Una hermosa pero ingenua actriz de televisión filma un documental sobre adolescentes con un secreto oculto.Una hermosa pero ingenua actriz de televisión filma un documental sobre adolescentes con un secreto oculto.Una hermosa pero ingenua actriz de televisión filma un documental sobre adolescentes con un secreto oculto.
- Nominada a1 premio BAFTA
- 7 premios ganados y 17 nominaciones en total
- Dirección
- Guionistas
- Todo el elenco y el equipo
- Producción, taquilla y más en IMDbPro
Argumento
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaAfter working in this movie, Casey Affleck brought director Gus Van Sant a screenplay by his brother Ben Affleck and Ben's friend Matt Damon; it became Mente indomable (1997).
- ErroresAt Larry Maretto's burial, the Catholic priest says "in nominis patris et filius et spiritus sanctus", getting most of the endings wrong; correct is "in nomine patris et filii et spiritus sancti", which any priest would know.
- Citas
Jimmy Emmett: Any time it rains, or when there's thunder and lightning, or when it snows, I have to jack off.
- Créditos curiososA scene plays out behind the end credits where Janice skates on the ice at the location where a significant moment in the story took place.
- Bandas sonorasSusie Q
Written by Eleanor Broadwater, Dale Hawkins and Stan Lewis (as Stanley J. Lewis)
Opinión destacada
There are some good things here - most notably the performances of Nicolle Kidman and Joaquin Phoenix - that nevertheless fail to coalesce into a satisfying whole because of the confusion of the central story. Kidman is great as the feather-brained harpy who will stop at nothing to be on television - the absolute narrowness of her world-view to the parameters of what fits onto the TV screen makes her a kind of female counterpart to Jim Carrey's Cable guy. But her single-minded devotion to this aim causes her subsequent actions to make little sense: would someone as ambitious as her really stick around in a nowhere New England town (humorously named Little Hope) rather than set out for the big time of New York or Los Angeles? Such a transplant would have given the movie a kick, since it would have set Suzanne's fundamental cluelessness against the reality of the television industry and how it actually works (to perhaps more humorous results than are displayed here).
But even if you can buy Suzanne remaining in her isolated little hamlet (and it must be said that the setting does allow for some subtler, more understated humor than the scenario drawn above would have), does it make any sense whatsoever for her to get involved with, much less marry, the Matt Dillon character? If we're really supposed to buy her as someone who thinks about nothing but television and making it in that medium, then what could she possibly see in Dillon, who is barely even familiar with TV? Any explanation would probably be lame, but what's lamer is the fact that the filmmakers don't even try to supply one! This leaves you with the sick feeling that it only happens in order to get the plot moving - the worst possible reason for ANYTHING to happen!
This fundamental flaw in plot logic really sinks the movie before it even has time to get going. That's a shame, because there are SO MANY good things here: Kidman's performance is wonderfully perky and shallow in all the right ways, and the candy-colored outfits that have been designed for her are a scream just in themselves. The narrative style is inventive, being told in flashback as a series of interviews - "Hard Copy" style, or even "Oprah" style - with the main participants, which in itself forms a meta-critique upon television and its reconstruction of the world (although, curiously, the film keeps dropping in and out of this style, and so waters down its effect). Finally, Phoenix is at once both hilarious and heartbreaking in his portrayal of a trailer park teenager so besotted with Kidman and the sophistication she supposedly represents (the joke's on him, of course) that he'd literally do anything for her, which is exactly his undoing. Watching him, I kept thinking of Dustin Hoffman's groundbreaking performance in The Graduate and how it operated on the twin levels of satire and true sympathy all at once. Phoenix, in my opinion, hits the same bulls-eye.
Other enjoyable performances come from Ileana Douglas as Dillon's sister, wonderfully nasty and sarcastic when discussing Kidman (and then surprisingly touching and vulnerable when you're least expecting it) and Wayne Knight as the head of the cable station where Suzanne comes to work. If you know Knight only as Newman on TV's "Seinfeld" and so believe him only capable of wild over-acting, his performance here is a treat: his baffled and understated responses to Suzanne's dippy ideas and shenanigans are some of the funniest things in the picture.
But in the end it all comes to nothing. The good things in this movie just can't salvage the fact that the central story has not been worked out with enough rigor. The film spins its wheels beautifully, but it simply has nowhere to go.
But even if you can buy Suzanne remaining in her isolated little hamlet (and it must be said that the setting does allow for some subtler, more understated humor than the scenario drawn above would have), does it make any sense whatsoever for her to get involved with, much less marry, the Matt Dillon character? If we're really supposed to buy her as someone who thinks about nothing but television and making it in that medium, then what could she possibly see in Dillon, who is barely even familiar with TV? Any explanation would probably be lame, but what's lamer is the fact that the filmmakers don't even try to supply one! This leaves you with the sick feeling that it only happens in order to get the plot moving - the worst possible reason for ANYTHING to happen!
This fundamental flaw in plot logic really sinks the movie before it even has time to get going. That's a shame, because there are SO MANY good things here: Kidman's performance is wonderfully perky and shallow in all the right ways, and the candy-colored outfits that have been designed for her are a scream just in themselves. The narrative style is inventive, being told in flashback as a series of interviews - "Hard Copy" style, or even "Oprah" style - with the main participants, which in itself forms a meta-critique upon television and its reconstruction of the world (although, curiously, the film keeps dropping in and out of this style, and so waters down its effect). Finally, Phoenix is at once both hilarious and heartbreaking in his portrayal of a trailer park teenager so besotted with Kidman and the sophistication she supposedly represents (the joke's on him, of course) that he'd literally do anything for her, which is exactly his undoing. Watching him, I kept thinking of Dustin Hoffman's groundbreaking performance in The Graduate and how it operated on the twin levels of satire and true sympathy all at once. Phoenix, in my opinion, hits the same bulls-eye.
Other enjoyable performances come from Ileana Douglas as Dillon's sister, wonderfully nasty and sarcastic when discussing Kidman (and then surprisingly touching and vulnerable when you're least expecting it) and Wayne Knight as the head of the cable station where Suzanne comes to work. If you know Knight only as Newman on TV's "Seinfeld" and so believe him only capable of wild over-acting, his performance here is a treat: his baffled and understated responses to Suzanne's dippy ideas and shenanigans are some of the funniest things in the picture.
But in the end it all comes to nothing. The good things in this movie just can't salvage the fact that the central story has not been worked out with enough rigor. The film spins its wheels beautifully, but it simply has nowhere to go.
- krumski
- 10 feb 2000
- Enlace permanente
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
- How long is To Die For?Con tecnología de Alexa
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- Países de origen
- Idioma
- También se conoce como
- To Die For
- Locaciones de filmación
- Black River, Georgina, Ontario, Canadá(final skating scene)
- Productoras
- Ver más créditos de la compañía en IMDbPro
Taquilla
- Presupuesto
- USD 20,000,000 (estimado)
- Total en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 21,284,514
- Fin de semana de estreno en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 386,510
- 1 oct 1995
- Total a nivel mundial
- USD 21,286,518
Contribuir a esta página
Sugiere una edición o agrega el contenido que falta
Principales brechas de datos
What is the streaming release date of Todo por un sueño (1995) in Canada?
Responda