Horizon: Uma Saga Americana - Capítulo 1
Título original: Horizon: An American Saga - Chapter 1
Narra um período multifacetado de 15 anos de expansão e colonização do oeste americano antes e depois da Guerra Civil.Narra um período multifacetado de 15 anos de expansão e colonização do oeste americano antes e depois da Guerra Civil.Narra um período multifacetado de 15 anos de expansão e colonização do oeste americano antes e depois da Guerra Civil.
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Artistas
- Prêmios
- 5 indicações no total
Resumo
Reviewers say 'Horizon: An American Saga - Chapter 1' is ambitious with stunning cinematography and epic scope. Praised for historical accuracy and Kevin Costner's performance, it faces criticism for disjointed storytelling, slow pacing, and lack of cohesive narrative. Some suggest it fits better as a TV series due to its length and multiple storylines. The abrupt ending lacks resolution, though many remain hopeful for future chapters, anticipating a more connected and engaging story.
Avaliações em destaque
I'm a massive fan of the Western genre, so when I heard that Costner was making this, I couldn't have been more excited. I pre-purchased tickets the day they went on sale. I knew this was going to be Part 1 of a four-part epic, so I fully expected that the story's development would be different than a typical film. Considering that, I was relatively disappointed in this first installment. Without giving any spoilers, here's the context for the whole review: The movie sets up multiple storylines that I expect will converge over the course of the remaining three installments. Each storyline focuses on a different aspect of Western expansion. That said, here's what I liked and was disappointed by.
Let's start with the good.
The subtitle of this film is "An American Saga." It is clear that Costner intends this to be precisely that. The storylines created in this first episode touch on virtually every aspect of Western expansion and the birth of America as we know it today. You have both sides of the conflict between the settlers moving west and the native population already occupying those territories. You have the military and the civil war. You have the "Wild West" component where a specific type of man was drawn to the lawless environs that would allow him to pursue his vices virtually unrestrained. And you have the appetite to take more and profit more, which is such a factor in history.
The story does an excellent job of showing just how difficult life was for virtually everyone in that ecosystem. It adeptly demonstrates the brutality, vulnerability to the elements and conditions, and the sheer amount of work required to live in the West. There are also quite a few subtle examples of very accurate aspects of history and life in the West that show a great deal of attention to detail.
The costumes, sets, and visuals are all what you would expect out of a great western.
Most importantly, the story is interesting. I am interested in what happens moving forward. And the story is unique, which is saying a lot given the current state of Hollywood, where 90% of films being released are just reboots of existing brands and stories we've already seen.
Having said all that, here's why I was disappointed.
To start, the writing could be better. Much of the dialogue is contrived, and several conflicts don't make much sense. In addition, the acting could be better too. Maybe it's the scripts they had to work with, but many actors seem like actors. That might sound weird. What I mean is that you look at them as an actor playing a part in a western rather than buy into them as the character they are playing.
In addition, some of the plot points are hard to follow. It's unclear why characters are making the decisions or why the story took the turn it did. Some characters appear out of nowhere and cause a significant turn of events that don't have rhyme or reason. There are also substantial jumps in time, which by themselves don't bother me. Still, in these cases, it's not obvious that significant time has passed or why the character you just saw in a previous scene is now making the choices they are making with some considerable time that's happened between scenes. (With all of this, I must be purposefully nebulous to avoid spoilers.)
The third aspect that disappointed me was the look of the film. Westerns are known for their epic, cinematic quality. They have a color grading that screams, "Big Feature Film." This movie does not. It looks more like an episode of Yellowstone than a feature film. Also, for fans of the Western genre, those quintessential beautiful landscape shots that make the land a character unto itself are half of the enjoyment. This film doesn't do that. You have a few brief wide shots. But this takes place in Arizona, Wyoming, Montana, and Kansas, giving ample opportunity for gorgeous panoramas. But we don't.
I am reserving judgment until I see the remaining three installments. I was so excited to see a 10 out of 10. Instead, I got a solid 6.8. So I'm rounding up and giving this a 7. Let's hope the remaining three bring up the average and this becomes the film for the ages that I know Costner wanted it to be.
Let's start with the good.
The subtitle of this film is "An American Saga." It is clear that Costner intends this to be precisely that. The storylines created in this first episode touch on virtually every aspect of Western expansion and the birth of America as we know it today. You have both sides of the conflict between the settlers moving west and the native population already occupying those territories. You have the military and the civil war. You have the "Wild West" component where a specific type of man was drawn to the lawless environs that would allow him to pursue his vices virtually unrestrained. And you have the appetite to take more and profit more, which is such a factor in history.
The story does an excellent job of showing just how difficult life was for virtually everyone in that ecosystem. It adeptly demonstrates the brutality, vulnerability to the elements and conditions, and the sheer amount of work required to live in the West. There are also quite a few subtle examples of very accurate aspects of history and life in the West that show a great deal of attention to detail.
The costumes, sets, and visuals are all what you would expect out of a great western.
Most importantly, the story is interesting. I am interested in what happens moving forward. And the story is unique, which is saying a lot given the current state of Hollywood, where 90% of films being released are just reboots of existing brands and stories we've already seen.
Having said all that, here's why I was disappointed.
To start, the writing could be better. Much of the dialogue is contrived, and several conflicts don't make much sense. In addition, the acting could be better too. Maybe it's the scripts they had to work with, but many actors seem like actors. That might sound weird. What I mean is that you look at them as an actor playing a part in a western rather than buy into them as the character they are playing.
In addition, some of the plot points are hard to follow. It's unclear why characters are making the decisions or why the story took the turn it did. Some characters appear out of nowhere and cause a significant turn of events that don't have rhyme or reason. There are also substantial jumps in time, which by themselves don't bother me. Still, in these cases, it's not obvious that significant time has passed or why the character you just saw in a previous scene is now making the choices they are making with some considerable time that's happened between scenes. (With all of this, I must be purposefully nebulous to avoid spoilers.)
The third aspect that disappointed me was the look of the film. Westerns are known for their epic, cinematic quality. They have a color grading that screams, "Big Feature Film." This movie does not. It looks more like an episode of Yellowstone than a feature film. Also, for fans of the Western genre, those quintessential beautiful landscape shots that make the land a character unto itself are half of the enjoyment. This film doesn't do that. You have a few brief wide shots. But this takes place in Arizona, Wyoming, Montana, and Kansas, giving ample opportunity for gorgeous panoramas. But we don't.
I am reserving judgment until I see the remaining three installments. I was so excited to see a 10 out of 10. Instead, I got a solid 6.8. So I'm rounding up and giving this a 7. Let's hope the remaining three bring up the average and this becomes the film for the ages that I know Costner wanted it to be.
Horizon is watchable and even enjoyable in parts. The cinematography was well executed, a visual feast in places, and there were some interesting story arcs. However, I've never seen a movie so messed up by atrociously bad editing. Several times while watching I found myself wondering what the hell was going on. Had I missed a scene? How did we get here? Then it really goes haywire towards the end without even referencing what it is doing. As if someone has fast forwarded the movie.
The we come to the story and script... if you were expecting a viscerally raw portrayal of the realities of the old west similiar to Cormac McCarthy's 'Blood Meridien', you'll be sorely disappointed. Horizon is more akin to 'Little House on the Prairie'. Some of the dialogue and interactions are embarrassingly mawkish. Your sense of credibility is stretched to breaking point.
After you've finished watching Horizon, and someone who hasn't seen it asks you what it was about, you're likely to scratch your head and say, 'Er..........'.
I get the feeling Costner has bitten off more than he can chew with this production. He seems to have aimed for 'the western to end all westerns'. In my opinion, he's fallen far short of that. I hope the remaining 'chapters' save the day but I wouldn't bet on it.
The we come to the story and script... if you were expecting a viscerally raw portrayal of the realities of the old west similiar to Cormac McCarthy's 'Blood Meridien', you'll be sorely disappointed. Horizon is more akin to 'Little House on the Prairie'. Some of the dialogue and interactions are embarrassingly mawkish. Your sense of credibility is stretched to breaking point.
After you've finished watching Horizon, and someone who hasn't seen it asks you what it was about, you're likely to scratch your head and say, 'Er..........'.
I get the feeling Costner has bitten off more than he can chew with this production. He seems to have aimed for 'the western to end all westerns'. In my opinion, he's fallen far short of that. I hope the remaining 'chapters' save the day but I wouldn't bet on it.
Visually its amazing, as you would expect from A western movie.
It has some great themes and plot lines but even though its part one and 3 hours long it feels rushed and crammed in. Pacing was all over the place, characters teleport between places and times and feels like chunks were left out.
There are parts of the story when in one scene people are doing something, then the next scene seems like a year later with no explanations.
As a story telling vehicle its all over the place.
The cast is great,
The end montage to preview the next movie was just ridiculous.
Still looking forward to seeing where it goes but it really feels like a TV series joined together, with the odd part of an episode left out.
It has some great themes and plot lines but even though its part one and 3 hours long it feels rushed and crammed in. Pacing was all over the place, characters teleport between places and times and feels like chunks were left out.
There are parts of the story when in one scene people are doing something, then the next scene seems like a year later with no explanations.
As a story telling vehicle its all over the place.
The cast is great,
The end montage to preview the next movie was just ridiculous.
Still looking forward to seeing where it goes but it really feels like a TV series joined together, with the odd part of an episode left out.
Look I'll be the first to admit I groaned and rolled my eyes at everyone in the theaters at the end of The Fellowship of the Rings when a few morons said out loud "wait that's it?!?" At the end of the 1st of 3 movies.... But, in the case of this movie (which I understand is just Chapter 1 with Chapter 2 in the eves) wait that's it?
I just watched a 3 hour movie, with 15 main characters, and 30 subplots. Each of which got 25 minutes? It just felt incredibly disjointed. The weird spoiler-y preview at the end was spoiler-y as hell. I feel like this would have been a great mini-series, but in this convoluted fashion it fell flat for me.
It was beautifully shot. And was fun to watch visually, but I have no idea about any of the characters, they history, reason for being. It just drops you in the middle of each journey and it genuinely feels like I missed and entire movie before this. Maybe Chapter 2 will solidify some stuff, but that is a stupid way to do things.
I just watched a 3 hour movie, with 15 main characters, and 30 subplots. Each of which got 25 minutes? It just felt incredibly disjointed. The weird spoiler-y preview at the end was spoiler-y as hell. I feel like this would have been a great mini-series, but in this convoluted fashion it fell flat for me.
It was beautifully shot. And was fun to watch visually, but I have no idea about any of the characters, they history, reason for being. It just drops you in the middle of each journey and it genuinely feels like I missed and entire movie before this. Maybe Chapter 2 will solidify some stuff, but that is a stupid way to do things.
It's not bad. It's just disjointed. It fails on a lot of levels. I think many people will enjoy it. I personally felt disappointment as I was hoping for a cinematic epic western. It felt like it belonged on tv as a miniseries in the late 90's. As much as people say there were cinematic shots, I didn't see anything that gave me that vibe. Medium shot after medium shot. This will be just as enjoyable on your home tv and you won't miss the big screen as much as say Dune or Oppenheimer. The characters. So. Many. Characters. We get barely any character development. Lots of great actors yes, but they are thrown at you left and right. It is also clear that there is probably 3 hours of deleted scenes. So many things happen with zero context. Characters fall in love out of nowhere. They wind up together out of nowhere. They cry for other characters out of nowhere. Characters show up out of nowhere. Who's a protagonist? Who's an antagonist? Some of the characters are over the top and fun, reminding me of classic western characters, but they feel silly here. The music is...fine....nothing really moving though, it's just there. It also feels too clean. Like either everyone is in very new costumes and clean and air conditioned or they are really really dirty, but nowhere in between. Remember when everyone was shiny from sweat and real flies flew around on screen? Early on I just kept thinking...something is off. Then there's the end. It's Part 1, but instead of a cliffhanger and a "to be continued" we cut straight into the longest montage of cut scenes from the next movie(s) showing way too much...for a movie we barely have to wait for. It comes out in 2 months. All that said, I'm invested in the story and I want to see how it unfolds. There is a good story and good characters here, but this would have been much better as a series on streaming where they could take time with everything. 6/10. (Like Dune, maybe Part 2 will change my rating)
Você sabia?
- CuriosidadesWhen shooting started in Moab, Utah, the temperature was 109 °F (43 °C). Towards the end of shooting, the temperature got to a low 9 °F (-13 °C).
- Erros de gravaçãoThere are a number of firearms mistakes throughout the film, mainly dealing with muzzle loading cap and ball revolvers being loaded with cartridges. The first part is supposed to take place in 1859, most common revolvers then included the Colt 1849 pocket model, Colt Dragoon, Colt Navy (which are used in the film), all of which are loaded by pouring gunpowder in the cylinders, ramming a ball or conical bullet into cylinder and putting a percussion cap (primer) on the cylinder's nipple. The first cartridge firing revolvers weren't seen until the late 1850s but were almost exclusively made by Smith and Wesson as they had a deal with the patent holder for the bored through cylinder at the time in the United States.
- Citações
Matthew Van Weyden: All I'm trying to do is get as many of us as I can, as far as I can.
- ConexõesFeatured in The 7PM Project: Episode dated 21 May 2024 (2024)
- Trilhas sonorasAmazing Grace
Arranged by Teddy Morgan & John Debney
Performed by Alyssa Flaherty featuring Shelly Morning Song
Published by Teddy Morgan Music (BMI); Administered by BMG and John Debney Music (ASCAP)
Produced & Recorded by Teddy Morgan & John Debney
Under license from Territory Pictures
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
Detalhes
- Data de lançamento
- País de origem
- Centrais de atendimento oficiais
- Idioma
- Também conhecido como
- Horizon: An American Saga
- Locações de filme
- Empresas de produção
- Consulte mais créditos da empresa na IMDbPro
Bilheteria
- Orçamento
- US$ 100.000.000 (estimativa)
- Faturamento bruto nos EUA e Canadá
- US$ 29.035.702
- Fim de semana de estreia nos EUA e Canadá
- US$ 11.052.561
- 30 de jun. de 2024
- Faturamento bruto mundial
- US$ 38.735.702
- Tempo de duração3 horas 1 minuto
- Cor
- Mixagem de som
- Proporção
- 1.85 : 1
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente
Principal brecha
What is the Canadian French language plot outline for Horizon: Uma Saga Americana - Capítulo 1 (2024)?
Responda