AVALIAÇÃO DA IMDb
4,9/10
1 mil
SUA AVALIAÇÃO
Na América do pós-guerra, quando se presume que um soldado da União esteja morto, seus filhos são mandados embora no trem dos órfãos. No oeste selvagem todos se unem pelo bem comum. As crian... Ler tudoNa América do pós-guerra, quando se presume que um soldado da União esteja morto, seus filhos são mandados embora no trem dos órfãos. No oeste selvagem todos se unem pelo bem comum. As crianças têm que crescer rápido.Na América do pós-guerra, quando se presume que um soldado da União esteja morto, seus filhos são mandados embora no trem dos órfãos. No oeste selvagem todos se unem pelo bem comum. As crianças têm que crescer rápido.
- Direção
- Roteirista
- Artistas
- Prêmios
- 1 indicação no total
Avaliações em destaque
A bit slow & drawn out (1 h 34 min seems like 2 hrs) but not too bad, overall just OK.
Can add that the scenery & photograpy was good, lots of drones shots in filming the snowy landscape.
Wanted to give 5.5 out of 10.
Can add that the scenery & photograpy was good, lots of drones shots in filming the snowy landscape.
Wanted to give 5.5 out of 10.
It started out well, but then you just wait and wait and wait while the story dragged on and on with boring dialogs.
Then you realize much of the film did no research and is based on cliches. For example, Apaches are from desert like New Mexico, they're not found in Missouri, not even close.
These cliches and inaccuracies just takes you out of the suspension of disbelief. A black woman walking on the road and out of nowhere a bunch of confederates decides to rape her with 2 union soldiers, armed union soldiers, only a few feet away? And the whole thing is just down right cliche, Confederates are evil, Union are good. I mean, do you know how many women were raped in Atlanta by Union soldiers? How many homes burned, children killed?
It's ironic b/c the final message of the movie is violence is bad and people should learn to live in peace, despite their cultural and ethnic differences. Yet in the so called diversity utopia ending, they never reconcile the main division between the Confederate and the Union at the beginning of the film. That's just either political bias or just very cliche work that did no research.
Then there is the ludicrous scenes, such as when the black woman all of the sudden end up riding a horse with them and armed with a pistol. Forget the fact, horses are quite expensive, but she was riding the horse in a dress? And she had lessons on how to ride horses? When the Apache showed up, they had to make quick turns and rode on high, she was trained to do that? Then she just pulled out a pistol and started firing at the Apache. Was she trained to use a gun?
I get this is a low budget movie, but the filming is actually quite good. The only time I thought it was cheezey was the Indian's costumes, a bit too colorful and Walmart. Which is ironic b/c Indian's outfit should be the easiest to make in comparison to the other clothings such as the soldiers uniforms, which require much more attention to detail. But a lot of these inconsistencies and ridiculous elements can easily be avoided with a little bit of research on the internet.
Then you realize much of the film did no research and is based on cliches. For example, Apaches are from desert like New Mexico, they're not found in Missouri, not even close.
These cliches and inaccuracies just takes you out of the suspension of disbelief. A black woman walking on the road and out of nowhere a bunch of confederates decides to rape her with 2 union soldiers, armed union soldiers, only a few feet away? And the whole thing is just down right cliche, Confederates are evil, Union are good. I mean, do you know how many women were raped in Atlanta by Union soldiers? How many homes burned, children killed?
It's ironic b/c the final message of the movie is violence is bad and people should learn to live in peace, despite their cultural and ethnic differences. Yet in the so called diversity utopia ending, they never reconcile the main division between the Confederate and the Union at the beginning of the film. That's just either political bias or just very cliche work that did no research.
Then there is the ludicrous scenes, such as when the black woman all of the sudden end up riding a horse with them and armed with a pistol. Forget the fact, horses are quite expensive, but she was riding the horse in a dress? And she had lessons on how to ride horses? When the Apache showed up, they had to make quick turns and rode on high, she was trained to do that? Then she just pulled out a pistol and started firing at the Apache. Was she trained to use a gun?
I get this is a low budget movie, but the filming is actually quite good. The only time I thought it was cheezey was the Indian's costumes, a bit too colorful and Walmart. Which is ironic b/c Indian's outfit should be the easiest to make in comparison to the other clothings such as the soldiers uniforms, which require much more attention to detail. But a lot of these inconsistencies and ridiculous elements can easily be avoided with a little bit of research on the internet.
Good subject and story concept about historical events that are not covered in film much. However...none of the actors were believable or convincing. Subpar / underdeveloped acting and actors doomed this film from start to finish. Excellent cinematography made up for acting shortcomings.
I don't know what people expected when going in to this movie, but a present rating of 4.3 is nothing but insulting.
The cinematography and the music is 10/10, nothing more, nothing less. The acting was really good from some of the actors, not as good from others. What do people expect from a low budget movie like this?
I read someone saying that the movie was slow. I on the other hand felt that it passed by too fast. It could literally had been at least an hour longer because it felt to me as if they tried to add too much into the movie which made it feel as if it was a bit rushed.
With a larger budget and another hour added it could've been great.
I must admit that the action scenes wasn't really Good, but i mean it's good enough. It's the message and the cinematography that got to me in this one.
It's a well deserved 6.5 or a 7. I chose to give it a 7. It's well worth a watch if you don't expect 24/7 action.
The cinematography and the music is 10/10, nothing more, nothing less. The acting was really good from some of the actors, not as good from others. What do people expect from a low budget movie like this?
I read someone saying that the movie was slow. I on the other hand felt that it passed by too fast. It could literally had been at least an hour longer because it felt to me as if they tried to add too much into the movie which made it feel as if it was a bit rushed.
With a larger budget and another hour added it could've been great.
I must admit that the action scenes wasn't really Good, but i mean it's good enough. It's the message and the cinematography that got to me in this one.
It's a well deserved 6.5 or a 7. I chose to give it a 7. It's well worth a watch if you don't expect 24/7 action.
I found this confusing as hell. Where did the family originally live? That was never established. Where was the father a POW? Never established. He is traveling from somewhere (never established) to Missouri. I did not realize that Missouri after the Civil War was still considered hostile Indian territory. It was civilized and a heavily battled over during the Civil War itself so from where have the sudden hostile tribes originated? It was all filmed in Colorado. This is why it didn't look like Missouri. I couldn't figure out where the mountains were coming from or what an earth was happening. This movie had so much potential. It was like it picked up halfway into the story but never explained what happened in the previous part. There have been a lot of orphan train books and movies and most are far better than this. I found this to be a great disappointment.
Você sabia?
- Erros de gravaçãoThe Indians that attacked the travelers were called Apache. There were no Apache Indians any where near the Missouri area where the film was supposed to be.
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
- How long is Hostile Territory?Fornecido pela Alexa
Detalhes
- Data de lançamento
- País de origem
- Central de atendimento oficial
- Idioma
- Também conhecido como
- Hostile Territory
- Locações de filme
- Bonanza Creek Ranch, Santa Fe County, Novo México, EUA(From the filming locations in the credits of movie)
- Empresas de produção
- Consulte mais créditos da empresa na IMDbPro
- Tempo de duração1 hora 34 minutos
- Cor
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente
Principal brecha
By what name was Território Hostil (2022) officially released in India in English?
Responda