AVALIAÇÃO DA IMDb
6,6/10
1,6 mil
SUA AVALIAÇÃO
Adicionar um enredo no seu idiomaThe lives and tribulations of staff of an independent newspaper in Boston who're struggling financially. Unbeknownst to them, they are about to be taken over by a big publisher; an idea they... Ler tudoThe lives and tribulations of staff of an independent newspaper in Boston who're struggling financially. Unbeknownst to them, they are about to be taken over by a big publisher; an idea they despise.The lives and tribulations of staff of an independent newspaper in Boston who're struggling financially. Unbeknownst to them, they are about to be taken over by a big publisher; an idea they despise.
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Artistas
- Prêmios
- 4 vitórias e 1 indicação no total
Avaliações em destaque
The lives and loves of a small Boston newspaper. You have the idealists, the wannabe authors, the photographers, the rock journalists, the editor, the secretary, etc etc. All working and hooking up while facing the possibility that the paper is going to be sold to a big corporation and ruin the counter culture nature of it all.
This is one of those ensemble movies that follows different people for a while then goes onto someone else. It's not nearly as good as Altman but still a nice movie about people. Sure a lot of them are jerks, but you do get a sense of who they are during the run time. Worth seeing for young Goldblum too!
This is one of those ensemble movies that follows different people for a while then goes onto someone else. It's not nearly as good as Altman but still a nice movie about people. Sure a lot of them are jerks, but you do get a sense of who they are during the run time. Worth seeing for young Goldblum too!
This note perfect film really must be seen. It is one of the best ensemble pieces ever made.
Viewed as an exercise in character, is is a strong enough . As a comment on its times, it was accurate and prescient. It was once possible to have a newspaper, music, a life that was not co-opted by corporatism.
Some of weaknesses in our culture are manifested in the sell-out, the opportunist, the survivor, the careerist. The real politician who changes political parties out of expedience, even if it means laying down with the dogs, could have stepped out of this picture. The once progressive believer who becomes a lapdog of the powerful was portrayed here.
This movie was too smart and knowing for Hollywood.
Viewed as an exercise in character, is is a strong enough . As a comment on its times, it was accurate and prescient. It was once possible to have a newspaper, music, a life that was not co-opted by corporatism.
Some of weaknesses in our culture are manifested in the sell-out, the opportunist, the survivor, the careerist. The real politician who changes political parties out of expedience, even if it means laying down with the dogs, could have stepped out of this picture. The once progressive believer who becomes a lapdog of the powerful was portrayed here.
This movie was too smart and knowing for Hollywood.
Joan Micklin Silver's ensemble masterpiece is watchable again and again! This is one of those rare films for which we can name 10 cast members. It captures the fading press counterculture of the late 60's and 70's in a memorable way. If you see it more than a few times, you will enjoy blurting out lines of dialog right before they are spoken... i.e. "some say 'whither rock 'n roll?...not at my house--I don't have the room" from Jeff Goldblum.
I'll wait a year or two, then watch it again. It's a 'cult' movie--at least with some friends I know-- along the lines of "Head Over Heels" a.k.a. "Chilly Scenes of Winter" another gem from Joan Micklin Silver.
I'll wait a year or two, then watch it again. It's a 'cult' movie--at least with some friends I know-- along the lines of "Head Over Heels" a.k.a. "Chilly Scenes of Winter" another gem from Joan Micklin Silver.
You know what happens when you bite into unripe fruit. It is not sweet or juicy; but it is a bit sour. The same is true for this film. Most of the actors in this ensemble went on to much better roles later in their careers, but not the director or writer. That is because several of these actors had talent. But at the stage most of these actors were at when this film was made, most of them were still unpolished, unripe fruit.
Goldblum is good. Heard is interesting, but Crouse was still very raw; and would not peak until House of Games. Worth viewing only to see the development of these kid actors at a very early stage. An interesting side note for this film is the story of Bruno Kirby. He had a very good role in Godfather 2, which was a good three years before this piece of fluff was made. He actually looks younger in this film. Marylou Henner went on to do Taxi in 1978, and she was much sexier and funnier by that time. Sometimes, it takes time for fruit to ripen.
Goldblum is good. Heard is interesting, but Crouse was still very raw; and would not peak until House of Games. Worth viewing only to see the development of these kid actors at a very early stage. An interesting side note for this film is the story of Bruno Kirby. He had a very good role in Godfather 2, which was a good three years before this piece of fluff was made. He actually looks younger in this film. Marylou Henner went on to do Taxi in 1978, and she was much sexier and funnier by that time. Sometimes, it takes time for fruit to ripen.
I had never heard of this movie until about two months ago when I was looking up actor John Heard. I had just watched 'Cutter's Way (1981)' and was extremely impressed by his performance having previously only recognized him as the dad in 'Home Alone.' Not only does 'Between the Lines' have John Heard delivering another excellent performance but it also has a terrific ensemble cast of some great actors before they gained popularity; notably Jeff Goldblum, Linsay Crouse, and Marilu Henner. 'Between the Lines' is set up very much the same way as Robert Altman's 'Nashville' with the plot (what little there is) taking a backseat to a picturesque look at a time period and delightful characters. In a nutshell the film is about an independent newspaper group who is about to be bought out by a large company; but more so it's about the relationships between all these people. An absolute breeze to watch because the actors are having so much fun. There are many random funny moments; including an absurd scene where an abstract artist comes into the office and starts wrecking the place referring to each action as art, but the movie also has a great deal to say. A charming time capsule for the late 70's and also for the displaying the talents of the young actors.
***1/2 out of ****
***1/2 out of ****
Você sabia?
- CuriosidadesFeature film debut of John Heard.
- Erros de gravaçãoAt the staff lunch, after Sarah's last line, her mouth can be seen to continue to move, but without voice, just before the cut.
- Citações
The Hawker: All the news behind the news... and some hippie smut.
- Cenas durante ou pós-créditosMax and Doug's conversation continues into the early end credits.
- ConexõesFeatured in For the Love of Movies: The Story of American Film Criticism (2009)
- Trilhas sonorasI Don't Want To Go Home
Written by Steven Van Zandt (as Steve Van Zandt)
Performed by Southside Johnny & The Asbury Jukes
© Blue Midnight Music
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
- How long is Between the Lines?Fornecido pela Alexa
Detalhes
- Data de lançamento
- País de origem
- Idioma
- Também conhecido como
- Zwischen den Zeilen
- Locações de filme
- Harvard Square, Cambridge, Massachusetts, EUA(David follows Max east on Brattle street heading to the record store - Harvard Square Subway Kiosk is visible)
- Empresa de produção
- Consulte mais créditos da empresa na IMDbPro
Bilheteria
- Faturamento bruto nos EUA e Canadá
- US$ 15.383
- Faturamento bruto mundial
- US$ 15.383
- Tempo de duração
- 1 h 41 min(101 min)
- Mixagem de som
- Proporção
- 1.85 : 1
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente