AVALIAÇÃO DA IMDb
5,3/10
8,4 mil
SUA AVALIAÇÃO
Adicionar um enredo no seu idiomaShakespeare's epic play is translated from page to screen, with the gender of the main character, Prospero, changed from male to female.Shakespeare's epic play is translated from page to screen, with the gender of the main character, Prospero, changed from male to female.Shakespeare's epic play is translated from page to screen, with the gender of the main character, Prospero, changed from male to female.
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Artistas
- Indicado a 1 Oscar
- 2 vitórias e 5 indicações no total
David Scott Klein
- Prospera's Husband
- (não creditado)
Bryan Webster
- Guard
- (não creditado)
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Elenco e equipe completos
- Produção, bilheteria e muito mais no IMDbPro
Avaliações em destaque
Julie Taymor (Frida, Titus) sets her sights on the Bard's final masterpiece, recasting Prospero as Prospera (Hellen Mirren) and letting the magic and romance loose in this very different take on The Tempest.
First, what works? Hellen Mirren does, rather unsurprisingly, and the art direction of photography are consistent with the vision of the woman who gave us Titus back in 1999. Kudos as well to the ever-watchable David Strathairn and Djimon Hounsou.
What annoys? Now we enter very subjective ground. This beautiful, deceptively simple play is turned into an amped up to the max, loud and frantic film. The electric guitar whines are painfully out of place, and Russell Brand, never guilty of subtlety on a good day, will make you claw your own eardrums out. It's almost as if Taymor had forgotten we were right there with her cast, right behind the camera, instead of sitting 50ft back in a packed theater.
This has proved an incredibly divisive film, and I feel split right down the middle on it. I admire Titus, in my mind one of the best Shakespeare adaptations in history, but whereas Taymor's turbocharged visuals and loud, often trashy use of sound and effects served as a perfect illustration for Shakesepare's bonkers gore-fest, it diminishes the more mature, heartfelt qualities of this play. The Tempest is a great playwright's swan song, the work of an aging, mature artist. Why would you give us an overly loud, ADD-afflicted MTV version?
Ultimately, this frustrating missed opportunity makes you wonder, did Taymor have her Shakespeare mixed up all along. Rather than give us "the stuff that dreams are made of", she serves us "a tale, told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing".
First, what works? Hellen Mirren does, rather unsurprisingly, and the art direction of photography are consistent with the vision of the woman who gave us Titus back in 1999. Kudos as well to the ever-watchable David Strathairn and Djimon Hounsou.
What annoys? Now we enter very subjective ground. This beautiful, deceptively simple play is turned into an amped up to the max, loud and frantic film. The electric guitar whines are painfully out of place, and Russell Brand, never guilty of subtlety on a good day, will make you claw your own eardrums out. It's almost as if Taymor had forgotten we were right there with her cast, right behind the camera, instead of sitting 50ft back in a packed theater.
This has proved an incredibly divisive film, and I feel split right down the middle on it. I admire Titus, in my mind one of the best Shakespeare adaptations in history, but whereas Taymor's turbocharged visuals and loud, often trashy use of sound and effects served as a perfect illustration for Shakesepare's bonkers gore-fest, it diminishes the more mature, heartfelt qualities of this play. The Tempest is a great playwright's swan song, the work of an aging, mature artist. Why would you give us an overly loud, ADD-afflicted MTV version?
Ultimately, this frustrating missed opportunity makes you wonder, did Taymor have her Shakespeare mixed up all along. Rather than give us "the stuff that dreams are made of", she serves us "a tale, told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing".
I am not a fan of male characters in Shakespeare being played by women, although it is only fair when you remember that when first written, all parts were played by men. However, I thought Helen Mirren did a brilliant and believable piece of work. At least the text had been adapted to reinforce the fact that she was female and we weren't expected to believe that she was Prospero and not Prospera. I thoroughly enjoyed this screen adaptation and although scenes that I looked forward to were cut out e.g., the Goddesses at the feast, the CGI was very clever. I thought that it was a mistake to make the casting of Caliban an African man, although he was disguised with scales and what looked like vertiligo. The purists see this play as about man's fear of anything different,(the other) and this plays into the post colonial criticisms by making the man black. Although Ben Wishaw did a sterling job as Ariel, it was a bit disconcerting to see his thin body running around naked. Especially at the beginning when he had to lie about with his leg discretely crossed in case he revealed anything he shouldn't. However, having acted in this play and seen several versions this was one of the best.
The kick to see it was Helen Mirren as Prospera .
The gift of this eccentric, at first sight, is its beauty. Indeed, very easy to critic it but few scenes, references to classics, the locations, the residence of Prospera, the superb Ariel proposed by Ben Whishaw, like the touching Caliban- indeed the recipe of colonialism works, as suggestion in this adaptation , again, by Djimon Hounsou are just inspired option. Not the quality of special effects matters for me, but the fair storytelling of a story easy to escape to director in exagerations. It is not this case.
It is a beautiful film and Helen Mirren translates in inspired manner the bitterness and the generosity of her Prospera. The opportunity to make a film , not a stage play is used in smart manner. Not the best version. But far to be a modest one.
The gift of this eccentric, at first sight, is its beauty. Indeed, very easy to critic it but few scenes, references to classics, the locations, the residence of Prospera, the superb Ariel proposed by Ben Whishaw, like the touching Caliban- indeed the recipe of colonialism works, as suggestion in this adaptation , again, by Djimon Hounsou are just inspired option. Not the quality of special effects matters for me, but the fair storytelling of a story easy to escape to director in exagerations. It is not this case.
It is a beautiful film and Helen Mirren translates in inspired manner the bitterness and the generosity of her Prospera. The opportunity to make a film , not a stage play is used in smart manner. Not the best version. But far to be a modest one.
In casting Helen Mirren as Prospera, director Julie Taymor adds an interesting spin to this Shakespeare adaptation.
Also CGI effects help make more sense of the story.
On the downside, film versions of the bard's plays rarely work perfectly (with the honourable exception of Baz Luhrmann's Romeo + Juliet) and unless you know the play already, the action here is pretty hard to follow. Also, it's a bit strange seeing comic genius Alan Cumming in a straight role.
Ultimately though, the main joy of the movie is Dame Helen. She does bitterness superbly. I loved the scene when Miranda first meets Ferdinand - Mirren's ironic commentary added a whole new dimension to the play for me.
I also loved Tony Conti as the aged senator Gonzalo. His performance is so masterful it puts his character at the forefront of the story for once - no bad thing.
Overall I think Shakespeare fans will really enjoy this film. Other people may be left a little bored and bewildered.
Also CGI effects help make more sense of the story.
On the downside, film versions of the bard's plays rarely work perfectly (with the honourable exception of Baz Luhrmann's Romeo + Juliet) and unless you know the play already, the action here is pretty hard to follow. Also, it's a bit strange seeing comic genius Alan Cumming in a straight role.
Ultimately though, the main joy of the movie is Dame Helen. She does bitterness superbly. I loved the scene when Miranda first meets Ferdinand - Mirren's ironic commentary added a whole new dimension to the play for me.
I also loved Tony Conti as the aged senator Gonzalo. His performance is so masterful it puts his character at the forefront of the story for once - no bad thing.
Overall I think Shakespeare fans will really enjoy this film. Other people may be left a little bored and bewildered.
Wow this is one of those movies that I am completely baffled about the low ranking on here. I agree with some of the critiques that the sound mixing could have been better but overall the film was gorgeous, overall well acted and very understandable for such a difficult play.
Someone mentioned poor special effects...I thought they were wonderful. Clearly the big money goes to plenty of trite blockbusters leaving little for pieces of art and beauty such as this. But what they lacked in money they made up for in creativity....I absolutely loved the rendition of the spirit Ariel. There was plenty of gorgeous scenery both real and mixed with CGI.
Julie Taymor never disappoints me and this is no exception!
Someone mentioned poor special effects...I thought they were wonderful. Clearly the big money goes to plenty of trite blockbusters leaving little for pieces of art and beauty such as this. But what they lacked in money they made up for in creativity....I absolutely loved the rendition of the spirit Ariel. There was plenty of gorgeous scenery both real and mixed with CGI.
Julie Taymor never disappoints me and this is no exception!
Você sabia?
- CuriosidadesThe decision to switch the gender of the lead character was a diving board to a whole new appreciation of the play. It had everything to do with Dame Helen Mirren and a coincidental exchange that writer, producer, and director Julie Taymor had with Mirren. When Taymor encountered Mirren at a party, she had already envisioned Mirren in the role and their conversation cemented her decision. "We were talking Shakespeare", Taymor recollects, "and she had no idea I was planning this film when she mentioned that the first Shakespeare she ever did was Caliban in 'The Tempest', and she actually said to me, 'You know, I could play Prospero-as a woman.' And I said, 'Do you want to? Because I've been preparing a film version of 'The Tempest' with exactly that in mind.' And, fortunately, she said 'yes'."
- Erros de gravaçãoThe chessboard that Miranda uses is set up 90 degrees rotated from its proper position. Facing the board, each player should have a white square on the far right of their back rank. This board is positioned so that the black squares are on that side.
- Cenas durante ou pós-créditosPart of the closing credits are an underwater sequence of Prospera's books sinking into the ocean depths.
- ConexõesFeatured in Breakfast: Episode dated 12 September 2010 (2010)
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
- How long is The Tempest?Fornecido pela Alexa
Detalhes
- Data de lançamento
- Países de origem
- Central de atendimento oficial
- Idioma
- Também conhecido como
- The Tempest
- Locações de filme
- Empresas de produção
- Consulte mais créditos da empresa na IMDbPro
Bilheteria
- Orçamento
- US$ 20.000.000 (estimativa)
- Faturamento bruto nos EUA e Canadá
- US$ 277.943
- Fim de semana de estreia nos EUA e Canadá
- US$ 42.436
- 12 de dez. de 2010
- Faturamento bruto mundial
- US$ 405.861
- Tempo de duração
- 1 h 50 min(110 min)
- Cor
- Mixagem de som
- Proporção
- 2.35 : 1
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente