apocalypse later
Entrou em ago. 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.
Selos2
Para saber como ganhar selos, acesse página de ajuda de selos.
Avaliações42
Classificação de apocalypse later
I've seen this film twice now, and had the same reaction both
times, so I feel a little more secure in decrying this a vile
piece of garbage. The central idea (a school bus crash) has
such monumental emotional repercussions that it's easy to be
washed away in grief enough to not notice the emptiness of the
conceit built around it. As an intruding lawyer, Ian Holm is
asked to give a performance of staggeringly self-conscious
falseness in which his every word, movement and breath is meant
to project "SOMETHING IMPORTANT". His episodic encounters with
the people of the community in which the accident took place
only reveals Egoyan's total condescension toward life's "little
people", presenting them as simpletons who, gosh darn it, love
their children and each other and turn their noses up at
anything so disgusting as a dollar bill. In a failed attempt to
make the lawyer at least two-dimensional, a subplot is slopped
on about his losing touch with his own child, the most
ridiculous drug-addicted banshee every put on film. Toss in
heavy-handed allegories, heart-tugging music and trite
conclusions, and what have you got? An award-winning "masterpiece", to hear most people talk. More than likely they
woke up the next morning, remembered something about angelic
children heading for their final bus ride, and forgot the rest.
There's no other explanation. Rent the first episode of
Kieslowski's 1988 "Decalogue", which covers similar thematic
ground and, in 50 short minutes, accomplishes worlds more. 3
out of 10 for the nice work by actors Bruce Greenwood and Sarah
Polley.
times, so I feel a little more secure in decrying this a vile
piece of garbage. The central idea (a school bus crash) has
such monumental emotional repercussions that it's easy to be
washed away in grief enough to not notice the emptiness of the
conceit built around it. As an intruding lawyer, Ian Holm is
asked to give a performance of staggeringly self-conscious
falseness in which his every word, movement and breath is meant
to project "SOMETHING IMPORTANT". His episodic encounters with
the people of the community in which the accident took place
only reveals Egoyan's total condescension toward life's "little
people", presenting them as simpletons who, gosh darn it, love
their children and each other and turn their noses up at
anything so disgusting as a dollar bill. In a failed attempt to
make the lawyer at least two-dimensional, a subplot is slopped
on about his losing touch with his own child, the most
ridiculous drug-addicted banshee every put on film. Toss in
heavy-handed allegories, heart-tugging music and trite
conclusions, and what have you got? An award-winning "masterpiece", to hear most people talk. More than likely they
woke up the next morning, remembered something about angelic
children heading for their final bus ride, and forgot the rest.
There's no other explanation. Rent the first episode of
Kieslowski's 1988 "Decalogue", which covers similar thematic
ground and, in 50 short minutes, accomplishes worlds more. 3
out of 10 for the nice work by actors Bruce Greenwood and Sarah
Polley.
"The Perfect Storm" tells of the 1991 "Storm of the Century", in which three storms collided over the Atlantic Ocean with catastrophic effect. The filmmakers attempt their own triple-header, following three stories of people affected by the storm - a group of people about a sailboat and their Coast Guard rescuers, the crew of a fishing boat, and that crew's family and friends back on the mainland. The results are equally rocky.
This is meant to be a story of heroes, which aptly applies to the rescuers and families. Unfortunately, the film thinks the FISHERMEN are the heroes, treating them with all the noble reverence of the soldiers marching off to save democracy in "Saving Private Ryan". Please Note: THEY CATCH FISH. FOR MONEY. THEY PURPOSEFULLY DIRECTED THEIR BOAT INTO A STORM. THEY'RE IRRESPONSIBLE FOOLS WHO CAUSE TRAUMATIC CONSEQUENCES FOR ALL THOSE AROUND THEM.
Now that I have that out of my system, I admit I found the film gripping. This is definitely an Oscar nominee for its Sound, Editing, and Visual Effects. The storm scenes are truly frightening. The cast is thoroughly appealing ... George Clooney, Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio, John C. Reilly, Diane Lane, Mark Wahlberg, Karen Allen, Cherry Jones. We care about them even though we are given ridiculously little (or in some cases, absolutely no) character development to base those feelings on.
But the film is just fundamentally wrong-headed, focusing on the wrong small story in weather's Big Story. I was rooting for the fish.
This is meant to be a story of heroes, which aptly applies to the rescuers and families. Unfortunately, the film thinks the FISHERMEN are the heroes, treating them with all the noble reverence of the soldiers marching off to save democracy in "Saving Private Ryan". Please Note: THEY CATCH FISH. FOR MONEY. THEY PURPOSEFULLY DIRECTED THEIR BOAT INTO A STORM. THEY'RE IRRESPONSIBLE FOOLS WHO CAUSE TRAUMATIC CONSEQUENCES FOR ALL THOSE AROUND THEM.
Now that I have that out of my system, I admit I found the film gripping. This is definitely an Oscar nominee for its Sound, Editing, and Visual Effects. The storm scenes are truly frightening. The cast is thoroughly appealing ... George Clooney, Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio, John C. Reilly, Diane Lane, Mark Wahlberg, Karen Allen, Cherry Jones. We care about them even though we are given ridiculously little (or in some cases, absolutely no) character development to base those feelings on.
But the film is just fundamentally wrong-headed, focusing on the wrong small story in weather's Big Story. I was rooting for the fish.
I loved the first Mission:Impossible film. LOVED IT. Beautiful European locations. Complex plot that had to be experienced twice to fully understand (how refreshing!). World-class cast playing well-defined characters, spouting witty, intelligent dialogue (Jon Voight! Vanessa Redgrave! Jean Reno! Emmanuelle Beart! Kristin Scott Thomas!) Magnificent set pieces (the restaurant explosion, the embassy ball, the high-security hanging-by-a-thread break-in, the high-speed train/helicopter/tunnel finale). Suspense, humor, drama... and all of it involving and thrilling.
Mission:Impossible 2 is exactly the opposite. Stock characters, stock plot, stock actors, stock locations, stock action sequences. Instead of suspense we get gun fights and car chases. Instead of humor we get tired double-entendres. Instead of drama we get "Octopussy"-level heavy breathing. Gone is the idea of Ethan Hunt being part of a M:I team. Now he's a stock superman, invincible and therefore totally boring. As is the film. A shame.
Mission:Impossible 2 is exactly the opposite. Stock characters, stock plot, stock actors, stock locations, stock action sequences. Instead of suspense we get gun fights and car chases. Instead of humor we get tired double-entendres. Instead of drama we get "Octopussy"-level heavy breathing. Gone is the idea of Ethan Hunt being part of a M:I team. Now he's a stock superman, invincible and therefore totally boring. As is the film. A shame.