IMDb रेटिंग
6.5/10
8 हज़ार
आपकी रेटिंग
अपनी भाषा में प्लॉट जोड़ेंPenn State football coach Joe Paterno becomes embroiled in a sexual abuse scandal.Penn State football coach Joe Paterno becomes embroiled in a sexual abuse scandal.Penn State football coach Joe Paterno becomes embroiled in a sexual abuse scandal.
- 2 प्राइमटाइम एमी के लिए नामांकित
- 1 जीत और कुल 7 नामांकन
Ken Maharaj
- MRI Tech
- (as Kenneth Maharaj)
Mitchell L. Mack
- Devon Smith
- (as Mitchell Mack)
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
Cable TV is really hitting it out of the park these days. Paterno is one of the better movies I've seen in awhile including theatrical movies. I probably don't need to recap the entire plot for anyone, since the news covered it widely at the time. This film centers on the horrific Penn State scandal of sexual molestation of young boys by a man who was at one time on the Penn State coaching staff and was a "pillar of the community." What makes this different though than any news coverage you've seen is that it goes inside Joe Paterno 's life to show the downfall of a community and sports icon from the inside.
Of course, one must take into account that filmmakers take some license when it comes portraying Paterno and his family. While I'm sure they did their research, they weren't actually sitting at his dining room table for those intimate encounters with his kids during the aftermath of all of this. I think a question that most people had when they heard about the scandal was, "What was Joe Paterno thinking? Why did this powerful leader not do more? What was going on inside head?" This movie delves into that, giving an interesting and very possible take on what really was going on inside Paterno's head. Other great things about this movie: Riley Keough is fantastic as the reporter who originally breaks the case, and Al Pacino is so amazing as Paterno that you will forget you are even watching Pacino.
Of course, one must take into account that filmmakers take some license when it comes portraying Paterno and his family. While I'm sure they did their research, they weren't actually sitting at his dining room table for those intimate encounters with his kids during the aftermath of all of this. I think a question that most people had when they heard about the scandal was, "What was Joe Paterno thinking? Why did this powerful leader not do more? What was going on inside head?" This movie delves into that, giving an interesting and very possible take on what really was going on inside Paterno's head. Other great things about this movie: Riley Keough is fantastic as the reporter who originally breaks the case, and Al Pacino is so amazing as Paterno that you will forget you are even watching Pacino.
I watched this movie at home on DVD from my public library, my wife skipped it.
I have been a football fan all my life and, while I never was a Penn State fan (go Purdue!) I knew of Joe Paterno and how respected he and the Penn State football program were. I also clearly remember when the events of 2011 broke wide open.
This movie stars Al Pacino as Joe Paterno and, while he does fine I was constantly reminded of the actor by his raspy voice. Paterno had a calm smooth voice, even near the end.
Still the movie is a good dramatization of the events of 2011 that led to Paterno's firing, just a couple of months before his death, when the details of former coach Sandusky's activities with young boys became fully known.
It was argued, and it seems plausible, that as head of the football program Paterno should have known more and should have done more earlier in the Sandusky case, so he was fired in November 2011. Paterno is portrayed as a rather simple man who focused so much on the football and preparation for next games that he was either unaware of Sandusky's activities or just wanted them to go away without his strong involvement.
A good movie of a sad chapter in college football programs.
I have been a football fan all my life and, while I never was a Penn State fan (go Purdue!) I knew of Joe Paterno and how respected he and the Penn State football program were. I also clearly remember when the events of 2011 broke wide open.
This movie stars Al Pacino as Joe Paterno and, while he does fine I was constantly reminded of the actor by his raspy voice. Paterno had a calm smooth voice, even near the end.
Still the movie is a good dramatization of the events of 2011 that led to Paterno's firing, just a couple of months before his death, when the details of former coach Sandusky's activities with young boys became fully known.
It was argued, and it seems plausible, that as head of the football program Paterno should have known more and should have done more earlier in the Sandusky case, so he was fired in November 2011. Paterno is portrayed as a rather simple man who focused so much on the football and preparation for next games that he was either unaware of Sandusky's activities or just wanted them to go away without his strong involvement.
