VALUTAZIONE IMDb
6,6/10
11.607
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
Carol ti danno la caccia perché sei testimone di un omicidio. Se vuoi continuare a vivere devi essere protetta e sarà la legge a farlo affidandoti ad un uomo che cerca quegli assassini da an... Leggi tuttoCarol ti danno la caccia perché sei testimone di un omicidio. Se vuoi continuare a vivere devi essere protetta e sarà la legge a farlo affidandoti ad un uomo che cerca quegli assassini da anni e adesso li combatterà con te!Carol ti danno la caccia perché sei testimone di un omicidio. Se vuoi continuare a vivere devi essere protetta e sarà la legge a farlo affidandoti ad un uomo che cerca quegli assassini da anni e adesso li combatterà con te!
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
- Premi
- 1 candidatura in totale
James Sikking
- Nelson
- (as James B. Sikking)
M. Emmet Walsh
- Sgt. Dominick Benti
- (as M. Emmett Walsh)
Barbara Russell
- Nicholas' Mother
- (as Barbara E. Russell)
Recensioni in evidenza
Terrific action thriller with great actors. Unfortunately, they don't have much to say because the action takes over. There isn't much time to develop a character when you're being chased up and down a mountain. Still, this is a great example of the genre. I can't help but think that it would have been a lot more successful financially with younger, hipper stars. I also think that would have ruined it.
The direction is very matter-of-fact. Some movies like this reel you in with a definite "atmosphere", stylized to death. I'm tempted to say this movie has no style at all, but that would be a disservice to Hackman and Archer, who give it all the style it needs.
The direction is very matter-of-fact. Some movies like this reel you in with a definite "atmosphere", stylized to death. I'm tempted to say this movie has no style at all, but that would be a disservice to Hackman and Archer, who give it all the style it needs.
In Los Angeles, the editor of a publishing house Carol Hunnicut (Anne Archer) goes to a blind date with the lawyer Michael Tarlow (J.T. Walsh), who has embezzled the powerful mobster Leo Watts (Harris Yulin). Carol accidentally witnesses the murder of Michel by Leo's hit-man. The scared Carol sneaks out of Michael's room and hides in an isolated cabin in Canada.
Meanwhile the Deputy District Attorney Robert Caulfield (Gene Hackman) and Sgt. Dominick Benti (M. Emmett Walsh) discover that Carol is a witness of the murder and they report the information to Caulfield's chief Martin Larner (J.A. Preston) and they head by helicopter to Canada to convince Carol to testify against Leo. However they are followed and the pilot and Benti are murdered by the Mafia. Caulfield and Carol flees and they take a train to Vancouver.
Caulfield hides Carol in his cabin and he discloses that there are three hit-man in the train trying to find Carol and kill her. But they do not know her and Caulfield does not know who might be the third killer from the Mafia and who has betrayed him in his office.
"Narrow Margin" is a great remake of the 1952 "The Narrow Margin" by Richard Fleischer. When I saw this remake in the early 90's for the first time, I did not know the original movie. The story is well written and this remake is breathtaking with the action scenes on the roof of the train. Further, the lead actor is the Gene Hackman, one of the best actors of the American cinema. My vote is seven.
Title (Brazil): "De Frente para o Perigo" ("In Front of the Peril")
Meanwhile the Deputy District Attorney Robert Caulfield (Gene Hackman) and Sgt. Dominick Benti (M. Emmett Walsh) discover that Carol is a witness of the murder and they report the information to Caulfield's chief Martin Larner (J.A. Preston) and they head by helicopter to Canada to convince Carol to testify against Leo. However they are followed and the pilot and Benti are murdered by the Mafia. Caulfield and Carol flees and they take a train to Vancouver.
Caulfield hides Carol in his cabin and he discloses that there are three hit-man in the train trying to find Carol and kill her. But they do not know her and Caulfield does not know who might be the third killer from the Mafia and who has betrayed him in his office.
