Aggiungi una trama nella tua linguaA professor of chemistry wins the Nobel Prize. His wife joins him to Stockholm, but his son, working on his Ph.D., get kidnapped, and the ransom demanded is exactly the Nobel Prize sum: $2,0... Leggi tuttoA professor of chemistry wins the Nobel Prize. His wife joins him to Stockholm, but his son, working on his Ph.D., get kidnapped, and the ransom demanded is exactly the Nobel Prize sum: $2,000,000.A professor of chemistry wins the Nobel Prize. His wife joins him to Stockholm, but his son, working on his Ph.D., get kidnapped, and the ransom demanded is exactly the Nobel Prize sum: $2,000,000.
Recensioni in evidenza
As a philandering chemistry professor who as a laboriously detestable character drives the story by winning the Nobel Prize in Chemistry, Alan Rickman is the definite anchor for the ensemble cast of characters, all of whom are pawns in the script's scheme to weave the jazziest web the genre's seen in years. It could have easily achieved that goal were director Randall Miller contemplative enough to understand the effects of the audiovisual medium of film. There are not only sequences which require a much different kind of music, but there are several sequences which would be much more impacting to the tension of the unraveling story's pace without overscoring at all. Nearly every American genre film has sequences handled in the less effective way, but few of them soar into the depths of its extreme.
Rickman is the flagship but Mary Steenburgen is no less charming as his wife. A woman can be married to a man like Nobel Prize-winning chemist Eli Michaelson purely by being masochistic, deranged or in control of a deeply sophisticated feel for bitter sarcasm. But in spite of there being plenty of pleasant surprise in bit roles by Danny DeVito, Ernie Hudson and Bill Pullman as well, there isn't much room to talk about their performances, which are compartmentalized into roles that serve more as functions than characters to create a remorseless plot. Each character's occupation has much more to do with how they could come in handy to tie up loose ends than with who they are.
Nevertheless, this caper takes you for a turbulent excursion, because whether or not Randall Miller or his wife and co-writer Jody Savin have crafted a top-drawer entry into the con game genre, they remember that confidence tricks manipulate human weaknesses like selfishness, corruption and ego, as they are all things a con artist possesses himself, but also exploited are merits like honor, charity or a forthright belief in good faith on the part of the con artist.
But then we don't. Most of what we believe during the first half is mutated in the second half until the story changes completely. There is no great message here, it is just a mostly entertaining fluff of a movie.
Alan Rickman is good as the morally bankrupt professor and Nobel winner. Bill Pullman almost reprises his role from "Zero Effect" where he is a sharp eyed detective able to piece together arcane clues.
The son of a Nobel Prize-winning chemist is kidnapped for ransom. There are a lot of interesting ways to take this story. The main problem is, they take all of them. We have an opportunity to investigate what's really going on in the mind of the son, how has his father affected his life, why does the father live his life the way he does, who is really responsible for the kidnapping and why... . The ways to explore this story are endless, and instead of delving in whole-heartedly, all that came out was a jumbled mess that left me feeling frustrated with no invested knowledge in any part of the story. Another review said the problem was too many cooks. I second that, and will adapt the phrase from "too many cooks spoil the broth" to "too many writers spoil the story". Only two screenwriters were credited, but I'm willing to bet there were more with their hands in it.
The actors were all quite good, I'm sure. It's the characters that I'm more confused about. Whenever they presented a scene which echoed my experiences in the ivory tower of science, they usually followed that up with a scene that didn't make sense based on what we knew about the characters. Perhaps I was focusing too much on specifics, but I was continuously confused and frustrated by their characterization and story ideas. Too many writers, ideas, and lack of focus spoiled "Nobel Son".
Lo sapevi?
- QuizMary Steenburgen's main reason on deciding to do this film was because she was always a fan of Alan Rickman and always wanted to work with him.
- BlooperDuring Barkley and City's love scene, a patch covering her right nipple is briefly visible.
- Citazioni
Eli Michaelson: If anyone in this room ever doubted my intellectual superiority, or your get fortune to be under my incomparable tutelage, you can now formally kiss my fine white ass.
- Versioni alternativeIn the U.K. the film was cut by 10 seconds to remove a scene where somebody has their thumb cut off. An uncut 18 certificate was available to the distributor. For the 2010 DVD the cut was waived and the certificate raised to an 18.
- ConnessioniReferences Scarface - Lo sfregiato (1932)
I più visti
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paese di origine
- Siti ufficiali
- Lingua
- Celebre anche come
- Nobel Son
- Luoghi delle riprese
- Aziende produttrici
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Budget
- 4.000.000 USD (previsto)
- Lordo Stati Uniti e Canada
- 540.382 USD
- Fine settimana di apertura Stati Uniti e Canada
- 333.912 USD
- 7 dic 2008
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 550.782 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione
- 1h 50min(110 min)
- Colore
- Mix di suoni
- Proporzioni
- 2.35 : 1