IMDb-BEWERTUNG
5,6/10
1821
IHRE BEWERTUNG
Der Film erzählt seine Geschichte aus der Perspektive des erwachsenen Jake. Er erzählt über seine Freundin Joanne und über Menschen, auf die man sich verlassen kann.Der Film erzählt seine Geschichte aus der Perspektive des erwachsenen Jake. Er erzählt über seine Freundin Joanne und über Menschen, auf die man sich verlassen kann.Der Film erzählt seine Geschichte aus der Perspektive des erwachsenen Jake. Er erzählt über seine Freundin Joanne und über Menschen, auf die man sich verlassen kann.
- Regie
- Drehbuch
- Hauptbesetzung
- Auszeichnungen
- 1 Gewinn & 1 Nominierung insgesamt
David Johansen
- Orangutan
- (Synchronisation)
Empfohlene Bewertungen
Naked in New York is one of those always risky propositions, when "artists" write about the "business" of what they're doing, in this case the theater. Naked is one of the better examples of it, and features some nice ensemble work from Eric Stoltz, Mary Louise Parker, and Timothy Dalton.
The best moment, and the reason I'm adding a comment, is when the main character attends his first New York literary party. When he spots William Styron, he makes some snide comment to the effect of, "What has he written?" The movie responds by flashing Styron's works, which are considerable.
It's a great moment and a great use of the medium, and almost worth the rental price. Naked is a good one for a slow night.
The best moment, and the reason I'm adding a comment, is when the main character attends his first New York literary party. When he spots William Styron, he makes some snide comment to the effect of, "What has he written?" The movie responds by flashing Styron's works, which are considerable.
It's a great moment and a great use of the medium, and almost worth the rental price. Naked is a good one for a slow night.
Two good actors, Eric Stoltz and Mary-Louise Parker, are overshadowed by a poor script and poor direction. The excessive use of asides and narration, along with a poor script, make this in all a poor movie.
The plot idea is good. Two people fall in love and must decide between careers going in geographically opposite directions and their mutual attraction for each other. That's a great idea for a plot, but it just didn't play out.
The plot idea is good. Two people fall in love and must decide between careers going in geographically opposite directions and their mutual attraction for each other. That's a great idea for a plot, but it just didn't play out.
"Naked in New York", is an indie film that is not seen much these days. In a way, its star, Eric Stolz is to be congratulated by his support to this kind of films. As directed by Daniel Algrent, and based on the material written by the director and John Warren, it shows it had a potential that somehow doesn't quite make the viewer root for these characters.
At the center, Jake and Joanne. They seem to be an ideal couple. Not only are they attractive, but they appear to have their marriage under control, that is, until outside influences come their way and in a way try to derail it. Jake is an aspiring playwright and Joanne a photographer. Joanne makes it first when a gallery owner shows interest in her work and in her. Jake, helped by his college friend, Chris, gets one of his plays accepted for a Off-Broadway production.
The separation of Jake from Joanne, plays heavily into their relationship. Jake suspects Elliott Price's motives when he makes Joanne his assistant. At the same time, Jake meets more than he bargained for in the theatrical world of New York, where he finds a fauna and flora he didn't count on.
Eric Stolz and Mary Louise Parker make a good couple. Ralph Macchio is the gay friend who's secretly in love with Jake. Jill Clayburgh, Timothy Dalton and Tony Curtis are seen also. Kathleen Turner is excellent as the older theater diva who is instrumental in having Jake's play produced because she is in it.
This was a good effort by all of the people involved.
At the center, Jake and Joanne. They seem to be an ideal couple. Not only are they attractive, but they appear to have their marriage under control, that is, until outside influences come their way and in a way try to derail it. Jake is an aspiring playwright and Joanne a photographer. Joanne makes it first when a gallery owner shows interest in her work and in her. Jake, helped by his college friend, Chris, gets one of his plays accepted for a Off-Broadway production.
The separation of Jake from Joanne, plays heavily into their relationship. Jake suspects Elliott Price's motives when he makes Joanne his assistant. At the same time, Jake meets more than he bargained for in the theatrical world of New York, where he finds a fauna and flora he didn't count on.
Eric Stolz and Mary Louise Parker make a good couple. Ralph Macchio is the gay friend who's secretly in love with Jake. Jill Clayburgh, Timothy Dalton and Tony Curtis are seen also. Kathleen Turner is excellent as the older theater diva who is instrumental in having Jake's play produced because she is in it.
This was a good effort by all of the people involved.
I can't put my finger on what was wrong with this movie. Good production values, as one would expect with Martin Scorcese involved. I was OK with the flashback style of character development, and narration and framing device. The cast was amazing, with so many famous actors in cameos or small parts. I guess it comes down to Eric Stoltz, who I find annoying for some reason, even though he is certainly an accomplished actor. I give it a wishy-washy five stars.
I'm just surprised by this film.
While the film was interesting enough to keep me watching, and simply flooded with star talent in terms of actors and people playing themselves, it never really comes together. Even Scorsese is involved, but you can't tell.
Is it a comedy? Is it a coming-of-age tale? Is it a love triangle/tree/whatever? Is it experimental? Somehow it fails at everything.
I never really cared for any of the characters, and most of the effects seemed completely pointless. It's as if someone made a movie, and everyone agreed to do it for free, and behaved like they were unwilling participants. I wonder how much better it would have been if they had an independent cast, and spent the money on, say, a director.
I do give it a generous 6/10, because there is an interesting story in there. And for spotting all the stars and personalities we know and love. And of course "the kiss".
While the film was interesting enough to keep me watching, and simply flooded with star talent in terms of actors and people playing themselves, it never really comes together. Even Scorsese is involved, but you can't tell.
Is it a comedy? Is it a coming-of-age tale? Is it a love triangle/tree/whatever? Is it experimental? Somehow it fails at everything.
I never really cared for any of the characters, and most of the effects seemed completely pointless. It's as if someone made a movie, and everyone agreed to do it for free, and behaved like they were unwilling participants. I wonder how much better it would have been if they had an independent cast, and spent the money on, say, a director.
I do give it a generous 6/10, because there is an interesting story in there. And for spotting all the stars and personalities we know and love. And of course "the kiss".
Wusstest du schon
- WissenswertesRalph Macchio's controversial role was chosen by his manager to "promote his popularity".
- Zitate
[On marriage]
Jake Briggs: I've been trying to fit it into the context of my life, you know what I mean? And life, life is... curious.
Top-Auswahl
Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
- How long is Naked in New York?Powered by Alexa
Details
Box Office
- Budget
- 5.000.000 $ (geschätzt)
- Bruttoertrag in den USA und Kanada
- 1.038.959 $
- Weltweiter Bruttoertrag
- 1.038.959 $
Zu dieser Seite beitragen
Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen
Oberste Lücke
By what name was Naked in New York (1993) officially released in India in English?
Antwort