Edge of Tomorrow
Edge of Tomorrow
Edge of Tomorrow
Ohjaus:
Doug LimanKuvaus:
Dion BeebeNäyttelijät:
Tom Cruise, Emily Blunt, Bill Paxton, Brendan Gleeson, Noah Taylor, Kick Gurry, Dragomir Mrsic, Charlotte Riley, Jonas Armstrong, Franz Drameh (lisää)Suoratoistopalvelut (5)
Juonikuvaukset(1)
EDGE OF TOMORROW sijoittuu lähitulevaisuuteen, jossa avaruusolennot ovat tehneet Maahan rajun hyökkäyksen, jota maailman mitkään sotavoimat eivät voi pysäyttää. Everstiluutnantti Bill Cage (Cruise) on upseeri, joka ei ole koskaan ollut mukana taistelussa, mutta silti hänet lähetetään tylysti suorittamaan hengenvaarallista tehtävää. Cage saa pian surmansa, mutta huomaa olevansa eräänlaisessa selittämättömässä aikaluupissa, joka pakottaa hänet elämään tuon armottoman taistelun ja kuoleman yhä uudestaan... ja uudestaan. Taistelu taistelulta Cage pystyy kuitenkin kasvattamaan taitojaan yhdessä erikoisjoukkojen sotilaan Rita Vrataskin (Blunt) kanssa. Niinpä Cagen ja Ritan käydessä taistoon kerta toisensa jälkeen, he etenevät vääjäämättä lähemmäs vihollisen kukistamista. (SF Film Fin.)
(lisää)Videot (16)
Arvostelut (13)
Some of the information in this review goes beyond what you might want to know before seeing the film. Edge of Tomorrow is clearly the most expensive example of silly gameplay to come along in a long time and possibly the most popular film among Cruise’s detractors, because in no other film does Tom die so many times. With its bold combining of the poetics of both films and video games, it underestimates the difference in the elementary principles on which the cinematic and gaming experiences are based. We go back to games because of the possibility to become (through our avatars) stronger, faster and more agile and to improve these abilities through repeated playing. Films take the element of interactivity out of our identification with the character and deprive us of the feeling that we are the ones who are becoming more capable (though in a certain respect, every viewing of a film is also an interactive activity during which we improve our cognitive ability). Therefore, films should strive to flesh out the characters and to support our emotional connection to them by gradually doling out information. In short, a well-thought-out story and believable characters should have priority over the more immediate “motion and emotion”. In this respect, Edge of Tomorrow falls critically short. The story is just as one-dimensional and dully straightforward as in any given action video game. The characters don’t put much effort into finding a solution that doesn’t involve a lot of shooting and corpses. Though we get into the protagonist’s head on a number of occasions and see the world through his eyes (the very game-like scanning of the space), the film does not give us enough clues as to why we should root for him. Besides the fact that he is a coward who doesn’t want to fight, we learn almost nothing else about him. His vague characterisation corresponds to the requirement of “open” video-game characters onto which players can easily project themselves. (Emily “Full Metal“ Blunt thus portrays the formulaic beautiful action heroine whom every second nerd can platonically fall in love with – though she is outwardly stubborn, tough and indomitable, the increasingly capable hero takes her under his wing as expected and she is thus transformed into just another fragile love interest). However, what works in a video game comes across as screenwriting laziness in a film. The most pronounced transformation that the protagonist undergoes consists in the improvement of his physical skills rather than in the reassessment of his opinions on war, fatalism and other issues that lend themselves to the story. But particularly because of the special abilities that he possesses, we don’t have any reason to fear for him through most of the film (the screenplay certainly does not sufficiently exploit the potential of the situation when Cage was only seriously wounded but didn’t die). We can thus only be amused by the various ways he dies and how he embarrasses the other characters with the scope of his knowledge. Not even the narratively important fact that in some scenes he sees farther into the future than the viewer does (and is thus explicitly used as the narrator of the story, or rather as a player who makes it through to the next level) was elaborated beyond simple gags and affected gestures. Liman was ironically least influenced by video games in directing the action scenes, which contain three times more cuts than would be necessary, so they are at least three times less clear than they could have been. Edge of Tomorrow is an entertaining summer lark that graphically demonstrates how counterproductive an excessive yet poorly though-out attempt to combine film and video-game elements can be. Simple imitation is not enough and, at least in my case, leads especially to thoughts about how much more fun it would have been to just play the game. 70%
()
(vähemmän)
(lisää)
The best thing would be not to praise this film and not to raise great expectations... The key asset of Edge of Tomorrow, after all, is not its grandiosity or action, as we would expect. Rather, Edge of Tomorrow is great thanks to its script, which is the most imaginative among blockbusters in a very, very long time. And thanks to its director (I bow down before him). In terms of entertainment value, dynamics and working with the viewer, the film practically has no faults and succeeds on every levels. From the balance of seriousness and humor in the perception of the (visually appealing) postapocalyptic world, through the retention of the audience’s attention by mean of an unpredictable plot that will glue you to your seat with its speed, all the way to the likable characters to whom you can relate, which you don’t see that much in blockbusters. Tom Cruise is just great, the character played by Emily Blunt is impossible not to fall in love with and the chemistry between them works without a hint of a romantic kitsch. Edge of Tomorrow is for playful post-apocalyptic sci-fi action movies what Children of Men is for thoughtful post-apocalyptic sci-fi dramas.
()
This technological blockbuster, which in the long post-production process was given a coat by the special effects artists that models would die for, earns points mainly with the merciless thrill of the war. This war borrowed all over the place to wring out a surprisingly clever, pleasantly black-humored (headshots!) spectacle, which is only shattered by the skeleton's lack of a more driving conclusion to bring the film's entire video-game architecture to an absolute climax; otherwise, it's flawlessly acted, musically compelling, and directorially as confident as few in the genre in recent years. 4 ½.
()
Very well executed concept known from Groundhog Day, Source Code and probably every sci-fi series ever made. At the beginning, the hero is introduced without any heroic attributes and the pandemonium of war that follows during the landing in Normandy sets the bar very high. And it holds there damn long. Edge of Tomorrow only stumbles a little by the end, where the thus far relatively reaistic battles (to the extent than a battle between people in exoskeletons and giant tentacled aliens can be described as “realistic”) abandon the realism and now they are falling from huge heights without any injuries and the entire final fight goes too smoothly, especially considering how important it is and how it goes straight down to business. That said, it’s an excellent action sci-fi blockbuster of the kind that has been missing in cinemas for a long time. The action is spectacular, Cruise and Blunt have good chemistry and the script also has a couple of nice moments.
()
I’m fascinated that the American viewer (the sponsor of the American filmmaking industry) prefers a commercial mishmash called Transformers to an imaginative sci-fi called Edge of Tomorrow, where the name essentially does not reveal anything and the movie can only surprise. The Japanese are known for always having great storylines in their stories and comic books, and I’m glad that finally one of those got this kind of interpretation with Tom Cruise in the leading role. For me, he will probably always be the actor who has signed up for sci-fi movies. Considering he’s a Scientologist, I’m not even surprised that he makes such films. I’m actually very happy that he’s the one to do it, because it fits him the most. As a result, after watching the film, I thought hard about whether to give it five stars. I had a slight issue with the camera, which blurred my vision in a similar way a decent 5 km run can. But that is Doug Liman for you. However, if not for his directing, I might not have seen such an amazing change in Tom’s role. So I can only add that this film has its pros and cons, but even so, it is probably my favorite one from this year’s movies.
()