A good movie of a sad chapter in college football programs.
History repeats itself once again with the systemic failure, from the top down, of the incompetence of so many people who chose to ignore a problem and pretended that nothing would ever happen due to their inability to accept responsibility and accountability. A very good performance by Al Pacino as Joe Paterno. You won't regret taking one hour and 45 minutes to view this film.
People who hate this film or its implications that Paterno was complicit to the child abuse are wrong. He clearly was part of the narrative. He maybe never witnessed the abuse himself. But he never reported what happened when he heard about such incidents. I understand that plenty of people are sympathetic to Paterno even if they aren't Penn State or football fans. The film to me seems to clearly display Paterno as a figure who probably would have stayed obsessed with winning football games even if 99% of the people who care about him and football, didn't care about football. And he didn't do anything to deserve someone like Sandusky being hired. Paterno with luck could have never had such an incident and be revered today. And plenty of people revered today might have made the same mistakes as Paterno if they had to deal with Paterno's issues. That doesn't mean that Paterno and others had no responsibility to do the right thing and report Sandusky as soon as possible.
It's remarkable how quickly Paterno's fall happens after his 409th win. I forgot that he went from the winningest couch that almost everyone loved, to fired in less than week. I give this a 7 because the story wasn't that interesting, even though there seemed to be good execution.
I think what bothers people is that the real enemy of this film isn't so much Joe Paterno or Jerry Sandusky. Instead the main enemy is America's priority of putting football and other interests over our more basic human responsibility of protecting children and bringing likely sex abuse criminals to justice as quickly as possible.
After Paterno is fired and he addressed his supporters in front of his yard, be almost forgets about the victims in his address. He just throws in a call to support the victims at the very end. The victims should have been brought up initially or not at all. The error in this response really displayed his faulty priorities again.
The reactions of many of many reviewers is similar to the students protesting in the film following Peterno being fired. This story really highlights our power of denying the errors of people we grow to respect. OJ and Mafia defenders have similar blind spots. People say "Sure they made a mistake on this matter, but they weren't bad about everything. Who hasn't made a mistake?" As if the scope of the crime doesn't matter.
It's remarkably easy for some people to shield acknowledging that someone like Joe Paterno, who might be mostly good 99% of the time, can be complicit to a seriously crime the other 1% of the time. And that 1% was a 1% mattered a lot. Another common response is, "Paterno wants to be known as a legendary football coach. Not a football coach who also had to deal with child sex abuse by one of his couches." Well the media rather than the university addressing this issue from the start let Sandusky fester and abuse dozens more of decades.
I can't help but wonder how it ever felt ok for people to know someone was molesting children and not report them. If someone witnesses a murder, A) I don't think the witness would report the incident to their boss or couch. But B) if they did, they'd be sure law enforcement was in the loop too. Especially if the witness notices that the murderer walking around where he committed his crime years later. Child molesters are extremely likely to repeat their crimes. Much more so than almost any other type of criminal. This is something people should know and care about. It seems that a lot of people are unprepared to deal with such an incident and think it'd never happen to them or someone they know. This film gets a 7 largely for bringing this issue more-so into the spotlight.
Based on the perceptions of other reviewers I get the feeling that people don't want other films based on true stories like Paterno, or Spotlight. They don't want to think about the faults of people who seemed mostly fine. My response: Put an end to such incidents happening, and more importantly festering, and there will be no extraordinarily awful true story to make a movie about down the line about our supposed heroes. Instead we can just have real heroes. The fact that, for now, such things still happen, only reinforces the need to make movies like Paterno.
Until we go decades with nothing like this happening, I'll find it relevant to be aware of stories like Paterno. In the last year or two we learned of a similar case of child abuse with the US gymnastics team. Maybe someday we'll learn.
It's remarkable how quickly Paterno's fall happens after his 409th win. I forgot that he went from the winningest couch that almost everyone loved, to fired in less than week. I give this a 7 because the story wasn't that interesting, even though there seemed to be good execution.
