Un groupe de criminels se réunit dans des circonstances mystérieuses et doit travailler ensemble pour découvrir ce qui se passe réellement lorsqu'un simple travail tourne mal.Un groupe de criminels se réunit dans des circonstances mystérieuses et doit travailler ensemble pour découvrir ce qui se passe réellement lorsqu'un simple travail tourne mal.Un groupe de criminels se réunit dans des circonstances mystérieuses et doit travailler ensemble pour découvrir ce qui se passe réellement lorsqu'un simple travail tourne mal.
- Prix
- 1 nomination au total
Histoire
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesMany media outlets have speculated about Brendan Fraser's appearance in this movie, with many concerned about his health. The actual reason for Brendan Fraser's dramatic weight gain was that he had bulked up for his starring role in the the upcoming movie, The Whale, directed by Darren Aronofsky.
- GaffesVanessa's face is a mess after she is beaten to a pulp by her mob boss husband. Yet the next morning, when Ronald meets her at the hotel, there is no trace of the beating.
- Citations
Ronald Russo: Wine is good for you. Ask Jesus.
Curt Goynes: Yeah, well, so's a clear head. Ask Pontius Pilate.
- Bandes originalesThe Three Men in My Life
Written by John Anderson, Lou Baxter and Joe Lutcher
Performed by Maggie Jacquet
Courtesy of Ace Records Ltd.
Commentaire en vedette
Steven Soderbergh's Neo-Noir begins with what seems like a simple set-up. In 50s Detroit, a low-level mobster (Brendan Fraser) hires three hoods (Don Cheadle, Benicio Del Toro, Kieran Culkun) to shake down an accountant (David Harbour) for some files in his office. Of course, nothing goes as planned.
What follows is a series of crosses, double-crosses and beyond. Ed Solomon's screenplay has enough twists and turns for a season's worth of a limited series. The plot certainly keeps the viewer on their toes and is never less than interesting, but at a certain point the momentum gets a bit slack. Some have compared the subtext of the script with Chinatown. The connection is obviously there, but, the constant churn of the stoyline blunts it's effectiveness. The Cinematography by Soderbergh (using his Peter Andrews pseudonym) is distracting with it's extreme wide lenses distorting the image. In a few wide shots, it's not ineffective, but, it's overuse doesn't work. And, "Andrews" also seems to be lighting the movie for film rather than digital which causes crushed shadow detail and too bright night exteriors.
The acting is what makes the movie worth seeing. In addition to the above mentioned, there are also nice turns by Ray Liotta, Amy Seimetz, Julia Fox, Jon Hamm and an unbilled significant cameo. At first the sight of Cheadle, Del Toro and Liotta may make one think that they are all a bit long in the tooth for their roles, but it works here. Their weary, haggard appearances make one believe that they are all just desperate enough to lay it on the line for one last gamble that will let them retire once and for all.
NO SUDDEN MOVE is a decent example of, more or less, straight storytelling for Soderbergh, even if his penchant for experimentation and subverting audience expectations get in the way of it being fully successful.
What follows is a series of crosses, double-crosses and beyond. Ed Solomon's screenplay has enough twists and turns for a season's worth of a limited series. The plot certainly keeps the viewer on their toes and is never less than interesting, but at a certain point the momentum gets a bit slack. Some have compared the subtext of the script with Chinatown. The connection is obviously there, but, the constant churn of the stoyline blunts it's effectiveness. The Cinematography by Soderbergh (using his Peter Andrews pseudonym) is distracting with it's extreme wide lenses distorting the image. In a few wide shots, it's not ineffective, but, it's overuse doesn't work. And, "Andrews" also seems to be lighting the movie for film rather than digital which causes crushed shadow detail and too bright night exteriors.
The acting is what makes the movie worth seeing. In addition to the above mentioned, there are also nice turns by Ray Liotta, Amy Seimetz, Julia Fox, Jon Hamm and an unbilled significant cameo. At first the sight of Cheadle, Del Toro and Liotta may make one think that they are all a bit long in the tooth for their roles, but it works here. Their weary, haggard appearances make one believe that they are all just desperate enough to lay it on the line for one last gamble that will let them retire once and for all.
NO SUDDEN MOVE is a decent example of, more or less, straight storytelling for Soderbergh, even if his penchant for experimentation and subverting audience expectations get in the way of it being fully successful.
- gortx
- 9 juill. 2021
- Lien permanent
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et surveiller les recommandations personnalisées
- How long is No Sudden Move?Propulsé par Alexa
Détails
- Durée1 heure 55 minutes
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 2.16 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant
Lacune principale
What was the official certification given to Que personne ne bouge (2021) in Spain?
Répondre