VALUTAZIONE IMDb
6,4/10
71.897
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
Per generazioni, la gente della città di Ember ha prosperato in un fantastico mondo di luci scintillanti. Ma il potente generatore di Ember si sta esaurendo la sua carica e le grandi lampade... Leggi tuttoPer generazioni, la gente della città di Ember ha prosperato in un fantastico mondo di luci scintillanti. Ma il potente generatore di Ember si sta esaurendo la sua carica e le grandi lampade che illuminano la città iniziano a tremolare.Per generazioni, la gente della città di Ember ha prosperato in un fantastico mondo di luci scintillanti. Ma il potente generatore di Ember si sta esaurendo la sua carica e le grandi lampade che illuminano la città iniziano a tremolare.
- Premi
- 6 candidature totali
Matt Ayleigh
- Joss
- (as Matt Jessup)
Recensioni in evidenza
Overall, this was an "okay" film; not bad, but nothing that memorable. I enjoyed the sets of the subterranean city and the teen kids were likable, but it took a little long before anything happened and when it did it was a little too far-fetched with poor special-effects. Nonetheless, the visuals and acting were fine and supporting performances by the always-goofy Bill Murray and Tim Robbins were somewhat entertaining.
The most intriguing actor, to me, was Saoirse Ronan, as "Lina Mayfleet." At first she minded me a bit of Peggy Ann Garner in "A Tree Grows In Brooklyn," but maybe two years older. Ronan has a plain but expressive and intelligent face, a la a very young Cate Blanchett. She looks like she's on her way to a good career.
Her counterpart, the male teen "Doon Harrow," was played nicely by Harry Treadaway.
Although it's a nice, safe family film, I think a lot of kids will be bored by the time anything happens, and adults will be so-so on it. I stuck around for the visuals, mainly, but was disappointed in how amateurish the action scenes in the last 20 minutes looked.
The most intriguing actor, to me, was Saoirse Ronan, as "Lina Mayfleet." At first she minded me a bit of Peggy Ann Garner in "A Tree Grows In Brooklyn," but maybe two years older. Ronan has a plain but expressive and intelligent face, a la a very young Cate Blanchett. She looks like she's on her way to a good career.
Her counterpart, the male teen "Doon Harrow," was played nicely by Harry Treadaway.
Although it's a nice, safe family film, I think a lot of kids will be bored by the time anything happens, and adults will be so-so on it. I stuck around for the visuals, mainly, but was disappointed in how amateurish the action scenes in the last 20 minutes looked.
If the only thing City of Ember does is show that Belfast can play host to high concept movies, then it was worthwhile, but no doubt, it was aiming for more than that. Perhaps to stand next to such fare as Harry Potter, or a Pixar flick.
Unfortunately, it falls short, but only just. This is without doubt, an exciting romp about two coming-of-age children who break out of the mold forced on them by the dying Ember, and in doing so, change everything. The acting is solid, the set design and music excellent. The concept, the builders of Ember leaving behind secret instructions to get back to the world, is genuinely engaging.
Unfortunately, they don't get to these instructions fast enough, and a lot of time is spent wandering around the, albeit, beautiful city. Often times there is a lack of a perceived threat. Despite being replete with a nefarious mayor and a mutated mole (like the massive moths, never explained), the story uses neither of these things enough, leaving some scenes to be propelled solely by the heroes following the by-the-numbers instructions left to them. Worst of all, the ending feels like a poor man's Goonies.
In the director's corner, he is guilty of some slow scenes, but what is almost unforgivable is the flat looks of the actors during intense CGI action. Somebody wasn't thinking ahead.
Nonetheless, a charming film that I hope made enough money to spawn treatment of the books sequels.
Unfortunately, it falls short, but only just. This is without doubt, an exciting romp about two coming-of-age children who break out of the mold forced on them by the dying Ember, and in doing so, change everything. The acting is solid, the set design and music excellent. The concept, the builders of Ember leaving behind secret instructions to get back to the world, is genuinely engaging.
Unfortunately, they don't get to these instructions fast enough, and a lot of time is spent wandering around the, albeit, beautiful city. Often times there is a lack of a perceived threat. Despite being replete with a nefarious mayor and a mutated mole (like the massive moths, never explained), the story uses neither of these things enough, leaving some scenes to be propelled solely by the heroes following the by-the-numbers instructions left to them. Worst of all, the ending feels like a poor man's Goonies.
In the director's corner, he is guilty of some slow scenes, but what is almost unforgivable is the flat looks of the actors during intense CGI action. Somebody wasn't thinking ahead.
Nonetheless, a charming film that I hope made enough money to spawn treatment of the books sequels.
I've read quite a few negative reviews but i think some of the people who have read the book need to realise this was a children's film that would no doubt have to be simplified and draw people in from the start. It hasn't had an easy launch either because it's been competing with High School Musical 3, when i went to see it the cinema was empty apart from me because everyone else had gone to see a certain other film.
It wasn't great and i am certain that if i had read the book i would have hated it because the characters were not brilliantly written and it was a messy mix of excellent fantasy sci-fi with the appropriate special effects and corny American generic children's movie. But it was good fun.
The girl in it displayed a superb acting performance the general set and costumes and well mise-en-scene in general was excellent and well worth watching just for that.
It was good to watch in the cinema and throughly enjoyable if a bit predictable. As i say, generally i liked it.
It wasn't great and i am certain that if i had read the book i would have hated it because the characters were not brilliantly written and it was a messy mix of excellent fantasy sci-fi with the appropriate special effects and corny American generic children's movie. But it was good fun.
The girl in it displayed a superb acting performance the general set and costumes and well mise-en-scene in general was excellent and well worth watching just for that.
It was good to watch in the cinema and throughly enjoyable if a bit predictable. As i say, generally i liked it.
Let me point out right away that this is a very good movie. Interesting topic, good acting, visually very well done, very realistic ambience, good sound and an interesting story. The film is not the best, but it is definitely for recommend. Considering the lack of good movies nowadays (most of them are polluted by the woke and diversity trend), so this movie is good to recommend and even to watch a second time. This is certainly one of those movies that you watch and stay in your memory, in fact I'm a little surprised with such a low rating for this movie, in my opinion this is a strong seven, almost eight star movie!
Having just taken 129 eighth-graders who read the book to see the premiere, everyone left the theater disappointed with what director Kil Kenan and screenwriter Caroline Thompson have given us with this translation from the page to the screen. Thompson, an accomplished screenwriter, deserves more of the blame in their (and my) opinion.
Books rarely translate better to film and this one suffers for many reasons. Jeanne DuPrau's book is an amazing trove of metaphors (candles, the library, the seed, the Pipeworks, and the city itself). When works of literature work on multiple levels, the filmmakers should at least offer us more than one. In fact, this book could be a metaphor for metaphors -- there are things below the surface that exist whether we acknowledge them or not; it is our job to find the tools to excavate the "deeper" level of what exists for others only on the surface.
Having sacrificed the novel's intellectual depth, the film version does a great disservice to the dedicated reader: we are given special effects that defy logic and re-focus the story unnaturally and unnecessarily; there are included scenes of hyped-up action they are neither satisfying nor helpful with advancing the plot; we lose some of the intricate details of character development; there's an unnecessary inclusion of giant scary creatures that offer distracting (and bizarre) thrills; and the mystery of what Ember is is destroyed in the first minute of narration.
The design of the film is great, but as in design, the beauty is found in the details. I believe that the greatest details of the book are missing, hidden away like the people of Ember. Let them come into the light!
Books rarely translate better to film and this one suffers for many reasons. Jeanne DuPrau's book is an amazing trove of metaphors (candles, the library, the seed, the Pipeworks, and the city itself). When works of literature work on multiple levels, the filmmakers should at least offer us more than one. In fact, this book could be a metaphor for metaphors -- there are things below the surface that exist whether we acknowledge them or not; it is our job to find the tools to excavate the "deeper" level of what exists for others only on the surface.
Having sacrificed the novel's intellectual depth, the film version does a great disservice to the dedicated reader: we are given special effects that defy logic and re-focus the story unnaturally and unnecessarily; there are included scenes of hyped-up action they are neither satisfying nor helpful with advancing the plot; we lose some of the intricate details of character development; there's an unnecessary inclusion of giant scary creatures that offer distracting (and bizarre) thrills; and the mystery of what Ember is is destroyed in the first minute of narration.
The design of the film is great, but as in design, the beauty is found in the details. I believe that the greatest details of the book are missing, hidden away like the people of Ember. Let them come into the light!
Lo sapevi?
- QuizThere were so many sets built for this movie that some of them wound up never being used. They do sometimes feature prominently in the background, like the hairdressers, but they play no part in the story.
- BlooperThe scene where Doon is watching the boat follow its track, the boat automatically launches into the water. Yet when the three get into the boat, the boat does not launch until Doon pulls a lever.
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paese di origine
- Sito ufficiale
- Lingua
- Celebre anche come
- Ember: La ciudad perdida
- Luoghi delle riprese
- Aziende produttrici
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Budget
- 55.000.000 USD (previsto)
- Lordo Stati Uniti e Canada
- 7.873.007 USD
- Fine settimana di apertura Stati Uniti e Canada
- 3.129.473 USD
- 12 ott 2008
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 17.929.684 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione
- 1h 30min(90 min)
- Colore
- Mix di suoni
- Proporzioni
- 2.35 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti