Conto sombrio de espionagem que segue um relacionamento tenso entre pai e filha em uma empresa familiar. As reviravoltas giram em torno de traição e escolhas moralmente cinzentas.Conto sombrio de espionagem que segue um relacionamento tenso entre pai e filha em uma empresa familiar. As reviravoltas giram em torno de traição e escolhas moralmente cinzentas.Conto sombrio de espionagem que segue um relacionamento tenso entre pai e filha em uma empresa familiar. As reviravoltas giram em torno de traição e escolhas moralmente cinzentas.
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Artistas
- Prêmios
- 1 indicação no total
Steve Park
- The Pilot
- (as Stephen Park)
Carmen-Maja Antoni
- Grandmother
- (as Carmen Maja Antoni)
Alexandra Wysoczanska
- Nurse
- (as Aleksandra Wysoczanska)
Jenny Behnke
- Nurse
- (as Jennifer Behnke)
Avaliações em destaque
This is a gloriously mad film from beginning to end.
Personally I laughed a lot and really enjoyed it, but it will definitely leave many people cold. There's no point to it, you won't be enriched, the plot never really becomes clear, and none of the characters is really sympathetic.
It felt very like a Monty Python film to me - absurdism, unexpected shifts, weird motifs, and recurrent dream sequences highly reminiscent of Terry Gilliam's cartoon interludes. And it's almost as silly.
An incredible cast of actors is reduced to a series of bit-part cameos, which should be annoying, but I couldn't help thinking that it was probably enormous fun to make. And Bill Murray as God is without doubt one of my favourite ever bits of casting. The Tom Hanks and Bryan Cranston double act is a total hoot.
So I certainly can't recommend it to everyone, but I will definitely recommend it to people who I think will get it. And l'll probably be wrong. The world needs more weirdness like this, to counterbalance the weirdness that matters. Enjoy.
Personally I laughed a lot and really enjoyed it, but it will definitely leave many people cold. There's no point to it, you won't be enriched, the plot never really becomes clear, and none of the characters is really sympathetic.
It felt very like a Monty Python film to me - absurdism, unexpected shifts, weird motifs, and recurrent dream sequences highly reminiscent of Terry Gilliam's cartoon interludes. And it's almost as silly.
An incredible cast of actors is reduced to a series of bit-part cameos, which should be annoying, but I couldn't help thinking that it was probably enormous fun to make. And Bill Murray as God is without doubt one of my favourite ever bits of casting. The Tom Hanks and Bryan Cranston double act is a total hoot.
So I certainly can't recommend it to everyone, but I will definitely recommend it to people who I think will get it. And l'll probably be wrong. The world needs more weirdness like this, to counterbalance the weirdness that matters. Enjoy.
If I could sum up Wes Anderson's films in one word, it would be "meticulous". Everything in his frames, dialogue, design and production is carefully manicured to a T, and as a result is both very beautiful and hilarious.
As a result of this, all of his films feel like they are on a knife's edge to tip to either an enjoyable masterpiece or a tedious dud. This one feels more like the latter.
It's not to say there aren't some good or funny moments, along with a fantastic cast. But the main relationship between a high ranking corrupt tycoon and his estranged religious daughter never really feels like it hits that mark of deep emotional resonance.
The Grand Budapest Hotel remains his magnum opus. And Henry Sugar is also when Wes is at his finest, which earned him an Oscar for Best Short.
Phoenician felt like a beautiful looking piece added to his collection rather than a film.
As a result of this, all of his films feel like they are on a knife's edge to tip to either an enjoyable masterpiece or a tedious dud. This one feels more like the latter.
It's not to say there aren't some good or funny moments, along with a fantastic cast. But the main relationship between a high ranking corrupt tycoon and his estranged religious daughter never really feels like it hits that mark of deep emotional resonance.
The Grand Budapest Hotel remains his magnum opus. And Henry Sugar is also when Wes is at his finest, which earned him an Oscar for Best Short.
Phoenician felt like a beautiful looking piece added to his collection rather than a film.
