O investigador particular de Los Angeles Harry Moseby é contratado por um cliente para encontrar sua filha adolescente fugitiva. Moseby rastreia a filha, apenas para tropeçar em algo muito m... Ler tudoO investigador particular de Los Angeles Harry Moseby é contratado por um cliente para encontrar sua filha adolescente fugitiva. Moseby rastreia a filha, apenas para tropeçar em algo muito mais intrigante e sinistro.O investigador particular de Los Angeles Harry Moseby é contratado por um cliente para encontrar sua filha adolescente fugitiva. Moseby rastreia a filha, apenas para tropeçar em algo muito mais intrigante e sinistro.
- Direção
- Roteirista
- Artistas
- Indicado para 1 prêmio BAFTA
- 2 indicações no total
- Crewman
- (não creditado)
Avaliações em destaque
It is not hard to figure out why a young girl has run away from home when we see her mother, a washed up, alcoholic living in the Hollywood Hills. What is odd is trying to figure out the relationship between her, her stepfather and his girlfriend in the Florida Keys where she has gone to live. It is hinted that the stepfather is not just a stepfather.
Even stranger is Jennifer Warren's odd, abrupt, salty behavior in the film and the the strange dialog written for her. At one point, Gene Hackman even tells her he is tired of her "ping-pong talk". Was that written for the benefit of the audience or did he improvise? I felt puzzled by much of her performance.
It is also painful, really painful to watch Gene Hackman's wife struggle with their relationship and her learning new things about her husband.
Yes, a strange, strange little film. The acting is almost too revealing. I can't quite wrap my brain around the whole thing. I think it will be appreciated by fans of films from the 70's.
First of which, the story really doesn't make sense. It's clear when the case is more or less solved about an hour in that the movie is really going to be about something else. In this case, it's more about Hackman's character, a guy who despite his love of things like chess, can't seem to really figure stuff out. So we are taken through his marriage, his wife's infidelity. an attempted reconciliation, etc. All that stuff is great for a great actor like Hackman who makes you feel how lost he is.
The problem is that the ties that connect that to the real story, that of the art smuggling, which is the real mystery, are very thin. Also, the ties that connect the plot points of the smuggling story are very week. Too much coincidence, too many people happen to be exactly where they need to be. Too much crossing the country - - LA to Florida in the blink of an eye. One second Gene Hackman is chasing James Woods around LA on a motorcycle. The next scene, he finds him in Florida.
I read that the film was shot in 1973 and then shelved until 1975, meaning that there must have been issues with it then. There must have also been a lot scenes cut, because a lot is in there, it's just hidden very deeply with no way to get at it. I think this is a film to check out and enjoy for some very good elements. I just don't think we can put our blinders on and make it a 70s classic. Good film. Worth a watch.
This idea of the lonely seeker is Hackman's own turf. His affable charm conveys a sense of a lifetime's wrongheaded idealism. In the wrong job, deluding himself, looking for a way out. Eventually, he is able to see clearly and see how his drifting has allowed the people around him to manipulate him in their games. Unlike many of this film's peers such as 'Chinatown', 'Taxi Driver', 'The Long Goodbye', we are not left to be slightly repulsed by the lead actor's ways. Hackman plays the everyman character as an affable, amateur sleuth whose hestitancy and chronic lack of commitment give him a fallibility more recognizable to an audience.
Unfortunately, both times I was frankly bored by this movie and struggled to get into it. What's the problem? Well, detective stories are a funny genre. They tend to have very little action or incident, and instead rely on character development and witty dialogue to sustain interest. For this approach to work, the dialogue must sparkle, and the cast of characters must be really compelling.
Night Moves gets this all about half right. Some of the dialogue is sharp, but the seduction scenes have rather laughable "deep" and "sexy" lines. The movie is also weighed down by a protracted marital infidelity subplot that goes nowhere interesting.
I'll say this, though - the violent finale is terrific and really sticks in the mind.
In short, it's hard to write detective fiction as well as Raymond Chandler or Ross Macdonald, and this kind of pale imitation / updating of their work mostly just annoys me. Hackman is great, and the story kind of holds together, yet somehow this movie fizzles rather than frizzles.
Você sabia?
- CuriosidadesDebut credited film role of Melanie Griffith and her first nude scenes. It's been reported that she was 17 when she appeared in this film, but if the film started filming in Oct. 1973 as reports state, that means Griffith turned 16 two months before, in August 1973.
- Erros de gravaçãoA considerable amount of time had passed between when Harry brought Delly home and when he had Paula return to the crash site to retrieve some of the treasure. It makes no sense that Tom and Paula wouldn't have already retrieved the treasure.
- Citações
Ellen Moseby: [of a football game] Who's winning?
Harry Moseby: Nobody. One side is just losing slower than the other.
- ConexõesFeatured in The Day of the Director (1975)
Principais escolhas
- How long is Night Moves?Fornecido pela Alexa
Detalhes
- Data de lançamento
- País de origem
- Idiomas
- Também conhecido como
- Secreto oculto en el mar
- Locações de filme
- Sanibel Island, Flórida, EUA(Florida scenes.)
- Empresas de produção
- Consulte mais créditos da empresa na IMDbPro