VALUTAZIONE IMDb
4,5/10
1651
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
Aggiungi una trama nella tua linguaTwo scientists working for UK and USA invent cold fusion. They decide to auction it off to foreign nations. Two look-alike crooks decide to steal their deposits but end working for CIA and M... Leggi tuttoTwo scientists working for UK and USA invent cold fusion. They decide to auction it off to foreign nations. Two look-alike crooks decide to steal their deposits but end working for CIA and MI5.Two scientists working for UK and USA invent cold fusion. They decide to auction it off to foreign nations. Two look-alike crooks decide to steal their deposits but end working for CIA and MI5.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
Deborah Moore
- Flo Fleming
- (as Deborah Barrymore)
Recensioni in evidenza
One evening,while channel surfing, my friend and I came upon this film on TV. In its own way, it was more astonishing than anything by Kurosawa, David Fincher or Takeshi Kitano. We simply couldn't believe what we were watching. We sat there as dumbstruck and as open mouthed as if we were watching Elvis doing his shopping in the local Sainsburys store. How could any film be such a complete failure? Even awful films usually have some saving grace, some ray of light, that stops your viewing being a completely worthless experience - one good performance or one funny line or even just some good scenery. 'Bullseye!', however, exists entirely in a vacuum; in a cinematic black hole. The script: No good. The acting: No good. The direction: No good. The editing: No good. Even the music: No good. Yet, later, I realised that the ray of light that I'd been looking for was actually in the fact that the film was such a total, glorious misfire and, if one watches it from that perspective, it's a wonderful film. The next time it came on TV I made sure to tape it and every so often I watch it again, in awe at its uselessness. It's nothing against Michael Winner personally. I'm sure he's a lovely bloke but, as a film maker, he makes a magnificent restaurant critic.
Pairing Roger Moore and Michael Caine must have thought to be a great Idea. Probably inspired by The Man Who Would be King, where Caine was paired with another ex-Bond, Sean Connery. Bullseye didn't have benefit of larger scale epic-like canvass of TMWWBK, as it didn't want itself to be taken seriously. Did Bullseye work?
Yes and No (God, we all hate this kind of answer). No, because most of the time, the jokes fall flat on the face. Yes, because Caine and Moore (as usual) are always great to watch. They play a pair of conmen and a pair of treacherous scientists. Keep an eye on Moore, always known as a great ad-libber. Unfortunately only this two guys are the only reasons to watch the movie.
Bullseye takes the premise of impersonating (this time two of them) and adds twist and turn, moving from a caper flick to espionage. While it tries hard to be a comedy, most of the time you see some humourless farce in an inconsistent progress. I quickly lost interest in the story during the first half an hour and just sat through the rest watching the dynamic duo of England. Being a Bond fan, I was especially delighted to see Moore playing off his Bond persona, even throwing lines like, `For England'. Ring a bell, Bond-fans?
There is Sally Kirkland, who provides some personal agenda to the ageing conmen, while also providing a bit of flesh here and there. She looks positively old and attractive at the same time. But her character does nothing much but to be in between Moore and Caine, and helping them with their con. That's all.
I checked out Michael Winner's (the director) past record, and was surprised to note that he directed the more seroius films like the Death Wish films and The Big Sleep (a supposedly sequel of Farewell, My Lovely). While the former was successful in its own way, the latter killed nostalgic-noir delight began by Farewell, My lovely. He later went on to direct many bombs, and regarded generally as a horrible director. Wonder how he managed to find job for so long. It is so evident in this film. Whether it's him, the script or his crew, the movie failed to amuse many at that time; it will still fail to amuse many now. Bullseye is something the film couldn't achieve.
Yes and No (God, we all hate this kind of answer). No, because most of the time, the jokes fall flat on the face. Yes, because Caine and Moore (as usual) are always great to watch. They play a pair of conmen and a pair of treacherous scientists. Keep an eye on Moore, always known as a great ad-libber. Unfortunately only this two guys are the only reasons to watch the movie.
Bullseye takes the premise of impersonating (this time two of them) and adds twist and turn, moving from a caper flick to espionage. While it tries hard to be a comedy, most of the time you see some humourless farce in an inconsistent progress. I quickly lost interest in the story during the first half an hour and just sat through the rest watching the dynamic duo of England. Being a Bond fan, I was especially delighted to see Moore playing off his Bond persona, even throwing lines like, `For England'. Ring a bell, Bond-fans?
There is Sally Kirkland, who provides some personal agenda to the ageing conmen, while also providing a bit of flesh here and there. She looks positively old and attractive at the same time. But her character does nothing much but to be in between Moore and Caine, and helping them with their con. That's all.
I checked out Michael Winner's (the director) past record, and was surprised to note that he directed the more seroius films like the Death Wish films and The Big Sleep (a supposedly sequel of Farewell, My Lovely). While the former was successful in its own way, the latter killed nostalgic-noir delight began by Farewell, My lovely. He later went on to direct many bombs, and regarded generally as a horrible director. Wonder how he managed to find job for so long. It is so evident in this film. Whether it's him, the script or his crew, the movie failed to amuse many at that time; it will still fail to amuse many now. Bullseye is something the film couldn't achieve.
Apparently Michael Caine and Roger Moore are good friends but never worked together so they teamed up in this 1990 film. Unfortunately they ended up with Michael Winner as the director.