MOONRISE KINGDOM was the first Wes Anderson movie I saw, and it's still my favorite. His newest is THE PHOENICIAN SCHEME, a caper about Zsa-Zsa Korda (Benicio del Toro), a businessman trying to squeeze his investors for more money to help overhaul the infrastructure of Phoenicia with slave labor. Joining him on his swindling journey are his estranged nun-to-be daughter Liesel (Mia Threapleton) and his assistant/tutor Bjørn (Michael Cera). It's a wonder how this is the first Anderson film that has Cera in it, the style is a perfect fit for him. If you're not familiar with the style, it's basically side scrolling camera work, symmetrical compositions, vibrant colors, and quick, whimsical dialogue. His best works have both style and substance. This movie definitely has the style, but I think the substance was lacking for me. Maybe I'm just getting tired of his schtick. The plot felt too mechanical and less emotional. It didn't truly have me invested in any of the characters. I laughed quite a bit though. It's always fun to see who Anderson has in his movies. They probably just come in for a day or two, have some fun filming their scene then leave. As always, this has exquisite art direction and production design. I really enjoyed the main trio. Ultimately, THE PHOENICIAN SCHEME boils down to whether or not you're a fan of Wes Anderson movies. This is one of the quirkier ones in his repertoire. In my opinion, it's visually beautiful and funny, but forgettable.
'The Phoenician Scheme (2025)' is, unsurprisingly, unmistakably a Wes Anderson movie. At this point, a "Wes Anderson movie" is almost a genre in and of itself. I'm pretty sure the quirky writer-director could do this in his sleep by now, and it kind of feels like that's what he's been doing recently. He consistently churns out films with no real theme or narrative drive or even reason to exist other than to suitably fit into the twee style he has curated over his career, crafting experiences that are ostensibly style as substance but often feel closer to all style and no substance. What I mean is that where his earlier films felt as though he was using his style to tell a specific and meaningful story, his more recent efforts feel like he is fitting a story into his style. He comes up with quaint nonsense that can be easily configured into the still-pleasing shape all his work takes, putting very little into things like theme or character or emotion. His work is starting to get a tiny bit tedious because it feels like he's simply going through the motions, never really challenging himself or using his specific talents to do anything other than the same thing he's been doing for years. That's not to imply that his newest stuff is bad, as they're just as good as any of his holistically more successful efforts from a formal and technical point of view, but they do lack a certain essentiality that makes them feel ever-so-slightly ho-hum. His latest feature - a business-centred pseudo satirical comedy starring a deadpan Benicio Del Toro, a commanding Mia Threapleton and an absurd Michael Cera, alongside a litany of famous faces both familiar and new - is a perfectly serviceable effort, filled with plenty of visual delight and enjoyable eccentricities. It's undeniable Anderson has complete control of his craft, capable of finely tuning his oxymoronically homogeneous idiosyncrasies so they still enchant even if they no longer surprise. However, it's sort of expected at this point that he can - and will - deliver something like this to this level of quality, which has the unfortunate side-effect of dampening the effectiveness - or, at least, novelty - of his cinematic prowess. The strength of his direction and the specificity of his writing aren't as potent as they once were precisely because they've been at the same level for so long that they're part of the proverbial furniture at this point. Of course, taking excellence for granted isn't something that ought to be encouraged, but it's undeniably difficult to get excited about something we've seen so many times before. Plus, it doesn't help that nothing in this flick hasn't been done better before in one of Anderson's earlier efforts. To be fair, it isn't actually any worse than his previous few, at least formally and technically speaking. However, there is a sense that he's running out of steam - or, at least, resting on his laurels - and comfortably releasing self-eating snakes that are so specifically 'Wes Anderson' that they're almost parodies of actual 'Wes Anderson' films. Still, the movie is enjoyable enough for what it is. It's never boring, moves at a pleasant pace, is well-made in its every aspect, and also provokes a handful of chuckles. The problem is that it only ever connects so deeply, that it never truly moves or inspires. That's primarily because there's no real sense of emotion to it, despite it having a family-focused central arc, and it also isn't really about anything. It's a good effort, for sure, and will probably feel extremely refreshing if you aren't all that familiar with its directors work. It's just a little hard to get excited about something that honestly seems a bit perfunctory. Maybe that's too harsh a term, but it's certainly something that comes to mind as you watch the feature unfold. Again, it is entertaining and it is well-crafted. Its cast, most of whom are now veterans in this field, know exactly what to do with the dialogue they're given, and Wes Anderson's signature style is still fairly fun even after all this time. It isn't hilarious, but there are a handful of funny gags and even more mildly amusing moments, and the narrative is engaging for its entirety. By the same token, though it's only ever mildly amusing, never really getting out of second - or, potentially, third - gear and therefore feeling like one of its director's more minor efforts. It's good enough for what it is, and - again - is very confident and compelling when it comes to its form, but it's just lacking a certain something that's difficult to put my finger on. It's a solid effort, and I definitely don't regret seeing it, but it certainly isn't one of Anderson's best. It's inessential, but enjoyable nevertheless.
