Recensioni degli utenti

A raging alcoholic ex-cop and a strident widow team up to get to the bottom of a murderous mystery that somehow involves the 1992 Seville Expo and its official mascot, Curro. The show isn't without its flaws but it's enjoyable thanks to its combination of darkness and quirky humor, its unconventional structure and some decent performances. The series is strangely effective - and affecting - in its portrayal of addiction. It's less successful in its attempts to say something profound about government corruption and official abuses of power, which come off as hammy and overdone. Overall it's an imperfect but engaging series.

What to watch when you want to watch something but don't know what to watch?

Not to bad, not to good.

A little exaggerated sometimes, with some shades of sci-fi.

Don't play it when your are eager for something that would keep you in front of tv.

I don't agree with people saying it's bad acting. Actors are quite good and they make a realy good work as a team.

The story is good and as I said, if some details hadn't been exaggerated sometimes and it had been made a little more realistic, it would have been a 9/10 movie or maybe more.

The fact that it's in Spanish relaxed me, because I'm a bit bored with English-language movies.

If you have nothing better to watch, grab something to nibble on, a few beers, and hit play.

1992 is a solid mini-series by Álex de la Iglesia, blending suspense and personal drama with his distinctive storytelling flair. Set in the mysterious and evocative backdrop of Seville during Expo '92, the show follows Amparo's relentless quest for answers after her husband's untimely death.

While not groundbreaking, the series keeps viewers engaged with its intriguing plot and complex characters. Fernando Valdivielso and Marian Álvarez deliver compelling performances, particularly in portraying the raw, flawed humanity of their roles. The pacing can feel uneven at times, but the unique narrative style of de la Iglesia compensates for these minor shortcomings.

Best suited for those who enjoy slow-burn mysteries with a dash of dark humor, 1992 is an enjoyable watch that highlights de la Iglesia's ability to blend the ordinary with the extraordinary.

Rating: 7/10 - A decent, stylistically rich series worth a try.

I am Spaniard so I have watched this without subtitles, what is a plus to watch this abomination lol. If you have watched several good Spanish Shows this one is not for you.

First, the script is a joke. It is a mixture of Nightmare on Elm Street with Alice in Wonderland and The Exterminator. I mean, what can go wrong?... Everything.

It starts interesting but soon sinks by itself. On the other hand, it is amazing how the more bad gets the show, the louder you laugh about any situation on it.

Second, the Fx's are mostly bad. Cheap, forgettable and obviously laughable.

Anyway, I don't want to spoil anything if you choose to watch this one. If not, you can watch for example "Antidisturbios" or "El cuerpo en llamas".

I have been using IMDB for last 8 years and first time I felt necessity to submit a review for a serial.

Beside bad acting and worst script why director showed his/her weather fetish. While it rains on actor behind him it is a sunny day. While wind blows all leaves all trees behind stand still. Unbelievable.

Wish the show at least showed us nice places in Sevilla but no chance. A gym addicted ex cop an adult widow and worse side actors.

If you have low budget you should made it in 3 episodes not 6.

I have been using IMDB for last 8 years and first time I felt necessity to submit a review for a serial.

Beside bad acting and worst script why director showed his/her weather fetish. While it rains on actor behind him it is a sunny day. While wind blows all leaves all trees behind stand still. Unbelievable.

Wish the show at least showed us nice places in Sevilla but no chance. A gym addicted ex cop an adult widow and worse side actors.

If you have low budget you should made it in 3 episodes not 6.

So bad an.d confusing. The acting is poor and the plot is unclear. There are so many random scenes that could easily had been left out. It's like they didn't had a script. The main characters walks from one wierd situation to and other. The story could easily have been told in 3 episodes instead of 6 and could even have been a decent story. Thecstiry telling is so inconsistent and unrealistic to the extreme. Sometimes it's like watching a really bad comedy and giving the story it's just bad taste. Again it's is so random but luckily one of the main characters gives the other main character an occasional recap and guess what, it's still random.

Everything Alex De la Iglesia does is as good and many times even better than an American production.

He is able to make very espectacular scenes; even without having the local USA budgets.

The actor are not beautifil or young but very natural and very belivables.

Besides; he has not the censorship from American series (outside NETFLIX) that are always looking for the POLITICAL CORRECTNESS instead on focusing on the real life.

In brief; is the best thriller series NETFLIX put this year by far; and really deserves and audience and a follow up. I saw it in ONE NIGHT and did not wanted to it end. Franky OUTSTANDING.

Some excellent productions have come out from Spain, this certainly is not one of them.

The barebones story could possibly have made for some entertaining TV, but not in the way it was actually done.

The first thing you may notice is the absolute horrible acting throughout, expecially from the protagonists "Richi" and "Amparo" but also from pretty much everybody else.

Then there are scenes, lots of scenes, so impossible idiotic and cringe it is actually insulting to the viewer.

Think of horror movies from the 80s, where people do obviously did the worst possible thing at every given time and therefore died. You look at it and just can't fathom what you see.

Why I wasted so much time on this I don't know. Maybe I was hoping for some kind of twist or revelation that would have made it worthwhile. But that never happened.

It was painful to watch, it is a mix of cheesy police thriller cliches (just never thrilling) with this deeply uninteresting lead characters, terrible characterisation of Seville, impossible plot, completely unbelievable but without any spectacularity. All the budget went into cgi fire. Seriously better miss this, by far the worst work of Alex de La Iglesia.

Maybe entertaining for really basic people, but i doubt it too since it is very slow.

The premise was fun, Sevilla's 1992 international expo still resonates in Spain's pop culture. It could have been so fun, but it ends in a lazy effort with cringeworthy overacted performances.

The 1992 serial didn't live up to expectations and felt below average overall.

The story started off okay but was stretched out across too many episodes. Instead of keeping things exciting, the plot felt slow, and the thrilling climax didn't come until the last episode. By then, it didn't have the impact it should have.

The series dragged on unnecessarily, with some episodes feeling like filler. The story moved very slowly, which made it harder to stay interested.

The acting didn't do justice to the story. The performances were not very strong, and the actors didn't make the characters feel real or exciting. This made it hard to connect with the story.

Overall, the 1992 serial was a letdown. It's a below-average series with slow pacing, weak acting, and a disappointing ending. If you're looking for a thrilling series, this one may not be the best choice.

This is a fine series and presented with great balance and originality. It is wisely kept to six episodes when so many other series are overambitiously stretched to eight. It is well acted and makes good use of the atmosphere and the remaining installations of the Seville World's Fair, something that other film makers might want to think about doing too. The balance and interaction of the characters is unusually supple, low-key and realistic, not something one would normally expect to see in, say, a U. S. film, for instance. Yet, it steers well clear of the soap-operatic, TV-style shallowness and caricature we are often shown on Spanish TV.

We know from Wikipedia that the boat-sinking and onshore fire at the beginning are real events that actually did beset the opening of the Seville 1992 Expo, but nowhere in the film are we given a clue as to whether the rest of the plot is true or not.

We should be told somewhere exactly which elements are ''documentary'' and which are not. Has the intricate plot beneath the surface got any connection with probable leads in the original real-life investigation, just a few of them, or none at all?

For that matter, what exactly DO we know about the real events? How much of this historical fiction is drawn from reality, and how much isn't?

Surely more is known of the actual events after thirty-three years, or is it still shrouded in mystery by the apparently sluggish and politically dominated Spanish police?

How much of this historical fiction is drawn from reality and how much isn't?

No need for a spoiler-alert here until the ORIGINAL mystery is finally solved some time in the future.

Is this part of the disquieting trend--apparently popularized by The Tudors--of using historical elements to ''legitimize'' a wholly invented fiction to stand in for any worthwhile attempt at history?