ÉVALUATION IMDb
6,9/10
40 k
MA NOTE
L'histoire autobiographique de Howard Stern, le rebelle de la radio qui est maintenant aussi une personnalité de la télévision, un auteur et une star de cinéma.L'histoire autobiographique de Howard Stern, le rebelle de la radio qui est maintenant aussi une personnalité de la télévision, un auteur et une star de cinéma.L'histoire autobiographique de Howard Stern, le rebelle de la radio qui est maintenant aussi une personnalité de la télévision, un auteur et une star de cinéma.
- Prix
- 2 victoires et 3 nominations au total
Histoire
Le saviez-vous
- GaffesRobin makes the statement that Howard, "...wasn't old enough to be in Vietnam" and Howard replies, "no duh". The Vietnam War started in 1965 and ended in 1975. Howard was 18 years of age in 1972 which does make him old enough to be in the war.
- Citations
[after seeing Howard in his Fartman oufit]
Ozzy Osbourne: What a fucking jerk.
- Générique farfeluStern cohort 'Stuttering John' Melendez rants about Howard not putting him in the movie.
- Autres versionsFor its airings on the USA Network, the movie occasionally pauses and 'Howard Stern' appears to provide commentary on the movie. Also, in an atypical move for a basic cable channel, USA Network presented the movie with no edits -- but with all spoken obscenities bleeped and objectionable visuals (nudity, drug use) electronically masked. This version also airs on VH1.
- ConnexionsFeatured in Saturday Night Live: Alec Baldwin/Tina Turner (1997)
- Bandes originalesThe Great American Nightmare
Written by Rob Zombie & Charlie Clouser
Performed by Rob Zombie with Howard Stern
Courtesy of Geffen Records
Commentaire en vedette
Another poster had the following heading for their review of "Private Parts":
A self-serving and unrealistic look at a funny man
And I totally agree. I like Howard Stern. I don't love or idolize him like many of his fans do but I think he fills a necessary niche for people.
But this movie reeked of self promotion and an attempt to win over people (mostly women) who didn't or don't like him. This was confirmed when my wife (who hated Stern) turned to me after the movie was over and said "he's so nice...I liked it!" Oye. The kiss of death.
This movie was a big hit in it's opening weekend but quickly fizzled out. I know why. His true, core fans flocked to see it the first weekend and were put off by it's "nice" moments (all the cuddly stuff with his wife and kids...the sorrowful, thoughtful look he gets before he hits it big..etc.) This movie is NOT what hardcore Stern fans want or were looking for. Oh, yes...there's the nudity and the "naughty" Stern behavior. But for some reason, despite some of it being taken directly from the original airings, these scenes have a cleaned/scrubbed feeling to it which zaps them of their spark, fun and originality. The scenes are simply NOT funny, daring or in the slightest way dirty or daring. It does not push the envelope at all.
After the opening weekend, most non Stern fans would not go near it because they feared (incorrectly) that the movie was near pornographic and anarchic. So the film fell into a void between the (disappointed )hardcore Stern fans and the non fans.
What the film could've been is something along the lines of a Monty Python film. It needed an edge or some zippy editing to move it along.
What's amazing about the film is how completely, shockingly CONVENTIONAL it is.
A self-serving and unrealistic look at a funny man
And I totally agree. I like Howard Stern. I don't love or idolize him like many of his fans do but I think he fills a necessary niche for people.
But this movie reeked of self promotion and an attempt to win over people (mostly women) who didn't or don't like him. This was confirmed when my wife (who hated Stern) turned to me after the movie was over and said "he's so nice...I liked it!" Oye. The kiss of death.
This movie was a big hit in it's opening weekend but quickly fizzled out. I know why. His true, core fans flocked to see it the first weekend and were put off by it's "nice" moments (all the cuddly stuff with his wife and kids...the sorrowful, thoughtful look he gets before he hits it big..etc.) This movie is NOT what hardcore Stern fans want or were looking for. Oh, yes...there's the nudity and the "naughty" Stern behavior. But for some reason, despite some of it being taken directly from the original airings, these scenes have a cleaned/scrubbed feeling to it which zaps them of their spark, fun and originality. The scenes are simply NOT funny, daring or in the slightest way dirty or daring. It does not push the envelope at all.
After the opening weekend, most non Stern fans would not go near it because they feared (incorrectly) that the movie was near pornographic and anarchic. So the film fell into a void between the (disappointed )hardcore Stern fans and the non fans.
What the film could've been is something along the lines of a Monty Python film. It needed an edge or some zippy editing to move it along.
What's amazing about the film is how completely, shockingly CONVENTIONAL it is.
- chconnol
- 20 mai 2004
- Lien permanent
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et surveiller les recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Private Parts?Propulsé par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Private Parts
- Lieux de tournage
- sociétés de production
- Consultez plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 28 000 000 $ US (estimation)
- Brut – États-Unis et Canada
- 41 230 799 $ US
- Fin de semaine d'ouverture – États-Unis et Canada
- 14 616 333 $ US
- 9 mars 1997
- Brut – à l'échelle mondiale
- 41 230 799 $ US
- Durée1 heure 49 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 Parties intimes (1997) officially released in India in Hindi?
Répondre