IMDb रेटिंग
6.0/10
4.1 हज़ार
आपकी रेटिंग
अपनी भाषा में प्लॉट जोड़ेंA group of teens in the 1980s spend the day theater-hopping.A group of teens in the 1980s spend the day theater-hopping.A group of teens in the 1980s spend the day theater-hopping.
- पुरस्कार
- 2 कुल नामांकन
Method Man
- Cookie
- (as Cliff "Method Man" Smith)
Jennifer Schwalbach Smith
- Sister Black Eye
- (as Jennifer Schwalbach)
Ernest O'Donnell
- Detective
- (as Ernie O'Donnell)
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
"4:30" is Kevin Smith's latest addition to his filmography, and it presents an interesting mix of elements that might leave audiences divided. The film revolves around its leads, who, while undoubtedly central to the narrative, come off as insufferable at times. It's a shame that Smith seems to struggle with creating truly likable characters, especially when compared to his earlier works where his characters resonated deeply with audiences.
In contrast, where "4:30" truly shines is in its side characters. These supporting roles inject much-needed charm and depth into the movie, saving it from becoming a complete letdown. It's in these moments and interactions that the film finds its rhythm and provides some enjoyable and watchable scenes.
While "4:30" may not reach the same heights as some of Smith's earlier classics, it still manages to surpass the last few lackluster entries in his filmography. There's a sense of improvement evident in this movie, a glimmer of the filmmaker revisiting his strengths and rediscovering what made his earlier works so beloved.
Despite its flaws, "4:30" offers a glimpse of Smith returning to form, albeit with some hiccups along the way. The pacing, dialogue, and character development may not be as polished as fans would hope for, but there's a raw honesty to the storytelling that is hard to ignore.
In conclusion, "4:30" is a mixed bag. While the leads may come across as insufferable and the writing lacking its past charm, the film is buoyed by strong performances from its side characters and an overall improvement in quality compared to Smith's recent endeavors. It might not be a perfect movie, but it shows promise and hints at a potential return to form for the filmmaker. With a rating of 5/10 stars, "4:30" is worth a watch for fans of Kevin Smith, but it may leave some wishing for more of the magic that defined his earlier works.
In contrast, where "4:30" truly shines is in its side characters. These supporting roles inject much-needed charm and depth into the movie, saving it from becoming a complete letdown. It's in these moments and interactions that the film finds its rhythm and provides some enjoyable and watchable scenes.
While "4:30" may not reach the same heights as some of Smith's earlier classics, it still manages to surpass the last few lackluster entries in his filmography. There's a sense of improvement evident in this movie, a glimmer of the filmmaker revisiting his strengths and rediscovering what made his earlier works so beloved.
Despite its flaws, "4:30" offers a glimpse of Smith returning to form, albeit with some hiccups along the way. The pacing, dialogue, and character development may not be as polished as fans would hope for, but there's a raw honesty to the storytelling that is hard to ignore.
In conclusion, "4:30" is a mixed bag. While the leads may come across as insufferable and the writing lacking its past charm, the film is buoyed by strong performances from its side characters and an overall improvement in quality compared to Smith's recent endeavors. It might not be a perfect movie, but it shows promise and hints at a potential return to form for the filmmaker. With a rating of 5/10 stars, "4:30" is worth a watch for fans of Kevin Smith, but it may leave some wishing for more of the magic that defined his earlier works.
It sucks! It doesn't JUST suck, it's actually kinda bad and I LOVE Kevin Smith! Like I get legit excited to see his stuff but Im super disappointed - do without spoilers, the entire first act is essentially talking about sneaking into an theatre, and idk if he's trying to explain a very simple concept to people born after 2000, or it's just 'Chuffa' ( 1. See Kevin I am a fan! I remember your Bruce Willis story when you directed him in Cop Out and 2. Shout out to Bruce Willis, thank you for the years and years of entertainment) - but take that in addition to flagrant attempts at manipulation of human nostalgia (which has become a way to leaned upon crutch after it hit big with Stranger Things) and it comes across as very desperate and simplistic in a very, almost offensive way - and oddly enough it was billed as" Kevins most personal film to date " (well it sure has enough of his friends in it ffs) (who can't act I might add, but it isn't endearing) but yet it's not autobiographical either soooo.... And yes I spoke directly to Kevin earlier cause I know he's gonna read this, I KNOW this because having read the day one reviews here on imdb, I can see that several of them are made from, let's say... 'inside the Smith camp' if u get my drift - and again listen I love the guy and have enormous respect - I WAS 16 in 86 so this has extra meaning to me and I should be susceptible to the nostalgia draw - but it's not enough and I think he knows it - I'm sorry, I expected better from such a genius.
The film starts and ends with a very, very weak "rom com" storyline. In total, this accounts for perhaps 15-20 minutes of the film's total run time. In between that, there's a good hour+ of just pointless, repetitive 80s references and "jokes" related to the future. The base "rom com" storyline isn't really very interesting or engaging, but that's really a minor aspect of the film.
Imagine... You travel back to 1986... and make as many statements that will prove to be inaccurate in 40 years... That's the BULK of this film.
While there's a very weak base story, most of the film is just trying to crack jokes about things that will eventually be proven true after 1986... example "There'll never be another Star Wars. Can you imagine.. they make tv series based on minor characters?!?" Those kind of "jokes". Only POSSIBLY slightly amusing because anyone watching this film would know different. They aren't "jokes" or "funny" in themselves.
The film is a series of repetitive 80s references, using only the most prominent trends of the 80s that were annoying then -- and in EVERY conversation, multiple times -- seems Smith was hard-pressed to write a single line of dialog that wasn't either referencing the 80s or miserably attempting some "joke" based solely on some future truism.