"Narrow Margin" is a great remake of the 1952 "The Narrow Margin" by Richard Fleischer. When I saw this remake in the early 90's for the first time, I did not know the original movie. The story is well written and this remake is breathtaking with the action scenes on the roof of the train. Further, the lead actor is the Gene Hackman, one of the best actors of the American cinema. My vote is seven.
Title (Brazil): "De Frente para o Perigo" ("In Front of the Peril")
Narrow Margin (1990) is a remake of a fondly remembered B-movie that became a real sleeper hit. It does not match the original for suspense or excitement, but it does boast a truly towering performance by Gene Hackman who takes the Charles MacGraw role and gives it everything he's got.
The story is about a DA from L.A, who travels to a mountain cabin in Canada to pick up a female murder witness. Some baddies follow him (because they want to kill the witness), but he manages to escape with her as far as the local railway station. They board an overnight train, bound for Vancouver, and spend the next day or so evading the killers on the train.
Hackman is quite brilliant, whether delivering panicky dialogue in a whisper or indulging in some violent action atop the speeding express. James B. Sikking makes a chilling assassin. Anne Archer is convincing as the vulnerable and terrified witness who would rather be anywhere other than where she is. Director Peter Hyams packs in some solid action sequences, such as a nerve-jangling car chase through a forest, and a savage fight on the roof of the train.
Where this film falls short is in the suspense department and the pacing. There are moments where Hackman and Archer are allowed to relax too much. One scene in particular involves Hackman and Sikking having a lengthy conversation at a dinner table; when Hackman leaves, you'd expect them to follow him to her, but they don't. There's another bit where the action jumps from about 1 a.m. to the next morning, without any indication of what kind of events have taken place during the night. There's also a lot of long shots of the lovely scenery, but to get the claustrophobic atmosphere the maker's needed to emphasise the inside of the train, not the outside landscapes. It's a pretty good film, but there are just a few things about it which drag it down a peg or two.
The story is about a DA from L.A, who travels to a mountain cabin in Canada to pick up a female murder witness. Some baddies follow him (because they want to kill the witness), but he manages to escape with her as far as the local railway station. They board an overnight train, bound for Vancouver, and spend the next day or so evading the killers on the train.
Hackman is quite brilliant, whether delivering panicky dialogue in a whisper or indulging in some violent action atop the speeding express. James B. Sikking makes a chilling assassin. Anne Archer is convincing as the vulnerable and terrified witness who would rather be anywhere other than where she is. Director Peter Hyams packs in some solid action sequences, such as a nerve-jangling car chase through a forest, and a savage fight on the roof of the train.
Where this film falls short is in the suspense department and the pacing. There are moments where Hackman and Archer are allowed to relax too much. One scene in particular involves Hackman and Sikking having a lengthy conversation at a dinner table; when Hackman leaves, you'd expect them to follow him to her, but they don't. There's another bit where the action jumps from about 1 a.m. to the next morning, without any indication of what kind of events have taken place during the night. There's also a lot of long shots of the lovely scenery, but to get the claustrophobic atmosphere the maker's needed to emphasise the inside of the train, not the outside landscapes. It's a pretty good film, but there are just a few things about it which drag it down a peg or two.
It's odd to like an original film and then like the re-make equally so, if not more, but that's the case with this film. I have viewed both versions of this film at least three times apiece and thoroughly enjoy both.
Almost 55 years ago, this was a film noir called "The Narrow Margin" and in 1990, this re-make took off the "The" on the title. However, as is sometimes the case with remakes, some of the twists and turns of this thriller were also changed from the first film.
They didn't spoil it. I have no objection to the changes made here because the bottom line is entertainment, and that's where this movie excels. Plausible? No, but neither was the original, for that matter, and neither are a lot of suspense/ crime films.
