A história do que acontece um dia em Nova York, quando um jovem advogado e um homem de negócios têm um pequeno acidente de carro e sua raiva mútua se transforma em uma briga.A história do que acontece um dia em Nova York, quando um jovem advogado e um homem de negócios têm um pequeno acidente de carro e sua raiva mútua se transforma em uma briga.A história do que acontece um dia em Nova York, quando um jovem advogado e um homem de negócios têm um pequeno acidente de carro e sua raiva mútua se transforma em uma briga.
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Artistas
- Prêmios
- 7 indicações no total
- Mina Dunne
- (as Jennifer Dundas Lowe)
- Gina Gugliotta
- (as Lisa Leguillou)
Avaliações em destaque
There are three main reasons why I checked out this movie: Samuel, L, Jackson. Needless to say, he's a terrific actor and worth seeing in whatever he does. He's one of my favorites, and he delivers another powerhouse performance, taking on a role somewhat different from his recent roles: he plays an average Joe. We're introduced to his character, Doyle Gibson, who's a very nice guy simply haunted by mistakes in his past, one being alcoholism, which led to a divorce. And now he's attending AA meetings and buying a house for his two kids, hoping he will attain custody of them. Ben Affleck is good and charismatic. I didn't sympathize as much with his character, but that doesn't make him an antagonist. Neither characters are saints, nor are they sinners. That's good, because it's never completely effective to include characters who are entirely sympathetic. They're both mature adults, but they resort to juvenile acts of revenge in hopes that they can undo what happened. Sydney Pollack is great, as Affleck's egotistical father-in-law, proving his talents in front of the camera are just as fine as his talents behind the camera. I wanted to see more of the beautiful Amanda Peet, but she only has approximately 7 minutes of screen time. So I'm guessing that topless scene I heard mentioned didn't make it to the final cut. Oh, well. William Hurt, who seems to do a movie every 5 years, unfortunately has a small, thankless role as an alcohol counselor.
The script is well-written, and the film is a lot more character-driven than ones of recent years. I loved that scene in the bar where Sam Jackson sits in a lonely bar, listening in on two white guys badmouthing Tiger Woods. He lashes back with a terrific monologue, and later ends up punching them out. Some directors would've cut that scene out, overly concerned about the film's pacing, but I'm glad this time that wasn't the case. However, the ending seems a little fake. It's just too happy for its own good. But that's the only element of the movie I found forced.
My score: 7 (out of 10)
I expected this to be a glorified version of Madd's Spy vs. Spy, or something of that nature, given the hype. However, it is not at the same pace at all... the violence is not cartoonish, its realistic. The characters are not simple, they are complex. They "have issues" and are both trying to find a better sense of balance in their lives, both do things which they regret... all in all, this is one of the most "human" movies I've ever watched.
Even though the characters are deep, the movie does not try to emphasis it with drawn out scenes with dramatic music or anything, which actually makes it more like watching real people than watching a movie. It also makes for a more powerful effect overall because it is up to the watcher to notice the subtleties.
The acting and directing are very well done, and there is some writing which surprised me in that it showed more about the characters rather than relating directly to the main conflict (I don't want to give too much detail and spoil it). The pacing is good and kept me interested throughout, partially to see what the main characters would do next and partially to see what, if anything, they would learn from the experience.
It is not as "epic" as something like Shawshank Redeption, and doesn't deal with esoteric themes such as Meet Joe Black or ominous themes such as Equilibirum or 1984(the novel), but in a way it is more epic because it deals with normal people who struggle to be beneficial humans despite major mistakes, pressures, and conflicts.
What I find interesting is that comments on this film tend to be regarding which side to take, with some saying Jackson is "vile" or Affleck is "selfish". And, really, that is part of the beauty of this movie -- we naturally want to pick a side, like one guy and dislike another. But they are both flawed people.
Affleck is selfish, cheats on his wife, cuts off a guy's credit, flees an accident... his only redeeming quality is he is the only non-corrupt member of a law firm, though that hardly makes up for his failings. Jackson has a terrible temper, breaks things, has little self-control and is an alcoholic. Sure, he wants to reunite with his kids, which is noble, but maybe he should not be able to. Even if he had received Affleck's insurance card, he still would have been late for court...
Samuel L. Jackson was well appointed as Doyle Gipson, and portrays his part well. One character's next move to destroy the other makes compelling viewing, and we can actually feel some sympathy for them, as we see both their emotional and compassionate side.
The story flows well as we are drawn into Banek and Gipson's desire to cause pain and hurt, not giving any thought to others who maybe affected by what they are doing. Changing Lanes is not a violent film as such, it simply explores the aspects of revenge in what could be a true-to-life measure. This is what makes it an entertaining and gripping movie that proved a winner for myself, and should do for many other film fans.
Você sabia?
- CuriosidadesA day after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, director Roger Michell had the World Trade Center towers digitally removed from the opening main title sequence in the film. In the DVD commentary, he admitted that it was a mistake to erase them, and make it appear as if they did not exist. During the re-editing of the film, Michell reinserted them as a tribute.
- Erros de gravaçãoWhen Gavin Lights the paper on fire and raises it to the sprinkler head, that type of sprinkler head would only discharge the water. No other heads would spray water. The reason for this is to minimize damage.
- Citações
Doyle Gipson: I hope you don't mind, but I was intrigued by your conversation. I just thought you were in advertising. So I want to give you my dream version of a Tiger Woods commercial, okay? There's this black guy on a golf course. And all these people are trying to get him to caddy for them, but he's not a caddy. He's just a guy trying to play a round of golf. And these guys give him a five-dollar bill and tell him to go the clubhouse and get them cigarettes and beer. So, off he goes, home, to his wife and to their little son, who he teaches to play golf. You see all the other little boys playing hopscotch while little Tiger practices on the putting green. You see all the other kids eating ice cream while Tiger practices hitting long balls in the rain while his father shows him how. And we fade up, to Tiger, winning four Grand Slams in a row, and becoming the greatest golfer to ever pick up a 9-iron. And we end on his father in the crowd, on the sidelines, and Tiger giving him the trophies. All because of a father's determination that no fat white man - like your fathers, probably - would ever send his son to the clubhouse for cigarettes and beer.
- Cenas durante ou pós-créditosThanks to the staff and Militia Force members and veterans at the Marcy Avenue Armory, Brooklyn, New York.
- Versões alternativasThere was an early review of the movie that contained a spoiler of the ending. The ending that was originally used involved Ben Affleck and Samuel L. Jackson getting into a fist fight that leads onto the balcony. They talk about right and wrong and Affleck takes the file and tears it up and the movie fades to credits. This ending was most likely cut because test audiences did not like it. It will most likely appear on the DVD. Also a small clip shown in the TV ads shows Affleck and Jackson fighting on the balcony. This was part of the original ending which explains why it was cut.
- ConexõesFeatured in Changing Lanes: The Writer's Perspective (2002)
Principais escolhas
- How long is Changing Lanes?Fornecido pela Alexa
Detalhes
- Data de lançamento
- País de origem
- Idioma
- Também conhecido como
- Fuera de control
- Locações de filme
- Empresas de produção
- Consulte mais créditos da empresa na IMDbPro
Bilheteria
- Orçamento
- US$ 45.000.000 (estimativa)
- Faturamento bruto nos EUA e Canadá
- US$ 66.818.548
- Fim de semana de estreia nos EUA e Canadá
- US$ 17.128.062
- 14 de abr. de 2002
- Faturamento bruto mundial
- US$ 94.935.764
- Tempo de duração
- 1 h 38 min(98 min)
- Cor
- Mixagem de som
- Proporção
- 2.35 : 1