La maravillosa historia de Henry Sugar
Título original: The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar
Henry Sugar es capaz de ver a través de los objetos y predecir el futuro con la ayuda de un libro que ha robado.Henry Sugar es capaz de ver a través de los objetos y predecir el futuro con la ayuda de un libro que ha robado.Henry Sugar es capaz de ver a través de los objetos y predecir el futuro con la ayuda de un libro que ha robado.
- Dirección
- Guión
- Reparto principal
- Ganó 1 premio Óscar
- 1 premio y 2 nominaciones en total
Christopher J. Long
- Casino Guest
- (as Christopher Long)
Reseñas destacadas
I think we can all agree that the format of this 'content' is very different from what we are used to. On the one hand, it has the features of an "audible book". But it most certainly also has features that fit with a stage play. Actually, it seems like a hybrid of the two, which I for certain have never seen before.
And whilst it is different, people tend to start agreeing with extreme ratings: i.e. They either say they like it very well and give it a rating of 10 stars, or they hate it and go for a 1 star rating. And since I do not want my review being tainted by chosing either of the two camps, I simply chose to not give it an IMDb rating. This so that either camp can agree with my review instead of a rating...
That this is some new type of content is obvious. I personally think it is more a natural evolution of (1) reading books, to (2) audiobooks, and now (3) this new format.
I think a term of "cinematic book" may fit with what we see here: a book that is read to an audience by using renowned actors in a format that fits cinema.
With many new things, I was confused at what exactly I was watching when I started this content. And honestly said, it took me several minutes to adjust to it. As an avid bookreader myself, I have enjoyed quite a number of Roald Dahl's books. Not being a fan of audiobooks myself, I never ever listened to his books. But this "cinematic book" is just a different experience. There is so much added richness to it, that I really started to enjoy it. So rich actually, that I had trouble keeping up with the fast-paced storytelling. There is so much to see in each of the different sets that it is pretty difficult to ingest all you hear and see. And I think this will be even a bigger challenge for viewers from non-english speaking countries which need to rely on subtitles. So, I think it may be a recommendation to (1) first "watch" it with a primary focus on listening to the story, and (2) a second time to enjoy the richly detailed scenes.
Concluding, I think we witness here the evolution of how we may "read" books. An evolution that first started with the introduction of audiobooks, which we now see evolve in a content genre that I can describe best as a "cinematic book". And whilst it takes some moments to get used to, I definitely want to see more of it in the future.
And whilst it is different, people tend to start agreeing with extreme ratings: i.e. They either say they like it very well and give it a rating of 10 stars, or they hate it and go for a 1 star rating. And since I do not want my review being tainted by chosing either of the two camps, I simply chose to not give it an IMDb rating. This so that either camp can agree with my review instead of a rating...
That this is some new type of content is obvious. I personally think it is more a natural evolution of (1) reading books, to (2) audiobooks, and now (3) this new format.
I think a term of "cinematic book" may fit with what we see here: a book that is read to an audience by using renowned actors in a format that fits cinema.
With many new things, I was confused at what exactly I was watching when I started this content. And honestly said, it took me several minutes to adjust to it. As an avid bookreader myself, I have enjoyed quite a number of Roald Dahl's books. Not being a fan of audiobooks myself, I never ever listened to his books. But this "cinematic book" is just a different experience. There is so much added richness to it, that I really started to enjoy it. So rich actually, that I had trouble keeping up with the fast-paced storytelling. There is so much to see in each of the different sets that it is pretty difficult to ingest all you hear and see. And I think this will be even a bigger challenge for viewers from non-english speaking countries which need to rely on subtitles. So, I think it may be a recommendation to (1) first "watch" it with a primary focus on listening to the story, and (2) a second time to enjoy the richly detailed scenes.
Concluding, I think we witness here the evolution of how we may "read" books. An evolution that first started with the introduction of audiobooks, which we now see evolve in a content genre that I can describe best as a "cinematic book". And whilst it takes some moments to get used to, I definitely want to see more of it in the future.
I have not read The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar by Roald Dahl, so I was unsure what to expect from this short film, but I was pleasantly surprised. The plot follows Henry Sugar when he finds a book about man who could see with his eyes closed, and from there, Henry Sugar attempts to learn how to do the same. The art style and direction of the film is unlike anything I have watched before thanks to Wes Anderson's directing. Benedict Cumberbatch is fantastic as Henry Sugar, and I quite liked the supporting cast as well. The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar is worth watching, and you will not regret spending the time on this book to film adaptation.
As much as this is pure Uncut 1100% pure white as the driven snow Wes Anderson, including one of his most thrilling tracking shots and rear-screen projection that made me laugh hard enough for the neighbors to sit up and probably want to check it out for themselves, it is also a perfect distillation of Roald Dahl's perfectly eccentric and wildly over-elaborate storytelling and construction of one plot into another.
Maybe you haven't read Dahl in a while if you were one of those kids who read him a lot (I know he has a reputation today, but he could objectively write comedy and quirk like nobody's business), but even if that's so the recognition of his voice will come back to you like a long dormant dream. It's also fascinating to see the clockwork-theatrical staging from Asteroid City taken even further. I'd ask him why he doesn't direct theater, but then he would look at me like I was a fool - why do that when he has the overwhelming power of control of the Frame of Cinema at his disposal?