What makes this re-run good, in addition to the great suspense, are several other things: 1 - Gene Hackman, one of the best actors of his generation and often overlooked in discussions of great actors; 2 - nice photography featuring some great train shots and the scenic Canadian Rockies; 3 - an interesting assortment of characters, some of which keep you guessing whether they are the good guys or the bad guys; 4 - a dash of humor thrown in here and there to break the tension.
In addition to Hackman, we see the sexy Anne Archer, who gives a nice film noir feel to the movie and we get some good supporting performances including two from guys with the same last name: J.T. and Emmet Walsh and one from a guy who plays one of the hit men: James Sikking. That's a name I'm not familiar with, but he has a scene talking to Hackman that is riveting.
The main fault of the movie at least to me, was the "Rambo" mentality in which I mean the villains have the good guy in point-blank, can't-miss range several times and....you guessed it: they miss. The action scenes in here are great but lack credibility, or this would be almost as good as it could ever get for a "thriller." I'm still tempted to rate it a "10" for the entertainment value alone.
Almost 55 years ago, this was a film noir called "The Narrow Margin" and in 1990, this re-make took off the "The" on the title. However, as is sometimes the case with remakes, some of the twists and turns of this thriller were also changed from the first film.
They didn't spoil it. I have no objection to the changes made here because the bottom line is entertainment, and that's where this movie excels. Plausible? No, but neither was the original, for that matter, and neither are a lot of suspense/ crime films.
What makes this re-run good, in addition to the great suspense, are several other things: 1 - Gene Hackman, one of the best actors of his generation and often overlooked in discussions of great actors; 2 - nice photography featuring some great train shots and the scenic Canadian Rockies; 3 - an interesting assortment of characters, some of which keep you guessing whether they are the good guys or the bad guys; 4 - a dash of humor thrown in here and there to break the tension.
In addition to Hackman, we see the sexy Anne Archer, who gives a nice film noir feel to the movie and we get some good supporting performances including two from guys with the same last name: J.T. and Emmet Walsh and one from a guy who plays one of the hit men: James Sikking. That's a name I'm not familiar with, but he has a scene talking to Hackman that is riveting.
The main fault of the movie at least to me, was the "Rambo" mentality in which I mean the villains have the good guy in point-blank, can't-miss range several times and....you guessed it: they miss. The action scenes in here are great but lack credibility, or this would be almost as good as it could ever get for a "thriller." I'm still tempted to rate it a "10" for the entertainment value alone.
This film pops up frequently on the tube, and with good reason -- it's lean, smart, and superbly acted. Director Hyams makes the most of the claustrophobic train interior contrasting with the wide open Canadian wilderness. Gene Hackman has never been better. Tension is built through a series of one-on-one confrontations, each with electric undercurrents. The best by far is the gentlemanly chat between Hackman and James Sikking in the dining car. The standard "action-packed" ending is a bit disappointing. But don't let this stop you if you're into suspense films for the thinking person.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizThe cabin featured in the first act was specifically built for the movie. Peter Hyams decided to build it on top of a mountain in that particular spot while it was still covered in winter snow. After the snow melted, it turned out that the spot was a dump and it took a short while to clear it out.
- BlooperThe helicopter bringing Caulfield and Benti to the cabin has different rear windows in different shots. From the interior, it has ordinary flat windows with sliding ventilation panels -- the rectangular panel frames and tracks are visible. From the exterior, it has unventilated one-piece bubble windows which allow sightseers unobstructed views and photography.
- ConnessioniEdited into No Tomorrow (1999)
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is Narrow Margin?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paese di origine
- Lingua
- Celebre anche come
- Narrow Margin
- Luoghi delle riprese
- British Columbia, Canada(Exterior train shots)
- Azienda produttrice
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Budget
- 21.000.000 USD (previsto)
- Lordo Stati Uniti e Canada
- 10.873.237 USD
- Fine settimana di apertura Stati Uniti e Canada
- 3.628.060 USD
- 23 set 1990
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 10.873.237 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione
- 1h 37min(97 min)
- Colore
- Proporzioni
- 2.39 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti