NOTE IMDb
5,3/10
7,6 k
MA NOTE
Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueA trapper and his young son get pulled into the American revolution early as unwilling participants and remain involved through to the end.A trapper and his young son get pulled into the American revolution early as unwilling participants and remain involved through to the end.A trapper and his young son get pulled into the American revolution early as unwilling participants and remain involved through to the end.
- Récompenses
- 1 victoire et 4 nominations
Cheryl Anne Miller
- Cuffy
- (as Cheryl Miller)
Histoire
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesWhen Annie Lennox's character sings a song near the end of the movie, her voice is dubbed.
- GaffesIn battle, the British soldiers are depicted taking short steps; in reality, Redcoats were trained to take long paces, so as to close the range quickly.
- Versions alternativesIn 2009, Hugh Hudson made his own director's cut titled "Revolution Revisited" which was also released on DVD. The new version featured new narration recorded by Al Pacino, a different ending, and removed 10 minutes of footage from the film.
- ConnexionsEdited into Give Me Your Answer True (1987)
Commentaire à la une
I'm Walkin' Here
It's 1776. France and England are in perpetual war. After the Declaration of Independence, British troops land in New York. Fur trapper Tom Dobb (Al Pacino) had lost most of his family. All he has left is his boat and his son. The revolutionaries confiscate his boat and they promise to pay him in gold in two weeks after the war is to end. His son Ned unwittingly signs up for the revolution and Tom is forced to join up to protect him. Daisy McConnahay (Nastassja Kinski) is the rebellious daughter of a rich New York family. She is drawn to the revolution and rebels against his war profiteering father. Sgt. Maj. Peasy (Donald Sutherland) is the ruthless English soldier who fights alongside his drummer boy son.
The son is the brattiest of brats. Pacino is Italian to his core. There is no way to alleviate that and his natural accent doesn't help. Kinski is foreign in her accent and annoyingly arrogant in her rebellion. Of course, her family is horribly selfish. The British are cartoonish. The revolutionaries don't start off well either. It's an ugly world overall. The only compelling work comes from Sutherland who knows how to play his uncomprising role without becoming a caricature. It is interesting to depict the rebellion start with such an ugly mob. Usually they're more noble than that. That has to be a part of the reason why this movie bombed so badly. There are also other pressing problems.
It's notable that the black actors barely speak a word. I'm sure the movie is trying to say a little something about slavery. In Philadelphia, the slaves are rising up as freedom rings out all around them but it's left confused. Obviously, none of them are freed in reality but it's not clear from the movie. I think the blacks being march off in the opposite direction is suppose to be them being sent into slavery in the south. I also have a problem with Pacino fighting off the two Indian scouts. It's barely believable and it would be easily solved if the friendly Indians arrive a minute earlier. They could help him kill the two Indian scouts. In addition, I don't understand why he doesn't go with his son at the end. He spends the entire movie rescuing his son but leaves him for the city life. That's stupid. I don't mind portraying the war as an ugly affair but this one is not that good.
The son is the brattiest of brats. Pacino is Italian to his core. There is no way to alleviate that and his natural accent doesn't help. Kinski is foreign in her accent and annoyingly arrogant in her rebellion. Of course, her family is horribly selfish. The British are cartoonish. The revolutionaries don't start off well either. It's an ugly world overall. The only compelling work comes from Sutherland who knows how to play his uncomprising role without becoming a caricature. It is interesting to depict the rebellion start with such an ugly mob. Usually they're more noble than that. That has to be a part of the reason why this movie bombed so badly. There are also other pressing problems.
It's notable that the black actors barely speak a word. I'm sure the movie is trying to say a little something about slavery. In Philadelphia, the slaves are rising up as freedom rings out all around them but it's left confused. Obviously, none of them are freed in reality but it's not clear from the movie. I think the blacks being march off in the opposite direction is suppose to be them being sent into slavery in the south. I also have a problem with Pacino fighting off the two Indian scouts. It's barely believable and it would be easily solved if the friendly Indians arrive a minute earlier. They could help him kill the two Indian scouts. In addition, I don't understand why he doesn't go with his son at the end. He spends the entire movie rescuing his son but leaves him for the city life. That's stupid. I don't mind portraying the war as an ugly affair but this one is not that good.
utile•72
- SnoopyStyle
- 8 juil. 2018
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et regarder afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Revolution?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Revolution
- Lieux de tournage
- King's Lynn, Norfolk, Angleterre, Royaume-Uni(New York scenes)
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 28 000 000 $US (estimé)
- Montant brut aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 358 574 $US
- Week-end de sortie aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 52 755 $US
- 29 déc. 1985
- Montant brut mondial
- 358 574 $US
- Durée2 heures 6 minutes
- Couleur
- Rapport de forme
- 2.35 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant
Lacune principale
By what name was Révolution (1985) officially released in India in English?
Répondre