I think what bothers people is that the real enemy of this film isn't so much Joe Paterno or Jerry Sandusky. Instead the main enemy is America's priority of putting football and other interests over our more basic human responsibility of protecting children and bringing likely sex abuse criminals to justice as quickly as possible.
After Paterno is fired and he addressed his supporters in front of his yard, be almost forgets about the victims in his address. He just throws in a call to support the victims at the very end. The victims should have been brought up initially or not at all. The error in this response really displayed his faulty priorities again.
The reactions of many of many reviewers is similar to the students protesting in the film following Peterno being fired. This story really highlights our power of denying the errors of people we grow to respect. OJ and Mafia defenders have similar blind spots. People say "Sure they made a mistake on this matter, but they weren't bad about everything. Who hasn't made a mistake?" As if the scope of the crime doesn't matter.
It's remarkably easy for some people to shield acknowledging that someone like Joe Paterno, who might be mostly good 99% of the time, can be complicit to a seriously crime the other 1% of the time. And that 1% was a 1% mattered a lot. Another common response is, "Paterno wants to be known as a legendary football coach. Not a football coach who also had to deal with child sex abuse by one of his couches." Well the media rather than the university addressing this issue from the start let Sandusky fester and abuse dozens more of decades.
I can't help but wonder how it ever felt ok for people to know someone was molesting children and not report them. If someone witnesses a murder, A) I don't think the witness would report the incident to their boss or couch. But B) if they did, they'd be sure law enforcement was in the loop too. Especially if the witness notices that the murderer walking around where he committed his crime years later. Child molesters are extremely likely to repeat their crimes. Much more so than almost any other type of criminal. This is something people should know and care about. It seems that a lot of people are unprepared to deal with such an incident and think it'd never happen to them or someone they know. This film gets a 7 largely for bringing this issue more-so into the spotlight.
Based on the perceptions of other reviewers I get the feeling that people don't want other films based on true stories like Paterno, or Spotlight. They don't want to think about the faults of people who seemed mostly fine. My response: Put an end to such incidents happening, and more importantly festering, and there will be no extraordinarily awful true story to make a movie about down the line about our supposed heroes. Instead we can just have real heroes. The fact that, for now, such things still happen, only reinforces the need to make movies like Paterno.
Until we go decades with nothing like this happening, I'll find it relevant to be aware of stories like Paterno. In the last year or two we learned of a similar case of child abuse with the US gymnastics team. Maybe someday we'll learn.
Very disappointed in this sketchy HBO presentation. which glosses over many key characters and injects bits and pieces of real events and presumed behaviors to a viewing audience which can be easily confused by the scattershot script and direction. It seemed like a series of story boards out of order. The film needed much more character development, as well as more coherent storytelling.
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाSara Ganim and members of The Patriot-News Staff won a number of national awards including the 2012 Pulitzer Prize for local reporting, making her the third youngest winner of a Pulitzer. The award cited "courageously revealing and adeptly covering the explosive Sandusky sex scandal involving former football coach Jerry Sandusky."
- भाव
[last lines]
Sara Ganim: Uh, I'm sorry. You said... 1976?
- क्रेज़ी क्रेडिटThe title appears after 10 minutes.
- कनेक्शनFeatured in The 70th Primetime Emmy Awards (2018)
- साउंडट्रैकMadama Butterfly, Act II: Un Bel Di Vedremo
Written by Giacomo Puccini
Performed by Maria Callas
Courtesy of Warner Classics U.K. Ltd.
By arrangement with Warner Music Group Film & TV Licensing
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
विवरण
- रिलीज़ की तारीख़
- कंट्री ऑफ़ ओरिजिन
- भाषा
- इस रूप में भी जाना जाता है
- Happy Valley
- फ़िल्माने की जगहें
- Riverdale, ब्रोंक्स, न्यूयॉर्क शहर, न्यूयॉर्क, संयुक्त राज्य अमेरिका(State College, PA)
- उत्पादन कंपनियां
- IMDbPro पर और कंपनी क्रेडिट देखें
- चलने की अवधि1 घंटा 45 मिनट
- रंग
- ध्वनि मिश्रण
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 16:9 HD
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें