "Ant-Man" charm at home and put on a goofy mustache and some red contacts for like a few minutes, and Captain Kirk (the new one, anyway) has a beard and is interesting, but doesn't really do anything and OPE what nope I'm awake not snoring sorry no.
This is going to be someone's favorite movie, and that's a beautiful thing; art needn't be categorically *good* to be *effective*, after all, and I love the hell out of "Xanadu", so I should know. But a film that wants to tell a story should be equipped to tell a story, and if it can't do that, then...it's doing something else, I dunno, I'm...
...
...huh? No, no, I was just...just resting my eyes. It's nice, maybe you should do the same.
Yeah...it was like that.
Look, I'll admit: I've never read the book (shame on me, I guess, as a lifelong lover of SF and general metaphysical weirdness), so I can't judge DuVernay's "A Wrinkle In Time" as an adaptation of L'Engle's literary favorite. But I CAN measure it as a film that wants to tell a story, and on that scale...um...
...
Uy. Never is there a real sense of conflict with which to engage: the tone and mood are so lovey-dovey, from stem to stern, that the film never feels like it's progressing in any meaningful way. The galaxy-gobbling threat doesn't, and isn't. Good performers are wasted on one-note characters (be they whimsical space-nymphs or oh-so-precious baby geniuses) in puzzling costumes and -- were those hairdos? I think they were hairdos. I mean, they were where hair is supposed to be. Expensive FX fill the screen in service to a plot that *drifts* through its paces instead of *advancing*. If there was variance in the musical score, I missed it (but I think I didn't, because I think there wasn't). Michael Peña is asked to leave his "Ant-Man" charm at home and put on a goofy mustache and some red contacts for like a few minutes, and Captain Kirk (the new one, anyway) has a beard and is interesting, but doesn't really do anything and OPE what nope I'm awake not snoring sorry no.
This is going to be someone's favorite movie, and that's a beautiful thing; art needn't be categorically *good* to be *effective*, after all, and I love the hell out of "Xanadu", so I should know. But a film that wants to tell a story should be equipped to tell a story, and if it can't do that, then...it's doing something else, I dunno, I'm...
...
...huh? No, no, I was just...just resting my eyes. It's nice, maybe you should do the same.
Good: Some of the messages and morals of the story are heartfelt for its intended audience of children. The saving grace is Chris Pine. Even though he had a small role, he fit the role perfectly and was not so excessive. The color scheme is very bright and colorful, which makes the movie somewhat interesting, even with the subpar acting and plot.....
Bad: The acting all around is either subar from the cast or over the top from Mindy Kaling and Zach Galifianakis that it comes out unnatural. Even with a good cast consisting of Oprah Winfrey and Reese Witherspoon, they did not add much to the movie's benefit. Disney spent so much money on its adult characters that they forgot to hire good child actors/actresses for the child cast members are not even on par with some of the amazing child stars from "Stranger Things," "It," or "Jungle Book."
Overall: The movie is mainly geared towards elementary and middle school children with some adult aspects, yet the movie is childish and not up to Disney's standard. Disney should be embarrassed to have produced such a movie with big Hollywood names and have it bomb. The movie falls flat and lacks humor leading to a failure for Disney. Even though this movie is supposed to be a big statement towards diversity with a colored director helming a $100 million budget project, the movie does not do justice.
2/5
Bad: The acting all around is either subar from the cast or over the top from Mindy Kaling and Zach Galifianakis that it comes out unnatural. Even with a good cast consisting of Oprah Winfrey and Reese Witherspoon, they did not add much to the movie's benefit. Disney spent so much money on its adult characters that they forgot to hire good child actors/actresses for the child cast members are not even on par with some of the amazing child stars from "Stranger Things," "It," or "Jungle Book."
Overall: The movie is mainly geared towards elementary and middle school children with some adult aspects, yet the movie is childish and not up to Disney's standard. Disney should be embarrassed to have produced such a movie with big Hollywood names and have it bomb. The movie falls flat and lacks humor leading to a failure for Disney. Even though this movie is supposed to be a big statement towards diversity with a colored director helming a $100 million budget project, the movie does not do justice.
2/5
I couldn't even finish the movie. I am speechless it was just so bad. I mean acting , direction , make up, dialogues just a very poorly done movie which did not make any sense at all. 0/10 A complere Waste of time and money.
I ignored the bad reviews and went anyway. Disappointing is probably an understatement. This movie is a disaster. Not only is the acting incredibly awful, especially from some otherwise accomplished cast members, but the original storyline was all but abandoned. I read the book several times, and even I was confused what was going on in this film. There was no explanation for any of the concepts, character development was nonexistent, special effects were plentiful but meaningless. The most fascinating parts of the book were eliminated, or only presented so quickly that it was difficult to understand why they were happening and how they related to the story. This movie could have been SO great - there was incredible potential here, and Disney and the director literally wasted it all.
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाOver the entrance to Mrs. Who's (Mindy Kaling's) house is a street-number sign with the eight hanging lopsided, forming an infinity symbol.
- गूफ़In several scenes, Meg's glasses do not have any lenses in them.
- भाव
Dr. Alex Murry: What if we are here for a reason. What if we are part of something truly divine.
- क्रेज़ी क्रेडिटThe Walt Disney Pictures logo is affected by a tesseract.
- कनेक्शनFeatured in The 75th Annual Golden Globe Awards (2018)
- साउंडट्रैकLet Me Live
Written by Denisia "Blu June" Andrews, Brittany "Chi" Coney, Ali Payami, and Kehlani (as Kehlani Parrish)
Produced by Nova Wav and Ali Payami
Performed by Kehlani
Courtesy of Tsunami Mob/Atlantic Recording Corp.
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
- How long is A Wrinkle in Time?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
- रिलीज़ की तारीख़
- कंट्री ऑफ़ ओरिजिन
- आधिकारिक साइटें
- भाषा
- इस रूप में भी जाना जाता है
- Un Viaje en el Tiempo
- फ़िल्माने की जगहें
- उत्पादन कंपनियां
- IMDbPro पर और कंपनी क्रेडिट देखें
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- बजट
- $10,00,00,000(अनुमानित)
- US और कनाडा में सकल
- $10,04,78,608
- US और कनाडा में पहले सप्ताह में कुल कमाई
- $3,31,23,609
- 11 मार्च 2018
- दुनिया भर में सकल
- $13,26,75,864
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें