Un biologo firma partecipa a una spedizione segreta e pericolosa in una zona misteriosa in cui le leggi della natura non si applicano.Un biologo firma partecipa a una spedizione segreta e pericolosa in una zona misteriosa in cui le leggi della natura non si applicano.Un biologo firma partecipa a una spedizione segreta e pericolosa in una zona misteriosa in cui le leggi della natura non si applicano.
- Premi
- 16 vittorie e 63 candidature
- Peyton
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
- Scientist
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
- Special Forces
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
- Special Forces
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
- Special Ops Soldier
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Trama
Lo sapevi?
- QuizDue to a poorly received test screening, David Ellison, a financier at Paramount, became concerned that the film was "too intellectual" and "too complicated," and demanded changes to make it appeal to a wider audience, including making Natalie Portman's character more sympathetic and changing the ending. Producer Scott Rudin sided with Garland in his desire to not alter the film, defending the film and refusing to take notes. Rudin had final cut.
- BlooperSentries would never light the inside of a watchtower, which would illuminate themselves and make it impossible for them to see anything outside.
- Citazioni
Lena: Why did my husband volunteer for a suicide mission?
Dr Ventress: Is that what you think we're doing? Committing suicide?
Lena: You must have profiled him. You must have assessed him. He must have said something.
Dr Ventress: So you're asking me as a psychologist?
Lena: Yeah.
Dr Ventress: Then, as a psychologist, I think you're confusing suicide with self-destruction. Almost none of us commit suicide, and almost all of us self-destruct. In some way, in some part of our lives. We drink, or we smoke, we destabilize the good job... and a happy marriage. But these aren't decisions, they're... they're impulses. In fact, you're probably better equipped to explain this than I am.
Lena: What does that mean?
Dr Ventress: You're a biologist. Isn't the self-destruction coded into us? Programmed into each cell?
- ConnessioniFeatured in Chris Stuckmann Movie Reviews: Annihilation (2018)
- Colonne sonoreHelplessly Hoping
Performed by Crosby Stills & Nash (as Crosby Stills and Nash)
Written by Stephen Stills
Licensed courtesy of Warner Music UK
Published by Gold Hill Music Inc (BMI)
For me, films work on three hierarchical levels: at the very basic, they should be entertaining. All films should succeed here (but not all do, which is why we should rightly slam those that don't!). Then, there are films that are not only entertaining but also elicit an emotional response; they move us in some way. Finally, there are entertaining films that are moving but also have meaning; they resonate on a deeper, often metaphysical level. To my mind, Annihilation achieves all three.
Forget the plot holes. They exist in every film, otherwise they wouldn't be stories. Some of my favourite films have canyon-sized plot holes and inconsistencies. If you analyse any film you'll find them, and often you don't have to look very hard, e.g. Back to the Future. Do the plot holes and gaps in logic stop BTTF from being a great film? Not to my mind, because I'm invested in the movie. Plot holes only matter to me when they draw me away from the film; if it fails to entertain me.
Does the plot in Annihilation even really matter? The film is about the experience, the visuals and audio, the curiosity, the suspense. A world that could only be accessible to us in our imaginations is here brought to life on the screen. It asks a lot of questions but isn't interested in the answers. It's bold, brave, challenging. Some of it is spectacular, some of it less so. Naturally, that will split opinion, but we've become too accustomed to the ready-packaged "Happy Meal Movies" that the studios churn out for us. We're addicted to them like we're addicted to sugary fast food. We should welcome any film that attempts to wean us off that and broaden our palates.
This is a proper cinematic film, so what a shame it is that here in the UK (and many other countries) we were denied the pleasure of seeing it on the big screen. I can only imagine how even more beguiling and entrancing the experience would've been.
Turn off the lights, switch off your phones, and sit back and feed your imagination and sense of wonder. I know that's why I watch and love films. 8.5/10.
- ajwh-53593
- 13 mar 2018
- Permalink
I più visti
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paesi di origine
- Sito ufficiale
- Lingua
- Celebre anche come
- Aniquilación
- Luoghi delle riprese
- Former RAF Bentwaters, Woodbridge, Suffolk, Inghilterra, Regno Unito(Exterior shots of army base)
- Aziende produttrici
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Budget
- 40.000.000 USD (previsto)
- Lordo Stati Uniti e Canada
- 32.732.301 USD
- Fine settimana di apertura Stati Uniti e Canada
- 11.071.584 USD
- 25 feb 2018
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 43.070.915 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione1 ora 55 minuti
- Colore
- Mix di suoni
- Proporzioni
- 2.39 : 1