While watching this film I felt a bit sad because it reminded me how funny Gene Hackman was as the disillusioned patriarch, a recurring theme in Wes Anderson films.
There is much to like in the Phoenician Scheme:
* Stravinsky - the use of music in the film is very good. I have always liked these pieces of music but to hear them together, in an up front way was special. I also loved Moonrise Kingdom for its extended use of Benjamin Britten.
*End Credits - worth watching as they tastefully but playfully hold your attention.
* Costumes and sets - as always of the highest quality * Colour Pallette - the most confectionary-like cinema has ever been; a mixture of stop animation, play within a film and situationist comedy.
It's easy to dismiss Wes Anderson films as being all the same but if this were the only film he'd made it would easily be the best of the year so far. Only because we as viewers have limited memory to store a few classics by each filmmaker, unfortunately Anderson's last few films have been slightly overlooked.
There is much to like in the Phoenician Scheme:
* Stravinsky - the use of music in the film is very good. I have always liked these pieces of music but to hear them together, in an up front way was special. I also loved Moonrise Kingdom for its extended use of Benjamin Britten.
*End Credits - worth watching as they tastefully but playfully hold your attention.
* Costumes and sets - as always of the highest quality * Colour Pallette - the most confectionary-like cinema has ever been; a mixture of stop animation, play within a film and situationist comedy.
It's easy to dismiss Wes Anderson films as being all the same but if this were the only film he'd made it would easily be the best of the year so far. Only because we as viewers have limited memory to store a few classics by each filmmaker, unfortunately Anderson's last few films have been slightly overlooked.
Wes Anderson Films as Ranked by IMDb Rating
Você sabia?
- CuriosidadesThe name of Zsa-zsa Korda is presumably derived from two of Hungary's most famous film related characters, actress Zsa Zsa Gabor and movie making brothers Alexander Korda, Vincent Korda and Zoltan Korda.
- Erros de gravaçãoWhen Zsa-Zsa and Liesl climb upstairs near the end of the film, to put the urn back into the safe, Zsa-Zsa is wearing high boots with no heel. When it cuts to them reaching the top, he is suddenly wearing heeled velvet slippers and his pants don't reach down far enough, leaving his ankles exposed.
- Citações
Zsa-zsa Korda: Myself, I feel very safe.
- Trilhas sonorasApotheosis
from "Apollon musagète"
Written by Igor Stravinsky
Performed by Igor Stravinsky and RCA Victor Orchestra
Courtesy of Sony Classical by arrangement with Sony Music Entertainment
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
Detalhes
- Data de lançamento
- Países de origem
- Central de atendimento oficial
- Idiomas
- Também conhecido como
- El esquema fenicio
- Locações de filme
- Empresas de produção
- Consulte mais créditos da empresa na IMDbPro
Bilheteria
- Orçamento
- US$ 30.000.000 (estimativa)
- Faturamento bruto nos EUA e Canadá
- US$ 19.475.015
- Fim de semana de estreia nos EUA e Canadá
- US$ 560.499
- 1 de jun. de 2025
- Faturamento bruto mundial
- US$ 38.316.541
- Tempo de duração1 hora 41 minutos
- Cor
- Mixagem de som
- Proporção
- 1.48 : 1
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente
Principal brecha
What is the Canadian French language plot outline for O Esquema Fenício (2025)?
Responda