AVALIAÇÃO DA IMDb
7,0/10
1,7 mil
SUA AVALIAÇÃO
Adicionar um enredo no seu idiomaMossad agents kidnap an American Jewish man, accuse him of being a fugitive Nazi war criminal and take him to Jerusalem to face trial for genocide.Mossad agents kidnap an American Jewish man, accuse him of being a fugitive Nazi war criminal and take him to Jerusalem to face trial for genocide.Mossad agents kidnap an American Jewish man, accuse him of being a fugitive Nazi war criminal and take him to Jerusalem to face trial for genocide.
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Artistas
- Indicado a 1 Oscar
- 3 indicações no total
Leonidas Ossetynski
- Samuel Weinberg
- (as Leonidas Ossettynski)
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Elenco e equipe completos
- Produção, bilheteria e muito mais no IMDbPro
Avaliações em destaque
I have viewed this movie many times in a poor quality VHS and now finally on DVD. It's difficult to explain the impact this movie can have and one viewing will not do it. It takes several viewings to really get the plot line. Millionaire Jewish entrepreneur Arthur Goldman rules his financial empire from a penthouse apartment overlooking Manhattan. Seemingly at the edge of sanity, Goldman holds forth on everyting from Papal edicts to ex-wives, from baseball to his family's massacre in a Nazi concentration camp. When Goldman remarks on a blue Mercedes continuously parked outside his building, Goldman's captive audience of assistant and chauffeur dismiss their boss' anxiety as encroaching paranoia. But each of Goldman's passionate, seemingly capricious ravings are transformed into a shocking, inadvertent deposition when Israeli agents capture Goldman and put him on trial as Adolph Dorf, the commandant of the concentration camp where Goldman's family was supposedly exterminated. In a trial scene of unrelenting intensity, crafts what the Detroit Free Press called "a white-hot lead performance," mutating from eccentric Goldman to sociopath Dorf and beyond. The riddle of Dorf's true identity becomes wrapped in an enigma of cunning self-treachery and single-minded obsession.
Although I have not seen this film for years it sticks in my mind as one of the best, particularly for its type, ie a courtroom dram, with few different scenes, (the other similar movie I liked was Twelve Angry Men.
The acting is superb, particularly Max Schell as the Nazi and the twists keep the viewer alert.
It is the type of movie that should be shown on TV much more often. It does have a message as well.
The acting is superb, particularly Max Schell as the Nazi and the twists keep the viewer alert.
It is the type of movie that should be shown on TV much more often. It does have a message as well.
As has been said in some of my reviews for the other twelve films making up the American Film Theatre series, the American Film Theatre series was an interesting and ambitious project but was also uneven. None of the thirteen films are terrible, one was close to though, but only three are great. 'The Man in the Glass Booth' was also seen as it was written by actor Robert Shaw and to see whether the Oscar nomination (the only performance in the American Film Theatre that was nominated for an Oscar) for Maximillian Schell was deserved.
My conclusions were that Schell's nomination was worthy, but it was a case of the performance being much better than the film itself (same with the subject matter being better than the film). Which left me intrigued but also a little cold. 'The Man in the Glass Booth' is not one of the worst of the American Film Theatre films, it's a lot better than 'Rhinoceros' and particularly 'Jaques Brel is Alive and Well and Living in Paris'. It is also not one of the best, it's no 'The Iceman Cometh', 'The Homecoming' or 'Butley'. Would put it somewhere bang in the middle.
Schell, the heart and soul of 'The Man in the Glass Booth', is extraordinary in the lead role. All the acting in fact is very good, though the rest of the cast are never on the same level as Schell. The second half is a lot better than the first half, with most of the second half being riveting and tension filled.
'The Man in the Glass Booth' is nicely filmed and the setting is simple and intimate without being too stifling. There is some thought-provoking and sincere writing.
However, 'The Man in the Glass Booth' had potential to be a lot better, especially considering the subject and the lead performance. The first half as indicated isn't as involving as the second. Parts are on the sluggish side while the writing is not as natural and can be mannered. While liking the second half a lot, the twist is somewhat contrived.
Furthermore the action was too confined and static. Arthur Hiller's direction has moments, but tended to be undistinguished and in need of more subtlety.
Concluding, definitely worth a one time watch but didn't blow me away. 6/10.
My conclusions were that Schell's nomination was worthy, but it was a case of the performance being much better than the film itself (same with the subject matter being better than the film). Which left me intrigued but also a little cold. 'The Man in the Glass Booth' is not one of the worst of the American Film Theatre films, it's a lot better than 'Rhinoceros' and particularly 'Jaques Brel is Alive and Well and Living in Paris'. It is also not one of the best, it's no 'The Iceman Cometh', 'The Homecoming' or 'Butley'. Would put it somewhere bang in the middle.
Schell, the heart and soul of 'The Man in the Glass Booth', is extraordinary in the lead role. All the acting in fact is very good, though the rest of the cast are never on the same level as Schell. The second half is a lot better than the first half, with most of the second half being riveting and tension filled.
'The Man in the Glass Booth' is nicely filmed and the setting is simple and intimate without being too stifling. There is some thought-provoking and sincere writing.
However, 'The Man in the Glass Booth' had potential to be a lot better, especially considering the subject and the lead performance. The first half as indicated isn't as involving as the second. Parts are on the sluggish side while the writing is not as natural and can be mannered. While liking the second half a lot, the twist is somewhat contrived.
Furthermore the action was too confined and static. Arthur Hiller's direction has moments, but tended to be undistinguished and in need of more subtlety.
Concluding, definitely worth a one time watch but didn't blow me away. 6/10.
7sol-
A fairly fascinating film, with a thought-provoking, albeit rather contrived, twist at the end, the material is helped a great deal by Maximilian Schell's Oscar nominated performance as the title person. Schell is startlingly good, considering what he has to do, balancing out two different eccentric personalities that are part of his one character. The character he plays is the most intriguing element throughout, but it does have a tendency to dominate, and therefore overshadow the things that film has to say. It also takes a while to get where its going, however the second half is highly intense stuff, and the film is merited by interesting ideas the whole time through.
10lousvr
A unique and terrific movie. Max Shell is the movie. One of his best acting performances. Complex plot calls for close focus and attention. It took quite some time to understand story due to its 'Cerebral layering' of just what is the goal of Shell's character. One very interesting note to movie is that it was based on a broadway play (which on opening had near riots by audiences due to misunderstanding of plot and closed shortly thereafter)and that was based on the original book, both written by none other then Robert Shaw (Capt Quint of 'Jaws' fame). Story is he was involved with the screenwriting or consulting, but in either case Shaw had his name removed in any connection with the movie. Why? Don't know. Unhappy with movie version?? The biggest trouble with this movie is that it is very, very difficult to find. Never shown on TV(where I originally saw on a PBS channel back in ~1979) or in most Video Catalogs. Find it.It's worth the effort. Best of luck.
Você sabia?
- CuriosidadesThis film was part of the American Film Theatre series, an experiment in marketing films (all based on plays) that would not otherwise have been able to get financing. Instead of being released to the general public, only people who purchased a subscription to the American Film Theatre series could buy tickets to any of its films. (Exceptions were made for movie critics and members of award-granting organizations, such as the American Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences which awards the Oscars.) As a result, only a small number of people ever saw any of the films in their theatre runs. To enhance the value of the subscriptions, subscribers were guaranteed that the films would never be shown on television and never released to the general public. Legal issues connected with these guarantees kept this film from being available in any form for nearly 3 decades. It was finally released on DVD in 2003. The American Film Theatre experiment was abandoned after 2 years.
- Erros de gravaçãoThe Nazi Concentration Camps were run by the SS. The Wehrmacht (the regular German Army, also referred to as the Heer) was not directly involved in running the camps. Also The SS used it's own rank titles, so Dorf would have been known as a Standartenfuhrer instead of an Oberst (Colonel).
- Citações
Arthur Goldman: Passion play is a passion play.
- ConexõesFeatured in Sunset Over Mulholland Drive (2019)
- Trilhas sonorasEs war ein Edelweiss
(uncredited)
Written by Herms Niel
Sung by Lawrence Pressman and Maximilian Schell
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
- How long is The Man in the Glass Booth?Fornecido pela Alexa
Detalhes
- Data de lançamento
- País de origem
- Idiomas
- Também conhecido como
- The Man in the Glass Booth
- Locações de filme
- Empresas de produção
- Consulte mais créditos da empresa na IMDbPro
Bilheteria
- Orçamento
- US$ 1.000.000 (estimativa)
- Tempo de duração
- 1 h 57 min(117 min)
- Mixagem de som
- Proporção
- 1.85 : 1
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente