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 twenty-something staff of the erstwhile quite radical newspaper "Mainline" are struggling to keep their work relevant as the 1970s give way to the 1980s. I don't know if anyone remembers a television drama called the "Paper Chase" (1973) but a lot of the style and characterisations of that film are reminiscent here. Young people trying to make their own way, defiantly trying to hold on to values and commitments that may be largely on the wain. The thing with this, for me anyway, was I found them all rather shallow and selfish. The combination of their working and social lives are presented in a fashion that is very, very, verbose. Why use one word when you can use eight? As the story drifts along, I felt less and less interested in the characters and their semi-comic antics and started to notice silly continuity errors - that wouldn't ordinarily matter - and to focus more on the tangential aspects of the film - the big collars, bell-bottom jeans - all the things I used to remember from "Starsky and Hutch". Maybe the fact that I'm not an American means that this Bostonian story of intellectual maturity and liberating camaraderie doesn't resonate in the same way - because I found this all rather dull. Will their newspaper be subsumed into a bigger, commercial, enterprise? Well at the start I hoped not, but by the middle I was indifferent.
This is a movie very much of it's time. The hippie underground newspaper is in financial trouble and might be bought by a big time publisher. The in-fighting, bickering, jealousies and bed hopping by the young, idealistic staff make up the main, simple plot of the film but the cast and the sharp script make it a pleasure to watch. The film is CHOCK FULL of some of the best, young American actors doing some of their earliest film work: Jeff Goldblum is hystercial as the constantly stoned music critic who is always dead broke, Bruno Kirby (pre-Godfather II, When Harry Met Sally) is almost unrecognizable, pre- L.A. Law Jill Eikenberry, Lindsay Crouse, Joe Morton (Terminator II, Lone Star, City of Hope), a very young pre-TAXI Marilu Henner as a stripper and TV's 7th Heaven, Stephen Collins who plays a real jerk in the film. In fact, there is a scene on a park bench between John Heard and Stephen Collins as two rival writers that is one of the best things I have ever seen about petty jealousy between scribes. Terrific fun.
Standard ensemble dramedy about 60's "youth quake" hippies running a radical paper, trying to maintain their anti-establishment values in the face of encroaching corporate greed, with all the joys and conflicts inherent in the enterprise. Good performance from lotsa youngish stars that continued to deliver for years, Jeff Goldblum even today.
Standard.
Standard.
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.
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.
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