Winner who might had once been a decent director was on a downward spiral. He ultimately ended up being better known as a food critic and fronting car insurance adverts.
Here the duo play dodgy nuclear physicists that have invented a form of nuclear fusion but plan to sell their formula to the highest bidder and make themselves rich and double cross their backers.
However at the same time there are a couple of con men who look exactly the same as these nuclear scientists. They get hired to retrieve the formula by CIA and MI5 not before they and a former partner played by Sally Kirkland try to steal some diamonds.
Somewhere along the line Moore's real life daughter pops up now and again. Moore disguises himself as a piano tuner as well as other disguises and there are some poor jokes and some funny ones.
It is all a bit of a mish mash as if the actors were enjoying themselves too much but forgot about the audience.
The critics slated this upon release, it failed at the box office. It is amusing enough and I liked some of the humour but then again I might be easily pleased.
Winner who might had once been a decent director was on a downward spiral. He ultimately ended up being better known as a food critic and fronting car insurance adverts.
Here the duo play dodgy nuclear physicists that have invented a form of nuclear fusion but plan to sell their formula to the highest bidder and make themselves rich and double cross their backers.
However at the same time there are a couple of con men who look exactly the same as these nuclear scientists. They get hired to retrieve the formula by CIA and MI5 not before they and a former partner played by Sally Kirkland try to steal some diamonds.
Somewhere along the line Moore's real life daughter pops up now and again. Moore disguises himself as a piano tuner as well as other disguises and there are some poor jokes and some funny ones.
It is all a bit of a mish mash as if the actors were enjoying themselves too much but forgot about the audience.
The critics slated this upon release, it failed at the box office. It is amusing enough and I liked some of the humour but then again I might be easily pleased.
Oh dear. I'm a big fan of Mr Caine and Mr Moore, and to be honest those two in the lead roles are the only reason to watch the film. Anyone lesser would have made it an utter waste of time.
The film is hackneyed with an incomprehensible plot. Films based on 'doubles' are always dodgy, so much so that even in the 30s it was considered bad plotting to use them in detective stories. At some points in the film I just didn't know who was meant to be whom, and by the time of the second 'double cross' I just lost interest.
While Caine and Moore were at times hilarious ('I come from a broken home...')a lot of the jokes and effects made me cringe. The scene where the train porter gets his head blown off had me rewinding to see if my eyes had not deceived me. That has to be the worst special effect for many years!
I also found the very obvious pitching of the film to the American audience patronising in the extreme. Tourist shots of London, Highland Games, stately homes, stuffy clubs, 'punk' taxi drivers and an unconvincing portrayal of the Queen - all this type of thing was being done far better and with greater irony by the Comic Strip team years before.
So don't expect a great plot or gags but if you like Caine and Moore, it's worth watching - just.
The film is hackneyed with an incomprehensible plot. Films based on 'doubles' are always dodgy, so much so that even in the 30s it was considered bad plotting to use them in detective stories. At some points in the film I just didn't know who was meant to be whom, and by the time of the second 'double cross' I just lost interest.
While Caine and Moore were at times hilarious ('I come from a broken home...')a lot of the jokes and effects made me cringe. The scene where the train porter gets his head blown off had me rewinding to see if my eyes had not deceived me. That has to be the worst special effect for many years!
I also found the very obvious pitching of the film to the American audience patronising in the extreme. Tourist shots of London, Highland Games, stately homes, stuffy clubs, 'punk' taxi drivers and an unconvincing portrayal of the Queen - all this type of thing was being done far better and with greater irony by the Comic Strip team years before.
So don't expect a great plot or gags but if you like Caine and Moore, it's worth watching - just.
Yes its as funny as a burning burns unit but on the other hand it isn't 'Large'
Bullseye is the kind of film that lovers of the truly terrible will relish.
Its got bad everything, accents, acting, directing, script. Its like the Superman 4 of comedy.
I remember it being released at the cinema, how did that happen? Its probably made by Cannon so they could at least get it into their own flea pits (god bless em)
I'd love the DVD. If you like this film may I recommend Sextette.
Bullseye is the kind of film that lovers of the truly terrible will relish.
Its got bad everything, accents, acting, directing, script. Its like the Superman 4 of comedy.
I remember it being released at the cinema, how did that happen? Its probably made by Cannon so they could at least get it into their own flea pits (god bless em)
I'd love the DVD. If you like this film may I recommend Sextette.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizThe final scenes had the smallest ever crew on a major movie. Writer and director Michael Winner operated the camera, cameraman David Wynn-Jones held the reflector. John Cleese moonlighted as sound man, but as he was performing at the same time (the sound recorder was concealed in a book he carried), he did not count as crew.
- BlooperWhen the train worker is shot you can clearly see that it was a dummy.
- Curiosità sui creditiAppearing without the permission of his mother: John Cleese as the man on the beach in Barbados who looks like John Cleese.
- ConnessioniFeatured in Premio Donostia a Michael Caine (2000)
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is Bullseye!?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paesi di origine
- Lingua
- Celebre anche come
- Bullseye - Der wahnwitzige Diamanten Coup
- Luoghi delle riprese
- Azienda produttrice
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Budget
- 15.000.000 USD (previsto)
- Tempo di esecuzione
- 1h 35min(95 min)
- Colore
- Proporzioni
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti