AVALIAÇÃO DA IMDb
6,5/10
17 mil
SUA AVALIAÇÃO
O rico e inventivo solteirão Colin se esforça para encontrar uma cura para sua amante Chloe após ter sido diagnosticada uma doença incomum causada por uma flor que cresce em seus pulmões.O rico e inventivo solteirão Colin se esforça para encontrar uma cura para sua amante Chloe após ter sido diagnosticada uma doença incomum causada por uma flor que cresce em seus pulmões.O rico e inventivo solteirão Colin se esforça para encontrar uma cura para sua amante Chloe após ter sido diagnosticada uma doença incomum causada por uma flor que cresce em seus pulmões.
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Artistas
- Prêmios
- 1 vitória e 10 indicações no total
Aïssa Maïga
- Alise
- (as Aïssa Maiga)
Laurent Lafitte
- Le directeur de société
- (as Laurent Lafitte de la comédie française)
Mathieu Paulus
- Le Chuiche
- (as Matthieu Paulus)
Frédéric Saurel
- Le Bedon
- (as Fred Saurel)
Alex Raul Barrios
- Jésus
- (as Alex Barrios)
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Elenco e equipe completos
- Produção, bilheteria e muito mais no IMDbPro
Avaliações em destaque
First of all, i must admit that I didn't read the book. So perhaps that's the reason I didn't get the purpose of this film.
I was attending this movie with great expectations, I love the work of Michel Gondry and I couldn't wait to see Audrey Tatou and Omar Sy playing together.
The special effects were great, and as I said before Michel Gondry is one of my favorites. But here's the thing, I was unhappy during the movie. I couldn't develop sympathy for the main characters, because the storyline felt missing too often. Combine that with the weird dialogs and the straying from one scene to another without a proper connection, you'll get why. The dialog, and I understand that this was adopted from the book, but in this movie it just didn't made sense.
I couldn't feel what I wanted to feel about this movie, I wanted to like it so badly but I couldn't. I feel the film was more focused on the special effects than on the actual character development and storyline.
I was attending this movie with great expectations, I love the work of Michel Gondry and I couldn't wait to see Audrey Tatou and Omar Sy playing together.
The special effects were great, and as I said before Michel Gondry is one of my favorites. But here's the thing, I was unhappy during the movie. I couldn't develop sympathy for the main characters, because the storyline felt missing too often. Combine that with the weird dialogs and the straying from one scene to another without a proper connection, you'll get why. The dialog, and I understand that this was adopted from the book, but in this movie it just didn't made sense.
I couldn't feel what I wanted to feel about this movie, I wanted to like it so badly but I couldn't. I feel the film was more focused on the special effects than on the actual character development and storyline.
10j_wijnja
To me, this movie does what movies are for: activate the imagination. In this case, touching a theme not as alien as one might wish it to be in a fantastic setting. The 'fantastic' way in which people and institutions appear is far from random; it feels to me like a hyperdream of familiar entities and sensations, their logical extreme. Rich, vivid imagination which enters your brain and puts hooks in it. Loved the book and Gondry made it even more alive for me. Quite a feat. If you do like the movie, please check out the book (and also other titles by Vian). Don't want to generalize too much but if you like movies by Terry Gilliams you will probably like this a lot, too. Rats, writing reviews is hard and I'm not very good at it; but i so disagree with the IMDb-grade for this film (currently 5.8) and the general reviews I've read so far that I had to create an account just to weigh in. So please go see this film and find out for yourself!
Did I mention already that it is beautifully made, and at times very funny?
Did I mention already that it is beautifully made, and at times very funny?
Usually, I do not care about how a book is adapted, as long as the movie is good on its own. In that case it was completely different; I am a huge, massive Boris Vian fan, and I never thought his style (for example the way he took metaphors literally) could be set upon a screen.
That is to say, until I've heard that Gondry was directing L'écume des Jours. Sometimes, those things just make sense; Gondry is the only one who could have transformed Boris Vian into something visual, and that is exactly what he did, and with no CGI, only old fashioned tricks. The DIY way ladies and gentlemen, that's what it is all about.
Maybe many will dislike this movie. Others, like me, will love it passionately, for its effusiveness, for its communicative joy, for its unrelenting sadness. But at least, people will feel what Boris Vian is all about. And I mean especially for the English speaking countries, where Boris Vian is really not well known and most of the time poorly translated: by transcribing his style to a visual dimension, Gondry made it universal.
That is to say, until I've heard that Gondry was directing L'écume des Jours. Sometimes, those things just make sense; Gondry is the only one who could have transformed Boris Vian into something visual, and that is exactly what he did, and with no CGI, only old fashioned tricks. The DIY way ladies and gentlemen, that's what it is all about.
Maybe many will dislike this movie. Others, like me, will love it passionately, for its effusiveness, for its communicative joy, for its unrelenting sadness. But at least, people will feel what Boris Vian is all about. And I mean especially for the English speaking countries, where Boris Vian is really not well known and most of the time poorly translated: by transcribing his style to a visual dimension, Gondry made it universal.
I went in to the theater without checking out the reviews beforehand, completely open-minded. I was drawn in by the word "surrealist" in the description, and curious to see whether the movie was going to compare with the early day movies like the 1902 A Trip to the Moon. This was when the totally new possibilities of film were being enthusiastically embraced, and for those long-gone creators the sky was the limit. I wasn't disappointed. It is fabulous how the director has created the most absurd situations and effects, giving the viewer the feeling of bouncing from one surrealist painting into another. It looks like a movie which must have been incredibly time-consuming to bring together, and in my mind Michel Gondry has totally succeeded. Bravo also to Marie-Charlotte Moreau, for her wonderful editing to bring about this beautiful result.
When I decided to go see that movie, I was really scared. Scared that, somehow, this movie might be bad, whereas the book of Boris Vian is one of my favorite. But when I got out, I was really amazed. I felt almost depressed, exactly the same way when I finished reading the book. For the whole night long, I couldn't keep my mind of the movie, and I was barely able to sleep.
Gondry actually made me open my eyes about some things, that I couldn't imagine or figure out. But when I think about it, it just make sense. Like the fact that Alise is black woman. I don't know why, I've always imagined her as a white and blonde woman. But it's only natural that she is in fact black.
I can understand the fact that some people would not like the movie, being very weird, and being in it's own universe. But I really think this movie deserves a way better grade. Maybe one of the greatest adaptations that I have seen, yet. I gladly recommend to see this movie.
Gondry actually made me open my eyes about some things, that I couldn't imagine or figure out. But when I think about it, it just make sense. Like the fact that Alise is black woman. I don't know why, I've always imagined her as a white and blonde woman. But it's only natural that she is in fact black.
I can understand the fact that some people would not like the movie, being very weird, and being in it's own universe. But I really think this movie deserves a way better grade. Maybe one of the greatest adaptations that I have seen, yet. I gladly recommend to see this movie.
Você sabia?
- CuriosidadesThe original French title for this movie, L'écume des jours, translates literally to "the foam of the days" but more colloquially means "the froth" or "the remnants" of daydreams. The English-language title, Mood Indigo, is the title of a 1930 jazz composition by Duke Ellington, the musician who is often mentioned in this movie.
- Erros de gravaçãoWhen Nicolas brings breakfast to Chloé and Colin the first time, the long shot from the back of the bedroom shows him entering the bedroom but there are no people up on the bed. The close shot from the end of the bed shows Chloé and Colin receiving the tray.
- Cenas durante ou pós-créditosThe end credits start on a background of footage of Duke Ellington playing the piano.
- Versões alternativasA shorter version than the 135 minutes original cut has been released in some countries, included France. This alternate version is 36 minutes shorter, and has been edited by Tariq Anwar and supervised by Michel Gondry.
- Trilhas sonorasTake the 'A' Train
Written by Billy Strayhorn
Performed by Duke Ellington Orchestra (as Duke Ellington and his famous orchestra)
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
- How long is Mood Indigo?Fornecido pela Alexa
Detalhes
- Data de lançamento
- Países de origem
- Centrais de atendimento oficiais
- Idiomas
- Também conhecido como
- Mood Indigo
- Locações de filme
- Empresas de produção
- Consulte mais créditos da empresa na IMDbPro
Bilheteria
- Orçamento
- € 19.000.000 (estimativa)
- Faturamento bruto nos EUA e Canadá
- US$ 303.187
- Fim de semana de estreia nos EUA e Canadá
- US$ 26.511
- 20 de jul. de 2014
- Faturamento bruto mundial
- US$ 10.435.322
- Tempo de duração2 horas 11 minutos
- Cor
- Mixagem de som
- Proporção
- 1.85 : 1
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente