VALUTAZIONE IMDb
5,9/10
1598
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
Italia, 1952. Il giovane ufficiale Furio Momenté viene inviato nel Veneto, vicino al Polesine, per indagare su un caso scioccante e misterioso: un minore ha ucciso uno dei suoi pari sostenen... Leggi tuttoItalia, 1952. Il giovane ufficiale Furio Momenté viene inviato nel Veneto, vicino al Polesine, per indagare su un caso scioccante e misterioso: un minore ha ucciso uno dei suoi pari sostenendo di aver ucciso il diavolo stesso.Italia, 1952. Il giovane ufficiale Furio Momenté viene inviato nel Veneto, vicino al Polesine, per indagare su un caso scioccante e misterioso: un minore ha ucciso uno dei suoi pari sostenendo di aver ucciso il diavolo stesso.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
- Premi
- 1 vittoria e 3 candidature totali
Cesare Cremonini
- Giulio Mongiorgi
- (as Cesare S. Cremonini)
Recensioni in evidenza
Great style and atmosphere, but disappointing ending. This is a recurring theme in Pupi Avati's work. This film is reminiscent of Arcane Sorcerer (1996) in which a protagonist goes to investigate strange happenings involving evil forces. There are similar castle/cathedral-like sets/locations. They both have underwhelming/disappointing endings.
Where Il Signor Diavolo really shines is the atmosphere and the look of the film. It has a gorgeous and gritty feel. It felt authentic. The acting was good all around. The subtitles were poor on the version I saw so that may be part of the problem.
However, the other part of the problem is the structure. This is a novel that was turned into a film about a man who spends half the film sitting down and reading a transcript of an interview that authorities conducted with a young boy who told them a story about why he killed a another boy he thought was the devil. Then, our protagonist has a series of conversations which lead into a rushed finale.
It's creepy. It's wonderful to look at. But it doesn't go anywhere interesting.
Where Il Signor Diavolo really shines is the atmosphere and the look of the film. It has a gorgeous and gritty feel. It felt authentic. The acting was good all around. The subtitles were poor on the version I saw so that may be part of the problem.
However, the other part of the problem is the structure. This is a novel that was turned into a film about a man who spends half the film sitting down and reading a transcript of an interview that authorities conducted with a young boy who told them a story about why he killed a another boy he thought was the devil. Then, our protagonist has a series of conversations which lead into a rushed finale.
It's creepy. It's wonderful to look at. But it doesn't go anywhere interesting.
In this movie, it's just the beginning part that's scary. For the rest the plot is ridiculous, the special effects are ridiculous and even the aura of the film that should be scary is ridiculous.
Firstly, why the hell are almost all dialogues so annoyingly whispered? I have to turn my TV's volume to NUCLEAR to hear clearly.
Some actors look quite out of their role, the story idea is OK, here and there the movie managed to give me some sweet discomfort of a horror, but narration is boring, very boring and too much built over long, whispered dialogues that pretend to build tension... without much success. In a sense the direction style seems quite theatrical which might meet the taste of some.
Nice soundtrack.
Some actors look quite out of their role, the story idea is OK, here and there the movie managed to give me some sweet discomfort of a horror, but narration is boring, very boring and too much built over long, whispered dialogues that pretend to build tension... without much success. In a sense the direction style seems quite theatrical which might meet the taste of some.
Nice soundtrack.
I watched this movie during spare time, hoping to see some "so bad it's good" stuff, knowing how terribly overrated everything shot by Avati is. In the beginning my hopes seemed to be fullfilled: terrible acting, awful scenes, didascalic photography.. however, with time the movie only gets more boring and unexplained, with some completely useless subplots like the "love story". Incredible how in 2019 a so called "maestro" can continue to get funds by italian ministry to make such awful and useless movies. Embarassing.
I read the plot and I was so interesting in seeing that one. When I ended the movie I realized that it was not a Horror movie at all. It is just a Supernatural-or kind of-Mystery movie.
Again at the beginning it is very interesting but towards the hour of movie it becomes boring and boring; not knowing exactly what is happening it is not a good thing. They do not provide clues about what we are seeing.
The movie seems to be a long flashback and the investigation of the events. The end is kind of good, but that is all. If you are getting boring and want to stop watching, you must see the the very end.
Again at the beginning it is very interesting but towards the hour of movie it becomes boring and boring; not knowing exactly what is happening it is not a good thing. They do not provide clues about what we are seeing.
The movie seems to be a long flashback and the investigation of the events. The end is kind of good, but that is all. If you are getting boring and want to stop watching, you must see the the very end.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizThis marks the first time Avati directs a movie adapted from one of his novels. Previously, he had done the opposite, adapting some of his movies ("La seconda notte di nozze", "Il nascondiglio", "I cavalieri che fecero l'impresa"...) into novels.
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
Dettagli
Botteghino
- Budget
- 1.000.000 € (previsto)
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 1.188.159 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione
- 1h 26min(86 min)
- Colore
- Proporzioni
- 1.78 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti