ÉVALUATION IMDb
5,7/10
3,5 k
MA NOTE
Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueA retired CIA agent is recruited to participate in a prisoner exchange with the Russians.A retired CIA agent is recruited to participate in a prisoner exchange with the Russians.A retired CIA agent is recruited to participate in a prisoner exchange with the Russians.
Avis en vedette
Pretty good spy movie more realistic than many other spy flicks. Plausible story with dozens of typical Hollywood digs at
America, American institutions in and out of the government and American allies- mostly overt digs but some covert ones too. If you ignore them, or more likely don't even notice them, this is a very watchable bit of entertainment. Good cinematography, sometimes reminiscent of Hitchcock, and action keeps you interested in the story. Hackman and Baryshnikov work and play well together.
I thought I had seen all of the Gene Hackman movies, but somehow I missed this one and I rather enjoyed it quite nicely.
The good: Gene Hackman Gene Hackman Gene Hackman. The guy just gets it right (almost) every single movie. He is Mister Cool. A gentleman. A wisecracker.
This is certainly not Gene Hackman's best role, but it's good enough.
More good: the music by Michael Kamen, which sounds eerily similar to the orignal Die Hard soundtrack, which Michael Kamen composed as well. I REALLY appreciate a dedicated soundtrack and this movie has got a special score for every different scene. Terrific suspenseful score, that is one of the best features of this entire movie, just as it was in Die Hard.
Any bad? Well, it's a predictable, classic espionage story, which has been told (better) many times before in other movies, but for the fans of this genre, who dont mind the typical espionage cliches, this is still well worth a watch. It did please me from start till finish.
I am glad I stumbled into this movie. Gene Hackman rocks. And this movie is simply a well made nineties espionage movie.
The good: Gene Hackman Gene Hackman Gene Hackman. The guy just gets it right (almost) every single movie. He is Mister Cool. A gentleman. A wisecracker.
This is certainly not Gene Hackman's best role, but it's good enough.
More good: the music by Michael Kamen, which sounds eerily similar to the orignal Die Hard soundtrack, which Michael Kamen composed as well. I REALLY appreciate a dedicated soundtrack and this movie has got a special score for every different scene. Terrific suspenseful score, that is one of the best features of this entire movie, just as it was in Die Hard.
Any bad? Well, it's a predictable, classic espionage story, which has been told (better) many times before in other movies, but for the fans of this genre, who dont mind the typical espionage cliches, this is still well worth a watch. It did please me from start till finish.
I am glad I stumbled into this movie. Gene Hackman rocks. And this movie is simply a well made nineties espionage movie.
Apparently this film bombed at the box office and the director was very disappointed with how the whole thing turned out.
However, the film has a certain post cold war charm and the two leads Gene Hackman and Mihail Baryshnikov play nicely opposite each other.
True it's not a well finished film and scripting is, at times, nonsensical.
However, the film has a certain post cold war charm and the two leads Gene Hackman and Mihail Baryshnikov play nicely opposite each other.
True it's not a well finished film and scripting is, at times, nonsensical.
Company business is definitely a film for those with spy-genre tastes. The plot begins as a fairly straight-forward story, but as you expect in all films in this genre, twists and turns develop - people are not who they seem and it becomes difficult to work out who is playing who. That said, it is not a clichéd film, largely because the twists are not contrived or overcooked.
Further it has a European flavour to tone it down. It doesn't become a cluttery screaming shoot out towards the end - an trap that American films all too often fall into.
I suppose that's why I give it such a high rating: an engaging spy thriller that manages not to overstate the drama or manufacture the twists. In many respects, it gives the film a strange credibility. I feel that this is much more indicative of a real CIA officer's job than something like spygame or James Bond.
Mikail Barishnykov (sorry if spelling is wrong) showed considerable acting talent and Hackman, as always, delivers a strong, but toned performance. Supporting roles from Kirkwood Smith and Terry Quinn, only bolstered its stocks further.
A strange thing to note is that the key people involved in the film has issues with it. Gene Hackman was tired from doing three films in a row and apparently wanted to back out, but pushed through. Barishnykov refused to do publicity for it and has not spoken fondly of the film. The director said some sequences were good, but the "whole" wasn't the outcome he wanted and regretted starting production without a complete shooting script.
While I feel like someone who appreciated a film that the main people in its production didn't rate, I don't care. I've rewatched it multiple times and love its pacing and plotting.
Further it has a European flavour to tone it down. It doesn't become a cluttery screaming shoot out towards the end - an trap that American films all too often fall into.
I suppose that's why I give it such a high rating: an engaging spy thriller that manages not to overstate the drama or manufacture the twists. In many respects, it gives the film a strange credibility. I feel that this is much more indicative of a real CIA officer's job than something like spygame or James Bond.
Mikail Barishnykov (sorry if spelling is wrong) showed considerable acting talent and Hackman, as always, delivers a strong, but toned performance. Supporting roles from Kirkwood Smith and Terry Quinn, only bolstered its stocks further.
A strange thing to note is that the key people involved in the film has issues with it. Gene Hackman was tired from doing three films in a row and apparently wanted to back out, but pushed through. Barishnykov refused to do publicity for it and has not spoken fondly of the film. The director said some sequences were good, but the "whole" wasn't the outcome he wanted and regretted starting production without a complete shooting script.
While I feel like someone who appreciated a film that the main people in its production didn't rate, I don't care. I've rewatched it multiple times and love its pacing and plotting.
the great acting was about the best part of this for me. I also liked the storyline; it was deep enough but not so that you get too confused about why the things that are happening are happening. It was good to see lots of different and interesting locations: Berlin and Paris (I always wondered how the elevators went up the curved legs) in particular. The script was no slacker either. On top of the normal discussion you had witty one liners to lighten the mood. I thought it was charming how they started out (Hackman and Baryshnikov that is) as 'business men' doing their respective jobs, playing their roles but then became attached to one another and thus fought together. I also liked the mysteriousness of the ending. The 'where are the going to go now?' factor is usually a good touch. If anything was wrong with it I would've liked a little more action. The only real action scene I recall was the shootout in the subway. Other than that they were just running from baddies and jumping out of windows, which was entertaining but more confrontation would have been appreciated.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesMikhail Baryshnikov hated this movie so much that he refused to do publicity for it.
- GaffesWhen Mikhail and Gene are walking through the forest, they walk toward the camera which moves backwards in sync with them. At one point, the camera crew bumps some branches of a fir tree, which are seen to snap into the frame before the actors reach the tree.
- ConnexionsReferenced in Ken Adam - Production Designer (1990)
- Bandes originalesThe Boys In The Back Room
Written by Friedrich Hollaender (as Frederick Hollander) and Frank Loesser
Arranged and Producedv by Tony Bremner
Performed by Adèle Anderson
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et surveiller les recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Company Business?Propulsé par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Langues
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Company Business
- Lieux de tournage
- société de production
- Consultez plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 18 000 000 $ US (estimation)
- Brut – États-Unis et Canada
- 1 501 785 $ US
- Fin de semaine d'ouverture – États-Unis et Canada
- 533 610 $ US
- 8 sept. 1991
- Brut – à l'échelle mondiale
- 1 501 785 $ US
- Durée1 heure 38 minutes
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant
Lacune principale
By what name was Associés Inc. (1991) officially released in India in English?
Répondre