VALUTAZIONE IMDb
7,1/10
21.556
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
Segui le vite degli eroinomani che frequentano "Needle Park" a New York City.Segui le vite degli eroinomani che frequentano "Needle Park" a New York City.Segui le vite degli eroinomani che frequentano "Needle Park" a New York City.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
- Premi
- 1 vittoria e 1 candidatura in totale
Vic Ramano
- Santo
- (as Vic Romano)
Recensioni in evidenza
This movie is not for people with sensitive nerves. Its harsh realism is very breathtaking, at times almost overwhelming. It concentrates in showing what drug addiction does to people in a relationship and succeeds in doing that. That's also the reason for its timelessness and artistic value.
Al Pacino and Kitty Winn, who plays the two main characters, Bobby and Helen, are very realistic in showing the ups and mostly the downs in the life of a drug addict. Especially the way they at times put their craving for drugs above each others needs.
The first time I saw the film I was 15. It was shown at my school and it made a very strong impression on me, especially its portrayal in the miserable life of a drug addict. I can therefore, among other things, recommend it as a preventive film for young people.
Al Pacino and Kitty Winn, who plays the two main characters, Bobby and Helen, are very realistic in showing the ups and mostly the downs in the life of a drug addict. Especially the way they at times put their craving for drugs above each others needs.
The first time I saw the film I was 15. It was shown at my school and it made a very strong impression on me, especially its portrayal in the miserable life of a drug addict. I can therefore, among other things, recommend it as a preventive film for young people.
Until the mid-Fifties, the taboo theme of drug addiction in films was either fleetingly mentioned - as in MYSTERY OF THE WAX MUSEUM (1933) - or ridiculously overblown as in the REEFER MADNESS (1936) school of movies but, with the appearance of films like Otto Preminger's THE MAN WITH THE GOLDEN ARM (1955) and Nicholas Ray's BIGGER THAN LIFE (1956), Hollywood producers showed that they had learned to treat it in an objective, mature and sensitive way. But, with the the runaway box office success of EASY RIDER (1969), the subject got its own unexpected little niche and the general public was for the first time allowed to wallow in a no-holds-barred view of the junkie lifestyle; of course, I am discounting films like Shirley Clarke's THE CONNECTION (1961; which I've never watched myself) and the Andy Warhol Factory movies which are anything but mainstream Hollywood products.
I can't say I've watched many of those 1970s drug-related movies and, off hand, only John G. Avildsen's JOE (1970; with Peter Boyle and Susan Sarandon) and Ivan Passer's BORN TO WIN (1971; with George Segal and a young Robert De Niro) come to mind. Even so, I'd say that THE PANIC IN NEEDLE PARK is arguably the bleakest, grittiest and most realistic screen portrayal of drug addiction I've ever watched - at least, until Darren Aronofsky's REQUIEM FOR A DREAM (2000); for one thing, while most films of the era made extensive use of the contemporaneous rock scene, this one has no musical underscoring at all.
Frankly, I've had the film on VHS recorded off Cable TV for over 10 years and only now managed to catch up with it because my father rented it on DVD (and, subsequently, turned it off before long)! Indeed, the scrappy first half-hour is rather off-putting and dreary and it wasn't until the main protagonists - Al Pacino (already superb in just his second movie) and Kitty Winn (who would go on to win the Best Actress Award at the Cannes Film festival for her work here) - really got together that I started to genuinely care about their plight; perhaps the most moving scene they share is their short-lived idyll in the country where the couple even purchase a dog with the little money they have (but lose it almost immediately through negligence when the urge for the drug habit kicks in once again). Subsequently reduced to prostitution, Winn is watched over by a sympathetic young cop but soon he's demanding that she turn Pacino over to the law. At the end of the film the couple are reunited, but it looks like their relationship has nowhere to go.
I can't say I've watched many of those 1970s drug-related movies and, off hand, only John G. Avildsen's JOE (1970; with Peter Boyle and Susan Sarandon) and Ivan Passer's BORN TO WIN (1971; with George Segal and a young Robert De Niro) come to mind. Even so, I'd say that THE PANIC IN NEEDLE PARK is arguably the bleakest, grittiest and most realistic screen portrayal of drug addiction I've ever watched - at least, until Darren Aronofsky's REQUIEM FOR A DREAM (2000); for one thing, while most films of the era made extensive use of the contemporaneous rock scene, this one has no musical underscoring at all.
Frankly, I've had the film on VHS recorded off Cable TV for over 10 years and only now managed to catch up with it because my father rented it on DVD (and, subsequently, turned it off before long)! Indeed, the scrappy first half-hour is rather off-putting and dreary and it wasn't until the main protagonists - Al Pacino (already superb in just his second movie) and Kitty Winn (who would go on to win the Best Actress Award at the Cannes Film festival for her work here) - really got together that I started to genuinely care about their plight; perhaps the most moving scene they share is their short-lived idyll in the country where the couple even purchase a dog with the little money they have (but lose it almost immediately through negligence when the urge for the drug habit kicks in once again). Subsequently reduced to prostitution, Winn is watched over by a sympathetic young cop but soon he's demanding that she turn Pacino over to the law. At the end of the film the couple are reunited, but it looks like their relationship has nowhere to go.
The Panic in Needle Park (1971)
Wow. This is as close as American Hollywood gets to cinema verite. The way it's filmed, the subject matter itself, and the acting by the whole cast, especially the two leading actors, is astonishing and gripping. Like many reality-based stories, this one lacks only a driving narrative thread. As disturbing and terrific as it is, it also gets slow, and could have been edited down with the same effect.
But less of it. By that I mean, if you can just settle into this world of 1970 heroin abuse in New York City, with close ups of shooting up and some very convincing rushes and rides, with squalor and hopelessness and indifference, with prostituting and stealing and a wide cast of people down and out, you'll want it to keep going. There is nothing quite like this movie, even as it lacks propulsion.
Al Pacino is so good, so convincing, as Bobby, you can almost picture the movie is a documentary and this slightly charming junkie is a real guy who was willing to be filmed. His girlfriend Helen played by Kitty Winn is also perfect, at first as a kind of tagalong who isn't comfortable with this world but who seems to have nowhere else to go so she sticks with Bobby. But she falls into the lifestyle, and her clean innocence is gradually worn down, almost before our eyes, and the two of them go through all the stages of addiction and desperation. They have no money, they sometimes have nowhere to live, but they stumble along, stealing or pulling tricks (sexual ones) to get their fix.
If anyone harbors any sense that heroin must be terrific, watch this movie. Even the famous euphoric rush is so internal it can't be appreciated, and people on their several hour high just seem to be sleepy all the time. And then the rest of their lives are absolute hell. I guess you don't care about everything else, so it may as well be hell, but from the outside, it's something to avoid.
And in that sense, the movie is perfect. It is so truthfully frank it's a masterpiece of some kind of cinema that we could use more of, but which is so raw and unappealing you can see why there isn't more. It's not a fun movie. And when it does get a little slow and repetitive you might even give up on it, or zone out like one of its characters. But watch at least part of it to appreciate what's been done. Here's the great Pacino in his first major role (and his second film), and Winn (also her second film) in an award winning performance.
Wow. This is as close as American Hollywood gets to cinema verite. The way it's filmed, the subject matter itself, and the acting by the whole cast, especially the two leading actors, is astonishing and gripping. Like many reality-based stories, this one lacks only a driving narrative thread. As disturbing and terrific as it is, it also gets slow, and could have been edited down with the same effect.
But less of it. By that I mean, if you can just settle into this world of 1970 heroin abuse in New York City, with close ups of shooting up and some very convincing rushes and rides, with squalor and hopelessness and indifference, with prostituting and stealing and a wide cast of people down and out, you'll want it to keep going. There is nothing quite like this movie, even as it lacks propulsion.
Al Pacino is so good, so convincing, as Bobby, you can almost picture the movie is a documentary and this slightly charming junkie is a real guy who was willing to be filmed. His girlfriend Helen played by Kitty Winn is also perfect, at first as a kind of tagalong who isn't comfortable with this world but who seems to have nowhere else to go so she sticks with Bobby. But she falls into the lifestyle, and her clean innocence is gradually worn down, almost before our eyes, and the two of them go through all the stages of addiction and desperation. They have no money, they sometimes have nowhere to live, but they stumble along, stealing or pulling tricks (sexual ones) to get their fix.
If anyone harbors any sense that heroin must be terrific, watch this movie. Even the famous euphoric rush is so internal it can't be appreciated, and people on their several hour high just seem to be sleepy all the time. And then the rest of their lives are absolute hell. I guess you don't care about everything else, so it may as well be hell, but from the outside, it's something to avoid.
And in that sense, the movie is perfect. It is so truthfully frank it's a masterpiece of some kind of cinema that we could use more of, but which is so raw and unappealing you can see why there isn't more. It's not a fun movie. And when it does get a little slow and repetitive you might even give up on it, or zone out like one of its characters. But watch at least part of it to appreciate what's been done. Here's the great Pacino in his first major role (and his second film), and Winn (also her second film) in an award winning performance.
This is one of the most disturbing films I have ever seen. It is very real and grisly looking, not polished with the horrible artificial lighting you see nowadays in films. Bobby and Helen are addicts whose lives are going nowhere, they just can't get out of their destructive lifestyle. The scenes of the characters shooting up, tricking, and hanging in the brutal streets of 1970's New York are very realistic. Makes "Trainspotting" look like a Disney cartoon.
When I first saw this film, Al Pacino was an unknown actor, yet to play in the Godfather. I usually just enjoy the movie, but I was surprised by how fine an actor the star was. I wondered why I had never seen this guy before.
Pacino has made many fine films, but this one is actually one of his best..and very few people have ever heard of it. It used to be available on VHS, but has been out of print now for about twenty years. I was finally able to get a very expensive used copy from an internet vendor specializing in hard to get film.
I just hope that this comes out in DVD.
Pacino has made many fine films, but this one is actually one of his best..and very few people have ever heard of it. It used to be available on VHS, but has been out of print now for about twenty years. I was finally able to get a very expensive used copy from an internet vendor specializing in hard to get film.
I just hope that this comes out in DVD.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizAfter the film screened at the Cannes Film Festival, Keith Richards of the Rolling Stones, asked director Jerry Schatzberg if he was into the hard stuff. When Schatzberg told him he wasn't, Richards asked how he could have made a film about it. Schatzberg told Richards that he could probably make a film about a woman having a baby, but, he couldn't do that either.
- Blooper[45:50] Boom microphone (and camera) visible in the upper right hand corner near the end of the stick ball game.
- Curiosità sui creditiThe 20th Century Fox logo appears without the fanfare.
- Versioni alternativeOriginally rated "R" in the U.S. upon its release, some profanity and drug use was cut from the film to be re-rated "PG". The "R" rated version was released on video but is now out of print and extremely rare.
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is The Panic in Needle Park?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paese di origine
- Lingua
- Celebre anche come
- Pánico en Needle Park
- Luoghi delle riprese
- Sherman Square, Manhattan, New York, New York, Stati Uniti("Needle Park" - W. 72nd St. and Broadway)
- Aziende produttrici
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Budget
- 1.645.000 USD (previsto)
- Tempo di esecuzione1 ora 50 minuti
- Colore
- Proporzioni
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti
Divario superiore
By what name was Panico a Needle Park (1971) officially released in India in Hindi?
Rispondi