Chinook-3
Entrou em mar. de 2000
Bem-vindo(a) ao novo perfil
Nossas atualizações ainda estão em desenvolvimento. Embora a versão anterior do perfil não esteja mais acessível, estamos trabalhando ativamente em melhorias, e alguns dos recursos ausentes retornarão em breve! Fique atento ao retorno deles. Enquanto isso, Análise de Classificação ainda está disponível em nossos aplicativos iOS e Android, encontrados na página de perfil. Para visualizar suas Distribuições de Classificação por ano e gênero, consulte nossa nova Guia de ajuda.
Selos3
Para saber como ganhar selos, acesse página de ajuda de selos.
Avaliações18
Classificação de Chinook-3
What a tremendous potential this film has....
The first hour is dazzling high tech, fast action with almost a "John Woo on speed" character. The plot is well developed and engrossing. So, what happened?
For the remainder of the film the pacing is terrible (bursts of action moving the story along followed by long periods of...well...sluggish navel gazing). It's as if Spielberg has NO idea what kind of a film he is making.
I understand the problem, as Philip K. Dick stories tend toward the futuristic high tech combined with film noire. But Spielberg doesn't combine them...he just makes two different movies and shows us one during the first hour, with the second movie making up the remainder of the film.
It's worth watching, and even paying for...but don't expect anything great. Just enjoy the action in the first half, and then head for the snack bar for a pot of popcorn somewhere in the middle.
(6 out of 10)
The first hour is dazzling high tech, fast action with almost a "John Woo on speed" character. The plot is well developed and engrossing. So, what happened?
For the remainder of the film the pacing is terrible (bursts of action moving the story along followed by long periods of...well...sluggish navel gazing). It's as if Spielberg has NO idea what kind of a film he is making.
I understand the problem, as Philip K. Dick stories tend toward the futuristic high tech combined with film noire. But Spielberg doesn't combine them...he just makes two different movies and shows us one during the first hour, with the second movie making up the remainder of the film.
It's worth watching, and even paying for...but don't expect anything great. Just enjoy the action in the first half, and then head for the snack bar for a pot of popcorn somewhere in the middle.
(6 out of 10)
NO longwinded review / critique. I wasn't sure this wouldn't be yet another "monster" sci-fi movie in another environment. WRONG! The characterizations, subplots and storyline are all first rate. The acting varies from terriffic (Diesel) to passable (Hauser). This is a great roller coaster ride. Enjoy!
OK..so it isn't EVER going to be confused with Oscar material. (However, they gave one to the mess known as 2001...so who knows?)
Get a grip folks...this is relatively high tech 1950's pulp scifi with a VERY dry sense of humor, with an interesting philosophical basis if you know to look for it.. I know..you have to be over 35 to get it, I guess.
Thought it was fun, what can I say? As for the folks here who just couldn't rush to their terminals fast enough to bash the film (think they are probably related to those folks who creamed Waterworld back when only the 'rushes' existed)....well, why even bother to see the flicks? Just wait for the critics and then LIE and say you saw the movie, then agree with them so that yer buds will be SO impressed with you.
Ok, Ok. I'll lighten up. It was a passable film, decent effects, pseudo John-Woo blow-stuff-up-when-you-lose-the-plot-for-a-few-minutes story telling that kills a couple of hours.
Gave it an 8....and if that bothers anyone, get over it!
Get a grip folks...this is relatively high tech 1950's pulp scifi with a VERY dry sense of humor, with an interesting philosophical basis if you know to look for it.. I know..you have to be over 35 to get it, I guess.
Thought it was fun, what can I say? As for the folks here who just couldn't rush to their terminals fast enough to bash the film (think they are probably related to those folks who creamed Waterworld back when only the 'rushes' existed)....well, why even bother to see the flicks? Just wait for the critics and then LIE and say you saw the movie, then agree with them so that yer buds will be SO impressed with you.
Ok, Ok. I'll lighten up. It was a passable film, decent effects, pseudo John-Woo blow-stuff-up-when-you-lose-the-plot-for-a-few-minutes story telling that kills a couple of hours.
Gave it an 8....and if that bothers anyone, get over it!