VALUTAZIONE IMDb
5,5/10
2874
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
Aggiungi una trama nella tua linguaBased on the novel "One For Sorrow" by Christopher Barzak, Jamie Marks is Dead is the story of a murdered high school boy who returns as a ghost looking for the love and friendship he never ... Leggi tuttoBased on the novel "One For Sorrow" by Christopher Barzak, Jamie Marks is Dead is the story of a murdered high school boy who returns as a ghost looking for the love and friendship he never had when he was alive.Based on the novel "One For Sorrow" by Christopher Barzak, Jamie Marks is Dead is the story of a murdered high school boy who returns as a ghost looking for the love and friendship he never had when he was alive.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
- Premi
- 1 vittoria e 2 candidature totali
Recensioni in evidenza
I'll start by giving credit where it is due here: There are some really good shots, and the soundtrack also fits them pretty well. In this sense, I can see the artistic value of the film.
That being said, I felt like a lot of context was missing when it came to the story/characters. There were a lot of things that just left me asking "Wait, wtf is happening?" as a watcher who hasn't read the original novel. And maybe with that context, it would have been better, but having watched this expecting an experience with no prior research required, it fell very short. I couldn't figure out the lore of this world when it comes to ghosts, etc. If there even was any. I did appreciate those moments of stereotypical but effective hints in small details, but there seemed to be so much extra added here with absolutely no context to add any emotional depth to the story itself. It was a sort of "I want to like this but the only merits are in the aesthetics of shots and the use of music, I am not actually feeling any emotion for anyone throughout the duration of this story (apart from annoyance and confusion)."
At least it wasn't painfully long; I just kept hoping for something more than what was given. It might just be my personality, but no character was relatable. (And I'm not talking about the stereotypical Hollywood sense; I legitimately just found these portrayals unrealistic and forced, with no explanation and minimal to no context as to what the dynamics were to establish a lot of the "conflicts" that arise in the film.)
The book is probably better, because I can see where there was potential here, but the script, in my opinion, was mostly a waste of my time. At least I did get the nice music and pretty visuals, but still.
That being said, I felt like a lot of context was missing when it came to the story/characters. There were a lot of things that just left me asking "Wait, wtf is happening?" as a watcher who hasn't read the original novel. And maybe with that context, it would have been better, but having watched this expecting an experience with no prior research required, it fell very short. I couldn't figure out the lore of this world when it comes to ghosts, etc. If there even was any. I did appreciate those moments of stereotypical but effective hints in small details, but there seemed to be so much extra added here with absolutely no context to add any emotional depth to the story itself. It was a sort of "I want to like this but the only merits are in the aesthetics of shots and the use of music, I am not actually feeling any emotion for anyone throughout the duration of this story (apart from annoyance and confusion)."
At least it wasn't painfully long; I just kept hoping for something more than what was given. It might just be my personality, but no character was relatable. (And I'm not talking about the stereotypical Hollywood sense; I legitimately just found these portrayals unrealistic and forced, with no explanation and minimal to no context as to what the dynamics were to establish a lot of the "conflicts" that arise in the film.)
The book is probably better, because I can see where there was potential here, but the script, in my opinion, was mostly a waste of my time. At least I did get the nice music and pretty visuals, but still.
I LOVED this movie. It's about a couple of gay teenagers who don't get to know each other until after one of them dies. I don't understand why other online reviewers keep saying how sad it is, because to me it's marvelously positive, encouraging, romantic and satisfying. Those reviewers must think death is a big deal.
The story is fascinating and completely believable, which is extraordinary for a movie about the supernatural. The dialog is always perfect - economical and powerful. The direction, the acting by every actor in every role (especially Liv Tyler as Adam's neurotic mother and Noah Silver as Jamie - he's fantastic in a marvelously sweet, subtle and sexy performance), the cinematography, production design, sound, music, etc, could not be better. This is a fantastic movie.
The only huge flaw is the Frances character. She's unnecessary, contrived, unbelievable and very, very annoying. I almost quit watching when she became such a huge part of the story. The fact that I didn't, and that I'm giving it ten stars in spite of her, is testimony to how very, very good this movie is.
The story is fascinating and completely believable, which is extraordinary for a movie about the supernatural. The dialog is always perfect - economical and powerful. The direction, the acting by every actor in every role (especially Liv Tyler as Adam's neurotic mother and Noah Silver as Jamie - he's fantastic in a marvelously sweet, subtle and sexy performance), the cinematography, production design, sound, music, etc, could not be better. This is a fantastic movie.
The only huge flaw is the Frances character. She's unnecessary, contrived, unbelievable and very, very annoying. I almost quit watching when she became such a huge part of the story. The fact that I didn't, and that I'm giving it ten stars in spite of her, is testimony to how very, very good this movie is.
One thing that really annoyed me about this movie is the number of times the question was asked 'Why are you naked?' when the subject of discussion was obviously not naked. It's just a sad testament when we have to pretend people are naked in movies instead of just making them naked. Like the girl wearing a bra being the new definition of topless. Might as well put the dude in a bra too, it's just dumb.
Movies in the 70s were even better than that, and today we're supposed to be a more 'progressive' society when obviously we are not. We're a society of Idiocracy and cancelling. And pretending that great Presidents are somehow evil because they look out for their own country FIRST.
Overall, this was a weird movie. Annoying and interesting at times. Since I couldn't really tell if I liked it, and I know I didn't hate it, I'll give it 5/10.
Movies in the 70s were even better than that, and today we're supposed to be a more 'progressive' society when obviously we are not. We're a society of Idiocracy and cancelling. And pretending that great Presidents are somehow evil because they look out for their own country FIRST.
Overall, this was a weird movie. Annoying and interesting at times. Since I couldn't really tell if I liked it, and I know I didn't hate it, I'll give it 5/10.
The title is very clear on one thing. Which doesn't mean we don't get to see the character (rather the actor playing that character) on screen. It's a very weird movie with a strange feel to it. It's tough to describe especially because our main character is very inactive and very closed to himself. But that makes him interesting (not only for the viewer but for other characters as you'll see).
You might not agree and find this "boring", which is a possibility and wouldn't be surprising with a movie like this. But if you can stay and stick with this, there is something there that you won't find in many other movies. For better or worse this is different!
You might not agree and find this "boring", which is a possibility and wouldn't be surprising with a movie like this. But if you can stay and stick with this, there is something there that you won't find in many other movies. For better or worse this is different!
It seems like no one has really seen this film aside from a very few, and I tend to not see films until I've heard enough reactions because, especially with indies like this, they always seem to, well, not be so good. This surprised me a whole lot. I thought it was going to be a horror film, and on some level it is, but it plays out like a coming- of-age drama. It reminds me of Let the Right One in/Let Me In in its slow pace, atmosphere, and pair of leads at the core. I think it's pretty fantastically directed, and the script, while not without its flaws, does a really good job setting up these characters and really giving some meat to the story. I strongly recommend this
Lo sapevi?
- Colonne sonoreThrough These Eyes
Written by Anthony Vincent Scialla
Performed by Tony Childs
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is Jamie Marks Is Dead?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paese di origine
- Siti ufficiali
- Lingua
- Celebre anche come
- Jamie Marks está muerto
- Aziende produttrici
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Budget
- 2.200.000 USD (previsto)
- Tempo di esecuzione
- 1h 41min(101 min)
- Colore
- Proporzioni
- 2.35 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti