IMDb-BEWERTUNG
5,6/10
2094
IHRE BEWERTUNG
Nach dem Tod ihres Mannes bei einer seltsamen Explosion beginnt Amparo mit der einzigen Hilfe von Richi, einem Wachmann, Ex-Polizisten und Alkoholiker, nach Antworten zu suchen. triNach dem Tod ihres Mannes bei einer seltsamen Explosion beginnt Amparo mit der einzigen Hilfe von Richi, einem Wachmann, Ex-Polizisten und Alkoholiker, nach Antworten zu suchen. triNach dem Tod ihres Mannes bei einer seltsamen Explosion beginnt Amparo mit der einzigen Hilfe von Richi, einem Wachmann, Ex-Polizisten und Alkoholiker, nach Antworten zu suchen. tri
Folgen durchsuchen
Empfohlene Bewertungen
The 1992 serial didn't live up to expectations and felt below average overall.
The story started off okay but was stretched out across too many episodes. Instead of keeping things exciting, the plot felt slow, and the thrilling climax didn't come until the last episode. By then, it didn't have the impact it should have.
The series dragged on unnecessarily, with some episodes feeling like filler. The story moved very slowly, which made it harder to stay interested.
The acting didn't do justice to the story. The performances were not very strong, and the actors didn't make the characters feel real or exciting. This made it hard to connect with the story.
Overall, the 1992 serial was a letdown. It's a below-average series with slow pacing, weak acting, and a disappointing ending. If you're looking for a thrilling series, this one may not be the best choice.
The story started off okay but was stretched out across too many episodes. Instead of keeping things exciting, the plot felt slow, and the thrilling climax didn't come until the last episode. By then, it didn't have the impact it should have.
The series dragged on unnecessarily, with some episodes feeling like filler. The story moved very slowly, which made it harder to stay interested.
The acting didn't do justice to the story. The performances were not very strong, and the actors didn't make the characters feel real or exciting. This made it hard to connect with the story.
Overall, the 1992 serial was a letdown. It's a below-average series with slow pacing, weak acting, and a disappointing ending. If you're looking for a thrilling series, this one may not be the best choice.
This is a fine series and presented with great balance and originality. It is wisely kept to six episodes when so many other series are overambitiously stretched to eight. It is well acted and makes good use of the atmosphere and the remaining installations of the Seville World's Fair, something that other film makers might want to think about doing too. The balance and interaction of the characters is unusually supple, low-key and realistic, not something one would normally expect to see in, say, a U. S. film, for instance. Yet, it steers well clear of the soap-operatic, TV-style shallowness and caricature we are often shown on Spanish TV.
We know from Wikipedia that the boat-sinking and onshore fire at the beginning are real events that actually did beset the opening of the Seville 1992 Expo, but nowhere in the film are we given a clue as to whether the rest of the plot is true or not.
We should be told somewhere exactly which elements are ''documentary'' and which are not. Has the intricate plot beneath the surface got any connection with probable leads in the original real-life investigation, just a few of them, or none at all?
For that matter, what exactly DO we know about the real events? How much of this historical fiction is drawn from reality, and how much isn't?
Surely more is known of the actual events after thirty-three years, or is it still shrouded in mystery by the apparently sluggish and politically dominated Spanish police?
How much of this historical fiction is drawn from reality and how much isn't?
No need for a spoiler-alert here until the ORIGINAL mystery is finally solved some time in the future.
Is this part of the disquieting trend--apparently popularized by The Tudors--of using historical elements to ''legitimize'' a wholly invented fiction to stand in for any worthwhile attempt at history?
We know from Wikipedia that the boat-sinking and onshore fire at the beginning are real events that actually did beset the opening of the Seville 1992 Expo, but nowhere in the film are we given a clue as to whether the rest of the plot is true or not.
We should be told somewhere exactly which elements are ''documentary'' and which are not. Has the intricate plot beneath the surface got any connection with probable leads in the original real-life investigation, just a few of them, or none at all?
For that matter, what exactly DO we know about the real events? How much of this historical fiction is drawn from reality, and how much isn't?
Surely more is known of the actual events after thirty-three years, or is it still shrouded in mystery by the apparently sluggish and politically dominated Spanish police?
How much of this historical fiction is drawn from reality and how much isn't?
No need for a spoiler-alert here until the ORIGINAL mystery is finally solved some time in the future.
Is this part of the disquieting trend--apparently popularized by The Tudors--of using historical elements to ''legitimize'' a wholly invented fiction to stand in for any worthwhile attempt at history?
A raging alcoholic ex-cop and a strident widow team up to get to the bottom of a murderous mystery that somehow involves the 1992 Seville Expo and its official mascot, Curro. The show isn't without its flaws but it's enjoyable thanks to its combination of darkness and quirky humor, its unconventional structure and some decent performances. The series is strangely effective - and affecting - in its portrayal of addiction. It's less successful in its attempts to say something profound about government corruption and official abuses of power, which come off as hammy and overdone. Overall it's an imperfect but engaging series.
So bad an.d confusing. The acting is poor and the plot is unclear. There are so many random scenes that could easily had been left out. It's like they didn't had a script. The main characters walks from one wierd situation to and other. The story could easily have been told in 3 episodes instead of 6 and could even have been a decent story. Thecstiry telling is so inconsistent and unrealistic to the extreme. Sometimes it's like watching a really bad comedy and giving the story it's just bad taste. Again it's is so random but luckily one of the main characters gives the other main character an occasional recap and guess what, it's still random.
I am Spaniard so I have watched this without subtitles, what is a plus to watch this abomination lol. If you have watched several good Spanish Shows this one is not for you.
First, the script is a joke. It is a mixture of Nightmare on Elm Street with Alice in Wonderland and The Exterminator. I mean, what can go wrong?... Everything.
It starts interesting but soon sinks by itself. On the other hand, it is amazing how the more bad gets the show, the louder you laugh about any situation on it.
Second, the Fx's are mostly bad. Cheap, forgettable and obviously laughable.
Anyway, I don't want to spoil anything if you choose to watch this one. If not, you can watch for example "Antidisturbios" or "El cuerpo en llamas".
First, the script is a joke. It is a mixture of Nightmare on Elm Street with Alice in Wonderland and The Exterminator. I mean, what can go wrong?... Everything.
It starts interesting but soon sinks by itself. On the other hand, it is amazing how the more bad gets the show, the louder you laugh about any situation on it.
Second, the Fx's are mostly bad. Cheap, forgettable and obviously laughable.
Anyway, I don't want to spoil anything if you choose to watch this one. If not, you can watch for example "Antidisturbios" or "El cuerpo en llamas".
Top-Auswahl
Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
- How many seasons does 1992 have?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Laufzeit
- 45 Min.
- Farbe
- Sound-Mix
Zu dieser Seite beitragen
Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen