VALUTAZIONE IMDb
6,4/10
1531
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
Aggiungi una trama nella tua linguaA 50-year-old married man begins an extramarital relationship which creates uncomfortable friction in his family between his long-time wife and grown children.A 50-year-old married man begins an extramarital relationship which creates uncomfortable friction in his family between his long-time wife and grown children.A 50-year-old married man begins an extramarital relationship which creates uncomfortable friction in his family between his long-time wife and grown children.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
- Candidato a 1 Oscar
- 3 candidature totali
Recensioni in evidenza
Harry MacKenzie (Gene Hackman) leaves wife Kate (Ellen Burstyn) for waitress Audrey Minelli (Ann-Margret). This causes huge complications with his adult children Sunny (Amy Madigan) and Helen (Ally Sheedy). Stephen Lang and Brian Dennehy throw in strong supporting performances.
This is well made and everything...but this has been done to death before and this adds nothing new. Aside from some swearing (the R rating for this is not deserved) this plays like a made for TV movie. I knew what was coming constantly all through the movie and quickly tired of it. It doesn't even have a conclusion! It just sort of stops. (One of my friends said, "I can't say if I like it or not until I see the end!") All the acting was great--especially Burstyn, Ann-Margret and Madigan (she was Oscar nominated for this one) but all the great acting in the world can't overcome the predictable storyline. If you're a sucker for Lifetime movies or predictable family dramas this is right up your alley. This came and went quickly in 1985 and is now (rightfully) forgotten. I believe Ann-Margret was asked about this a few years back in an interview and she couldn't remember doing it! That should tell you something. I give it a 6.
This is well made and everything...but this has been done to death before and this adds nothing new. Aside from some swearing (the R rating for this is not deserved) this plays like a made for TV movie. I knew what was coming constantly all through the movie and quickly tired of it. It doesn't even have a conclusion! It just sort of stops. (One of my friends said, "I can't say if I like it or not until I see the end!") All the acting was great--especially Burstyn, Ann-Margret and Madigan (she was Oscar nominated for this one) but all the great acting in the world can't overcome the predictable storyline. If you're a sucker for Lifetime movies or predictable family dramas this is right up your alley. This came and went quickly in 1985 and is now (rightfully) forgotten. I believe Ann-Margret was asked about this a few years back in an interview and she couldn't remember doing it! That should tell you something. I give it a 6.
Where in the world do people celebrate birthdays - 50th or otherwise - like they do down at Mo's Tavern. Hackman walks in and the place goes nuts as if all the barflies were just waiting for him to walk in. And then they stop the dancing so his buddy can give him a Seahawks jacket to the wild applause of the other patrons, followed by a big smooch from Ann-Margret working her first night at the bar.
Not a believable moment in that entire scene.
The home scenes are much more believable, with Ellen Burstyn showing a quiet dignity as the shop-worn wife. And to be fair during the quiet scenes, Hackman and Ann-Margret do very well together. For my money, Hackman can do no wrong as an actor.
The story doesn't really break any new ground, unfortunately. More like a Middle-Age Crisis Movie of the Week.
Nevertheless I want to get on record that if Ellen Burstyn were my wife, there's no way I'd be wandering off with a barmaid, regardless of whether that barmaid is Ann-Margret. It made me lose sympathy for Hackman. There, I said it.
Not a believable moment in that entire scene.
The home scenes are much more believable, with Ellen Burstyn showing a quiet dignity as the shop-worn wife. And to be fair during the quiet scenes, Hackman and Ann-Margret do very well together. For my money, Hackman can do no wrong as an actor.
The story doesn't really break any new ground, unfortunately. More like a Middle-Age Crisis Movie of the Week.
Nevertheless I want to get on record that if Ellen Burstyn were my wife, there's no way I'd be wandering off with a barmaid, regardless of whether that barmaid is Ann-Margret. It made me lose sympathy for Hackman. There, I said it.
8tavm
After 30 years of only reading about this movie, I finally watched this with my mom on Netflix disc. Gene Hackman plays a middle-aged man who feels his life is just routine. When he celebrates his 50th birthday, he does so at a bar without his family members-they had done so earlier-and meets Ann-Margret-a new barmaid there. Their affair is eventually revealed by someone who knows both. His wife-Ellen Burstyn-doesn't take it well, of course, but it's one of his daughters-Amy Madigan-who really flies off the handle when she finds out. I'll stop there and just say there's no false note here, it's portrayed quite honestly mostly from beginning to end. Ally Sheedy and Brian Dennehy round out the fine cast with good help from producer-director Bud Yorkin. This was a mostly fine drama. So on that note, Mom and me highly recommend Twice in a Lifetime. P.S. This review is dedicated in memory of Yorkin. Also, this was shot in Seattle where one of my sisters currently lives with her family.
Gene Hackman plays a guy in midlife crisis: he's been married to boring Ellen Burstyn for like, forever, and he's just met hottie Ann-Margret in the local bar he frequents. What's a man to do?
This thin Colin Welland script (British screenwriter of the overrated CHARIOTS OF FIRE) is enlivened considerably by Hackman's convincing portrayal of a blue-collar Everyman who's mortgaged his life for work and family to the exclusion of any dreams for himself. The decidedly unmelodramatic arc of his life change and its consequences is relatively rare in American films and is more interesting for it. Look for newcomer Amy Madigan lighting up the screen as Hackman's PO'd but devoted daughter. A wistful Pat Metheny score and Nick McLean's cinematography of unglamorous Seattle locations -- back before it became America's trendiest city -- enhance the authentic feel. Bud Yorkin, Norman Lear's former producing partner, directs to good low-key effect. Worth a look for Hackman/Burstyn/Margret fans.
This thin Colin Welland script (British screenwriter of the overrated CHARIOTS OF FIRE) is enlivened considerably by Hackman's convincing portrayal of a blue-collar Everyman who's mortgaged his life for work and family to the exclusion of any dreams for himself. The decidedly unmelodramatic arc of his life change and its consequences is relatively rare in American films and is more interesting for it. Look for newcomer Amy Madigan lighting up the screen as Hackman's PO'd but devoted daughter. A wistful Pat Metheny score and Nick McLean's cinematography of unglamorous Seattle locations -- back before it became America's trendiest city -- enhance the authentic feel. Bud Yorkin, Norman Lear's former producing partner, directs to good low-key effect. Worth a look for Hackman/Burstyn/Margret fans.
It's as if scenarist Colin Welland realized, about halfway through writing this rather standard account of a husband and wife breaking up and then readjusting to their new lives, that he didn't have much of a story going on and went "Blimey! Better start padding things out". How else to account for the none too interesting forays into the lives of the couple's two daughters and their spouses? To mention nothing of lots of picture postcards of Seattle on rare sunny days. (Wonder how long the shooting sched had to be to dodge this gloomy burg's pervasive rain and overcast?) That the viewer sticks with it (well, this viewer) without putting a dent in the fast forward is mostly due to the plethora of fine acting by Hackman, Burstyn, Margret, Madigan, Sheedy, Lang and Dennehy. And when the acting is all first rate, even when delivered by the above pros, the director, in this case TV vet Bud Yorkin, must be given some recognition even though Yorkin's visual sense is strictly small screen, and thus totally at the service of Welland.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizThe film in 1986 was Oscar nominated for one Academy Award for Best Actress in a Supporting Role for Amy Madigan but lost out to Anjelica Huston for L'onore dei Prizzi (1985).
- BlooperWhen Gene Hackman was watching a baseball game on TV after celebrating his 50th birthday, the television screen shows the White Sox at the plate, but the audio track reports a Mariners player hitting a home run.
- Colonne sonoreTwice In A Lifetime
Written and Performed by Paul McCartney
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is Twice in a Lifetime?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paese di origine
- Lingua
- Celebre anche come
- Twice in a Lifetime
- Luoghi delle riprese
- Snohomish, Washington, Stati Uniti(street scenes of downtown Holden)
- Azienda produttrice
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Budget
- 8.000.000 USD (previsto)
- Lordo Stati Uniti e Canada
- 8.402.424 USD
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 8.402.424 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione1 ora 51 minuti
- Colore
- Mix di suoni
- Proporzioni
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti
Divario superiore
By what name was Due volte nella vita (1985) officially released in India in English?
Rispondi