The thing about this Henry Sugar film that I like on top of the perfectly calibrated balancing act between very human comedy and quixotic and deadpan fantasy that we know Anderson can do in his sleep (though I imagine as easy as it looks it takes a lot of concentration to get right with DP Yeoman), the performances are just right and add to the flavor of the piece. Call it shallow, but I just enjoy how soothing the voices of Cumberbatch, Dev Patel, Kingsley and even to an extent Fiennes are, like they could almost be ASMR-ing you with the Dahl words that get spun like a marathon sprinter who is running in this precision that dazzles you because it almost is inexplicable (just like, I might posit for comparison, what the men can see with their eyes closed after concentrating hard for days and years on end).
Last but not least: Benedict Cumberbatch in a dress = most unlikely kind of attractive walking cartoon in a dress since Bugs Bunny.
Maybe you haven't read Dahl in a while if you were one of those kids who read him a lot (I know he has a reputation today, but he could objectively write comedy and quirk like nobody's business), but even if that's so the recognition of his voice will come back to you like a long dormant dream. It's also fascinating to see the clockwork-theatrical staging from Asteroid City taken even further. I'd ask him why he doesn't direct theater, but then he would look at me like I was a fool - why do that when he has the overwhelming power of control of the Frame of Cinema at his disposal?
The thing about this Henry Sugar film that I like on top of the perfectly calibrated balancing act between very human comedy and quixotic and deadpan fantasy that we know Anderson can do in his sleep (though I imagine as easy as it looks it takes a lot of concentration to get right with DP Yeoman), the performances are just right and add to the flavor of the piece. Call it shallow, but I just enjoy how soothing the voices of Cumberbatch, Dev Patel, Kingsley and even to an extent Fiennes are, like they could almost be ASMR-ing you with the Dahl words that get spun like a marathon sprinter who is running in this precision that dazzles you because it almost is inexplicable (just like, I might posit for comparison, what the men can see with their eyes closed after concentrating hard for days and years on end).
Last but not least: Benedict Cumberbatch in a dress = most unlikely kind of attractive walking cartoon in a dress since Bugs Bunny.
This is exactly Wes Anderson style! Same colors, angles, another Wes Anderson film star in a side role.. I enjoyed it and never get bored. The story was unbelievable and quite fluent. Also see Benedict in a Wes Anderson movie just wonderfull. So far, so good but i think the director should try new methods because everything was same. Think like a Grand Budapest Hotel but shorter this time! If even one thing changes, the films will be more distinctive and unique in themselves. Still, that doesn't mean the movie shouldn't be given a chance. If you like Wes Anderson's style, you must give a chance.
'The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar' is the first of four shorts by Wes Anderson. This production is the perfect visualization of a book. The transitions are peculiar and they contributed greatly to make the story flow smoothly. The editing was absolutely phenomenal with a few cuts placed in the right moments. The 1.33:1 aspect ratio immersed me even more in the story. All the trademarks of the director are there: the perfect symmetry of the sets, the actor placed exactly in the right spot and the fairy mood. The plot is engaging and exotic. I like the development and I was genuinely curious to see how everything was going to wrap up. This is how you tell a trivial story in an original and fresh way. The cast is composed of many great actors: with a team such as Benedict Cumberbatch, Ralph Fiennes and Ben Kingsley you know that simply you cannot go wrong. All of them have a very pleasant and clean British accent, which for me is an added value. My final mark is 7.5 stars out of 10.
¿Sabías que...?
- CuriosidadesIn a 2023 interview with Deadline, Wes Anderson spoke about how Ralph Fiennes got into the character of Roald Dahl: "In our house, we have a recording of Dahl reading Fantastic Mr. Fox. He did record himself doing quite a few of [his books]. There's also a reasonable amount of documentary stuff about Dahl. In fact, when we started filming Henry Sugar, Ralph was on set, in the little space that's a recreation of Dahl's workspace, and I could hear him talking to himself. I said, 'Tell me what you're saying.' It turned out that he'd been observing Dahl from the archival stuff I'd sent him, and he knew Dahl's little rituals. He was acting them out on his own, just in preparation. And I was like, 'Start over, start over! We'll film this!' And so, the movie begins with Ralph completely improvising. Every take was a bit different, because it's Ralph just sort of channeling Dahl getting ready to write. Ralph is so interesting and authentic."
- PifiasStarting around 22:00 as the cuts go back and forth between front angle cuts and side angle cuts; the orientation of how Roald Dahl is holding the cigarette changes.
- Citas
Imdad Khan: Audiences loved it, but no one ever ever believed it to be genuine. Still don't. Even doctors, such as yourself, who blindfold me in the most expert fashion, refuse to believe anyone can see without his eyes. They forget there are other ways of sending an image to the brain.
Dr. Chatterjee: What other ways?
Imdad Khan: Quite honestly, I do not know.
- ConexionesEdited into La maravillosa historia de Henry Sugar (2024)
- Banda sonoraCosi Fan Tutte, K. 588, Act I Scene 2: No. 10, Terlettino Soave Sia il Vento (Dorabella, Don Alfonso, Fiordiligi)
Written by Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart
Arrangement by Jonathon Rathbone
Performed by The Swingles
Courtesy of Erato/Warner Classics, Warner Music UK Ltd
By arrangement with Warner Music Group Film & TV Licensing
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y añadir a tu lista para recibir recomendaciones personalizadas
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- Países de origen
- Sitios oficiales
- Idioma
- Títulos en diferentes países
- The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar
- Localizaciones del rodaje
- Empresas productoras
- Ver más compañías en los créditos en IMDbPro
- Duración40 minutos
- Color
- Mezcla de sonido
- Relación de aspecto
- 1.33 : 1
Contribuir a esta página
Sugerir un cambio o añadir el contenido que falta