This appears to be a film targeted at 13-15 year olds.. who will miss all the (way overused) 80s references and, once in a blue moon, MIGHT find the statements about the future amusing.. but that's stretching things.
Oddest thing was the reference to needing to be 18 years old to see an R rated film.. That's never been true. It's always been 17, not 18. It states it right in the MPAA rating screen at the beginning of a film. All my life it's been 17.. and I'm the same age as Smith. Really? I mean Smith is in the film industry and he gets this wrong?? Kind of shows how much thought was put into the script.
I didn't find this film funny or even slightly amusing in ANY way... and it wasn't that interesting. This is quite possibly Kevin Smith's worst film ever. I typically love Kevin Smith films. I'll NEVER sit through this one again.
----- Pass ------
Imagine... You travel back to 1986... and make as many statements that will prove to be inaccurate in 40 years... That's the BULK of this film.
While there's a very weak base story, most of the film is just trying to crack jokes about things that will eventually be proven true after 1986... example "There'll never be another Star Wars. Can you imagine.. they make tv series based on minor characters?!?" Those kind of "jokes". Only POSSIBLY slightly amusing because anyone watching this film would know different. They aren't "jokes" or "funny" in themselves.
The film is a series of repetitive 80s references, using only the most prominent trends of the 80s that were annoying then -- and in EVERY conversation, multiple times -- seems Smith was hard-pressed to write a single line of dialog that wasn't either referencing the 80s or miserably attempting some "joke" based solely on some future truism.
This appears to be a film targeted at 13-15 year olds.. who will miss all the (way overused) 80s references and, once in a blue moon, MIGHT find the statements about the future amusing.. but that's stretching things.
Oddest thing was the reference to needing to be 18 years old to see an R rated film.. That's never been true. It's always been 17, not 18. It states it right in the MPAA rating screen at the beginning of a film. All my life it's been 17.. and I'm the same age as Smith. Really? I mean Smith is in the film industry and he gets this wrong?? Kind of shows how much thought was put into the script.
I didn't find this film funny or even slightly amusing in ANY way... and it wasn't that interesting. This is quite possibly Kevin Smith's worst film ever. I typically love Kevin Smith films. I'll NEVER sit through this one again.
----- Pass ------
I really enjoyed this movie. The cast is a mix of unexpectedly good newcomers and funny cameos from regulars in Kevin's movies. There is a sweet side to the story that we haven't seen from Kevin since Jersey Girl and it works.
Austin Zajur gives a performance way above what you would expect and the cast has great chemistry.
I was lucky enough to get to watch this movie with Kevin at his place and it was an amazing evening. I'm going to see it again this weekend on the big screen.
The movie isn't drawn out or heavy and it is a great time. Highly recommended for anyone who grew up in that era or wished they did.
Austin Zajur gives a performance way above what you would expect and the cast has great chemistry.
I was lucky enough to get to watch this movie with Kevin at his place and it was an amazing evening. I'm going to see it again this weekend on the big screen.
The movie isn't drawn out or heavy and it is a great time. Highly recommended for anyone who grew up in that era or wished they did.
A very short movie that is padded with homages for movies from the past that never existed - can you really not play any trailers from real movies from the past you can make fun of? What's with the fake trailers? What was the point? Just to vaguely bring some nostalgia to the table and satirise the quality of the movie scene in the 80s.
And once again, Kevin Smith finds himself to use his movie as a platform to criticise other movies or franchises...basically if a letterboxed user was a director. This is what it would come out. Does anybody have Kevin Smith's user on here?
The actors have their limited charm in this, but they were the correct choices. This is thin and forgettable.
And once again, Kevin Smith finds himself to use his movie as a platform to criticise other movies or franchises...basically if a letterboxed user was a director. This is what it would come out. Does anybody have Kevin Smith's user on here?
The actors have their limited charm in this, but they were the correct choices. This is thin and forgettable.
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाKevin Smith intended for the film to be rated PG-13, but it received an R, primarily due to jokes about masturbation. Unlike with many of his other films, he was not successful in getting the film to a lower rating.
- गूफ़The MPAA movie trailer rating screen shown before the trailer for Sister Sugar Walls is the incorrect one, being the one that is currently in use by the MPAA. The one that was used by the MPAA in 1986, when The 4:30 Movie takes place, was a still green frame which just had the sentence: "The Following Preview Has Been Approved For All Audiences by the Motion Picture Association of America."
- भाव
Hot Usher: Most people come to the movies to escape their lives, but people like us, we come here because movies make life make sense. Out here, man, world is full of lies. But in there, they tell the lie that tells the truth. And the truth about you and me is we are filmmakers. We just have not made our film. Yet.
- क्रेज़ी क्रेडिटAfter the credits roll, there is a montage of outtakes.
- कनेक्शनReferenced in Film Junk Podcast: Episode 975: The 4:30 Movie (2025)
- साउंडट्रैकZ100 Jingle ('The Flame Thrower')
Written by Jon Wolfert (as Jonathan Wolfert)
Performed by JAM Creative Productions, Inc.
Used under license
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
- How long is The 4:30 Movie?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
- रिलीज़ की तारीख़
- कंट्री ऑफ़ ओरिजिन
- भाषा
- इस रूप में भी जाना जाता है
- Сеанс в 16:30
- फ़िल्माने की जगहें
- उत्पादन कंपनियां
- IMDbPro पर और कंपनी क्रेडिट देखें
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- बजट
- $30,00,000(अनुमानित)
- दुनिया भर में सकल
- $2,385
- चलने की अवधि1 घंटा 27 मिनट
- रंग
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 1.85 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें