Un veterano a cui è stato assegnato il compito di supervisionare l'estraziopne di risorse minerarie dall pianeta Terra score che la sua missione nasconde qualcosa di più sinistro.Un veterano a cui è stato assegnato il compito di supervisionare l'estraziopne di risorse minerarie dall pianeta Terra score che la sua missione nasconde qualcosa di più sinistro.Un veterano a cui è stato assegnato il compito di supervisionare l'estraziopne di risorse minerarie dall pianeta Terra score che la sua missione nasconde qualcosa di più sinistro.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
- Premi
- 1 vittoria e 17 candidature totali
David Benyena
- Grow Hall Survivor
- (as David Madison)
John L. Armijo
- NASA Ground Control
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Fileena Bahris
- Survivor
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Joanne Bahris
- Tourist
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Andrew Breland
- Survivor
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Suri Cruise
- Jack's Daughter
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Z. Dieterich
- Survivor
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Paul Gunawan
- Survivor
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Julie Hardin
- Librarian
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Recensioni in evidenza
A provocative story kernel in its own right, yet it pulls fragments from too many genre greats making it a clichéd mosaic pastiche of a post apocalyptic world where everything is not as it seems.
The opening third is intriguing and well played with a strong three-way dynamic between Jack, Victoria and their mysterious video-comm handler; it piques interest and poses many questions. Jack's questioning nature and feeling that something is 'off' contrasts with the 'happy clappy', following orders vibe from Victoria.
This dynamic is enhanced with the addition of a fourth character Julia, who is already in Jack's dreams - a fabulous performance from Olga Kurylenko. From there though, the movie loses its charm and becomes completely generic.
Fabulous cinematography uses distinct color palettes to denote time and location, admirably supported by excellent effects. The soundtrack is also strong with carefully selected music.
Overall this is a good watch, but flatters to deceive. With more self-confident writing this could have become a classic.
The opening third is intriguing and well played with a strong three-way dynamic between Jack, Victoria and their mysterious video-comm handler; it piques interest and poses many questions. Jack's questioning nature and feeling that something is 'off' contrasts with the 'happy clappy', following orders vibe from Victoria.
This dynamic is enhanced with the addition of a fourth character Julia, who is already in Jack's dreams - a fabulous performance from Olga Kurylenko. From there though, the movie loses its charm and becomes completely generic.
Fabulous cinematography uses distinct color palettes to denote time and location, admirably supported by excellent effects. The soundtrack is also strong with carefully selected music.
Overall this is a good watch, but flatters to deceive. With more self-confident writing this could have become a classic.
The trivia tells us that this is based on a comic book that director joseph kosinski wrote in 2005 but was never published. The story takes place in 2077, just after the "memory wipe" that jack (cruise) describes for us. And the invasion by space travelers, which destroyed most of the cities and made living on the surface mostly impossible. Some great special effets. The control panels, the copter, even the wrecked surface of the planet. Jack is tasked with protecting the structures that support the floating living quarters for the remaining population. I LOVE the mini moto that jack rides around on... kind of like a george jetson briefcase that folds and unfolds. Google it. Some beautiful scenery of iceland, and various film locs in the united states. When another human from the past crash lands, we're not sure what her mission is, or who's side she is on. Some really good suspense, while we wait for answers. Especially when morgan freeman is involved. Really good sci-fi stuff!
I never gave this a chance when it was released. It received mediocre reviews and it just kinda fell off my radar.
I have to agree with others and say it's definitely underrated. Great plot (minus a few plot holes), amazing acting, cgi looks awesome (it's just as good as modern movies or better even though this is a decade old).
I've noticed a lot lately that if I go back to the mid 2010's or earlier I find a lot of good movies. It just shows you how far Hollywood has fallen off. Weirdly CGI seems to peak around that time and then studios just got lazy or something and cheaper out with bad graphics and bad writing.
I have to agree with others and say it's definitely underrated. Great plot (minus a few plot holes), amazing acting, cgi looks awesome (it's just as good as modern movies or better even though this is a decade old).
I've noticed a lot lately that if I go back to the mid 2010's or earlier I find a lot of good movies. It just shows you how far Hollywood has fallen off. Weirdly CGI seems to peak around that time and then studios just got lazy or something and cheaper out with bad graphics and bad writing.
Oblivion is nine years old as I write this, and in perusing the reviews written when it opened, they have aged far less well than the movie.
Those reviews are mostly concerned about whatever the hell Tom Cruise was going through at the time, or obsessed with obscure symbolism in the production design.
For whatever reason, it appears the reviewers couldn't get over themselves enough to just watch the movie and evaluate it on its merits.
