Aggiungi una trama nella tua linguaA high school prodigy builds an atomic bomb with stolen plutonium to win the 45th National Science Fair and expose a nuclear weapons lab posing as a nuclear medical research facility in Itha... Leggi tuttoA high school prodigy builds an atomic bomb with stolen plutonium to win the 45th National Science Fair and expose a nuclear weapons lab posing as a nuclear medical research facility in Ithaca, NY.A high school prodigy builds an atomic bomb with stolen plutonium to win the 45th National Science Fair and expose a nuclear weapons lab posing as a nuclear medical research facility in Ithaca, NY.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
- Premi
- 1 vittoria e 2 candidature totali
- Roland
- (as Abe Unger)
- Max
- (as Robert Leonard)
Recensioni in evidenza
6/10
Marshall Brickman's "The Manhattan Project" is a warm, comedy-laced doomsday story which packs plenty of entertainment for summer audiences, but falls short of its potential as a thriller.
Topical premise has 16-year-old student Paul Stevens (Christopher Collet) tumbling to the fact that the new scientist in town, Dr. Mathewson (John Lithgow) is working with plutonium in what fronts as a pharmaceutical research installation. While Mathewson is romancing Stevens' mom (Jill Eikenberry) -the husband having split years ago -the genius kid is plotting with his helpful girlfriend Jenny (Cynthia Nixon) to steal a canister of plutonium and build an atomic bomb. Their goal: to expose the danger of the secret nuclear plant placed in their community in the strongest possible terms.
Using clever one-liners and many humorous situations (particularly when Lithgow is clumsily coming on to Eikenberry early in the film), Brickman manages successfully to sugarcoat the story's serious message concerning the ongoing folly of arms buildup and reliance upon nuclear deterrence for security. What keeps the film from being a thriller is his matter-of-fact direction, extremely sluggish in many scenes early on. Only a very interesting "Rififi ''-style silent (background sound only) reel in which the hero steals the plutonium from the well-secured lab is strong enough to keep interest from wandering. Fortunately, later situations regain the story's momentum and lead to a rousing climax.
Collet is very appealing as the brilliant hero, almost convincing in situations that require him to be more resourceful than is truly possible. Lithgow adds quirky personality and charm to what might have become a standard "bad guy sees the light" assignment. As their respective sounding boards, Nixon and Eikenberry both contribute to the film's emphasis upon human values over mere hardware in a genre which has increasingly been upstaged by its special effects work.
Those special effects here are entirely realistic rather than showy, another feather in the cap of wiz Bran Ferren, who also appears in an opening reel cameo as a lab assistant. Philip Rosenberg's production design and Billy Williams' camerawork are exemplary.
Feature was financed by Thorn EMI Screen Entertainment, but print caught already had the Cannon logo at introduction, reflecting Cannon's recent buyout of what was once TESE.
But the script is so ridiculous. Despite high production values, the plot is like that of a kid's cartoon.
This film, uh, bombed badly, and I think I know why. A film with lead characters that are scientists/engineers/wunderkind is likely to appeal to that type of audience. And that's the exact audience that's not going to buy the implausibilities all over this film.
The worst to me is when he breaks into the lab. He visited the lab once and yet on a whim he is able to completely defeat the lab's security in a VERY elaborate operation.
However, it's still pretty charming. It doesn't take itself too seriously, it takes itself so EARNESTLY. It's kind of like Point Break in that respect- it takes a completely ridiculous high concept and treats it so respectfully, it comes out charming. It also manages to feel quite a lot like Wargames, as if it were set in the same universe, but without feeling at all like a ripoff. Basically, it feels like a well made sequel that manages to recapture most of the magic of the original., something very rare with actual sequels.
I was around back in the day, and I do recall this being advertised kind of as a comedy. I'm pretty sure the "does anyone have a Phillips screwdriver" gag being in a trailer. Apparently it was one of those pictures that the studio either didn't understand how to market, or decided to market it as something it wasn't.
There are some solid gags that fit in organically, like the screwdriver, uh, bit, but the, but it's certainly not remotely a comedy.
As a reviewer noted, Paul is a genius, yet is frequently stupid about things and not in consistent ways. This is annoying but I suspect that was done because if he were truly aware of these things, he would be quite evil. He's already pretty much a sociopath.
This has a bit of WarGames but the lead kid doesn't have the charm of Matthew Broderick. Of course who has the charm of Ferris Bueller. The lead is a teen brat stereotype without the funny sensibility. It spends too much time with montages and slow action. It also makes the mistake of concentrating a bit too much time on the adults. John Lithgow is such a great star that this mistake is understandable. As in many of these 80s caper movies, there is a lot of unreal unbelievability but one must accept such things. The movie struggles mostly with the pompous teen. He is a spoiled teen without any of the comedy. However it is fun to imagine a teen building a nuclear bomb, and defusing the bomb in the end is kinda exciting.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizThe kids with science projects in the background of the science fair scenes were actual NYC middle school students with real science projects that were submitted to the NYC borough-wide science fair. These scenes were filmed over a three-day period at the Penta Hotel in NYC on 33rd St.
- BlooperPlutonium must be alloyed with another metal (usually gallium) in order to prevent forming allotropes which cause it to crack while cooling. Cracks in the pit would have significant impact in the weapon, and could result in a fizzle (non-nuclear explosion.)
- Citazioni
Dr. John Matthewson: You try to tough it out with them, they'll lock you in a room somewhere and throw away the room.
I più visti
- How long is The Manhattan Project?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
Botteghino
- Budget
- 18.000.000 USD (previsto)
- Lordo Stati Uniti e Canada
- 3.900.000 USD
- Fine settimana di apertura Stati Uniti e Canada
- 1.503.545 USD
- 15 giu 1986
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 3.900.000 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione1 ora 57 minuti
- Colore
- Mix di suoni
- Proporzioni
- 1.85 : 1