Un ufficiale di polizia di Filadelfia lotta con un'ossessione che ha da sempre, quella di rintracciare un misterioso serial killer i cui crimini sfidano ogni spiegazione.Un ufficiale di polizia di Filadelfia lotta con un'ossessione che ha da sempre, quella di rintracciare un misterioso serial killer i cui crimini sfidano ogni spiegazione.Un ufficiale di polizia di Filadelfia lotta con un'ossessione che ha da sempre, quella di rintracciare un misterioso serial killer i cui crimini sfidano ogni spiegazione.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
- Premi
- 2 candidature totali
Recensioni in evidenza
The movie does build suspense and a dark brooding atmosphere like 12 monkeys did in the first hour, then unravels as the plot is thrust unwillingly into an otherwise good story. You can almost think of it as 2 movies in 1. The first movie is well acted, directed, with excellent sound and decent action scenes. A little over the top but mild compared to the drivel Hollywood is producing today.
The bad. This film could have seriously benefited from a science adviser. This is what initially kills suspension of belief as the, I cannot call it even pseudo science, it's not even good magic, begins to degrade the story and tug the viewer away. This destroys the suspense and the big reveal is not even a weak anti-climax.
Huge plot holes develop as the writers lose track of what wrote previously. This throws you out, and before you can get lured back into the fantasy they commit another egregious error. The specifics would give away the entire movie, so are omitted, but clearly no one with even a high school physics course, the most rudimentary understandings of sociology, psychology or really any branch of physics, especially biology, all are not even given cartoon like salutes. The story just steamrolls through blunder after blunder.
Now for the really ugly. The political bias just leaves a bad taste in one's mouth. It's scary that even a child could buy into a plot idea so naive, much less destroy what otherwise could have been an excellent film. I strongly suspect the first half of this movie was stolen from another story. It starts too well, flows too well to be hacked by such oafish hands in the last half of the movie. There were a million ways this movie could have developed, but the least plausible and most predictable was chosen.
By yanking the viewer out so violently the one really inspired plot twist is aborted and thrown to the floor to thrash in artistic agony.
In the end it becomes a really pale imitation of 13 monkeys without the hard hitting story. that made 13 monkeys such an incredible movie. My advice, watch the first hour then turn the movie off. Be left with the magic they were able to conjure without the corpse they eventually produce.
"In the Shadow of the Moon" starts like any other police thriller, introducing us to a duo of likeable cops, a damp city full of crime & a mystery in the making. Through equal amounts of engaging drama, energetic action and time skipping we steadily move forward to the solution of the mystery, accompanied by the obsessive detective Lockhart who's got some heavy burdens on his shoulders. Boyd Holbrook, whom I first saw on "Narcos" (as I'm sure many people did as well) gives a great lead performance as detective Lockhart & the supporting cast helps him out well, especially Bokeem Woodbine & Cleopatra Coleman. The revelation of the sci-fi twist & the point of the mystery comes a tad bit too slowly & doesn't quite have the impact one would wish for, but, nevertheless, while "In the Shadow of the Moon" left me wanting more, at the same time the ending felt right. The themes of horrors and wonders of humanity & family values are served well. We cannot forget that the movie also looks gorgeous, has a decent original score, well made action sequences & even features a few bloody scenes for the horror fans. In summary, "In the Shadow of the Moon" kinda looks like, feels like and plays out like a big-screen movie.
I think this movie could've been a little less convoluted, with a different, less straight forward mystery building structure, but the result is still engaging, handsome and thoughtful thriller piece. My rating: 7/10.
Was drawn to this by the trailer, as the movie looked like a good murder-mystery. Unfortunately, it turns out this is much more a sci fi thriller than a murder drama, and I'm generally far more into the latter than the former.
This said, the movie still had potential, but this potential was wasted. It becomes quite dull and derivative. Throw in some twists for twists sake, plot developments that don't make much sense or are just there for empty sentimentality's sake, an irritating, unconvincing performance from Michael C Hall (of Dexter fame) and a tame conclusion and it is all quite unsatisfying.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizIn the beginning when in 1988, they are listening to a basketball game on the radio in the patrol car. The announcer says that Philadelphia "lost a heartbreaker" to Atlanta 103-101. This places the exact date as April 14, 1988.
- BlooperAt the 52 minute mark there is a sweeping shot of the 1997 Philadelphia skyline that includes the Comcast Center building which wasn't built until 2008.
- Citazioni
Locke: You know, when I kill you, you'll never be able to kill anybody. One version of me won't have to chase you.
Rya: If you kill me now, the world as you know it will end in a very short time. And you have no idea what's coming.
Locke: You're not the only one trying to change the past. I'll be a regular guy.
[checks his gun]
Locke: With a regular family.
Rya: No. You don't kill me. I know you. I've known you my entire life. You were the one who told me to take this job. You taught me how to ride a bicycle. You made me my first ice cream pancakes. And you held me on the day I was born. This was my mother's.
[hold up her bracelet]
- Colonne sonoreChina Dance
Written by Tony Tam
Performed by APM Music
I più visti
Dettagli
- Tempo di esecuzione1 ora 55 minuti
- Colore
- Proporzioni
- 2.39 : 1