On the off chance this film has escaped your attention, it is well worth two hours of your time. It is solidly acted and produced, has first class effects, and a spectacular location. The story combines some emotional heft with a clever and satisfying twist at the end.
I watched it again, but this time with my SciFi hating wife. She protested initially, watched the entire thing, and then thanked me for getting her to watch it afterwards.
That's as good as it gets.
Those reviews are mostly concerned about whatever the hell Tom Cruise was going through at the time, or obsessed with obscure symbolism in the production design.
For whatever reason, it appears the reviewers couldn't get over themselves enough to just watch the movie and evaluate it on its merits.
On the off chance this film has escaped your attention, it is well worth two hours of your time. It is solidly acted and produced, has first class effects, and a spectacular location. The story combines some emotional heft with a clever and satisfying twist at the end.
I watched it again, but this time with my SciFi hating wife. She protested initially, watched the entire thing, and then thanked me for getting her to watch it afterwards.
That's as good as it gets.
For decades it has been an accepted fact of life in Hollywood that, no matter how good the movie, endings are a write-off.
Hollywood has learned the hard way that, no matter how good the film (or the book on which it is based) it is impossible to do an ending which satisfies the writer, the director, the producers, the critics, the audience and (duh!) reviewers like this one.
That is why, for literally as long as there have been movies, endings are changed at the last minute; and often even multiple endings are shot so that survey groups can be brought in to make the final choice.
The reason I gave this brief lecture on the importance of endings is simple -- going into the last 20 minutes, this was a rock solid film with a rock solid script and rock solid performances.
But the ending was ... perfect.
And perfect endings are so rare these days that I needed to write a review for posterity that does nothing except note this for future readers and future viewers.
Are we still an effective team???????????
Hollywood has learned the hard way that, no matter how good the film (or the book on which it is based) it is impossible to do an ending which satisfies the writer, the director, the producers, the critics, the audience and (duh!) reviewers like this one.
That is why, for literally as long as there have been movies, endings are changed at the last minute; and often even multiple endings are shot so that survey groups can be brought in to make the final choice.
The reason I gave this brief lecture on the importance of endings is simple -- going into the last 20 minutes, this was a rock solid film with a rock solid script and rock solid performances.
But the ending was ... perfect.
And perfect endings are so rare these days that I needed to write a review for posterity that does nothing except note this for future readers and future viewers.
Are we still an effective team???????????
Lo sapevi?
- QuizThere were ten days of location shooting in Iceland, where daylight lasted virtually 24 hours. Joseph Kosinski wanted to make a film that was very much based in daylight, considering that a lot of classic sci-fi movies like Alien (1979) and Blade Runner (1982) were shot in near darkness.
- BlooperShortly before the end of the film, Jack listens to the contents of the black box which he found in the crashed crew module with the hibernating "Odyssey" crew members. The recorded cockpit conversation between Victoria and Jack goes on after sealing off the module with other crew members and even continues after jettison of the module. At first glance it seems the cockpit conversation could no longer be on the black box, but the system could have been transmitting the recorded conversation to the crew module with the black box.
- Citazioni
Jack Harper: If we have souls, they are made of the love we share... undimmed by time and bound by death.
- Curiosità sui creditiThe Universal logo features the Earth in its ruined state in 2077 in the film, with the logo's letters rusted.
The Tet space station is seen orbiting the world.
- Versioni alternativeThe film's IMAX release presented the film open-matte, at an aspect ratio of 1.90:1, meaning there was more picture information visible in the top and bottom of the frame than in normal theaters and on home video.
- ConnessioniFeatured in Projector: Oblivion (2013)
- Colonne sonoreRamble On
Written by Robert Plant, Jimmy Page
Performed by Led Zeppelin
Courtesy of Atlantic Recording Corp.
By arrangement with Warner Music Group Film & TV Licensing
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is Oblivion?Powered by Alexa
- What is the purpose of all those random noises that the drones make? Is it a form of communication?
- Is Oblivion based on a book?
- Why did the Tet need Earth's seawater?
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paese di origine
- Siti ufficiali
- Lingua
- Celebre anche come
- Oblivion: El tiempo del olvido
- Luoghi delle riprese
- Aziende produttrici
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Budget
- 120.000.000 USD (previsto)
- Lordo Stati Uniti e Canada
- 89.107.235 USD
- Fine settimana di apertura Stati Uniti e Canada
- 37.054.485 USD
- 21 apr 2013
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 286.168.572 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione2 ore 4 minuti
- Colore
- Mix di suoni
- Proporzioni
- 2.39 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti