Exactamente un año después de que Tom Salomón sale por primera vez con Violet Barnes, él la sorprende con un anillo. Sin embargo, se encuentran cada vez más con tropiezos en su camino hacia ... Leer todoExactamente un año después de que Tom Salomón sale por primera vez con Violet Barnes, él la sorprende con un anillo. Sin embargo, se encuentran cada vez más con tropiezos en su camino hacia el altar.Exactamente un año después de que Tom Salomón sale por primera vez con Violet Barnes, él la sorprende con un anillo. Sin embargo, se encuentran cada vez más con tropiezos en su camino hacia el altar.
- Dirección
- Guionistas
- Elenco
- Premios
- 1 nominación en total
- Dirección
- Guionistas
- Todo el elenco y el equipo
- Producción, taquilla y más en IMDbPro
Opiniones destacadas
Longer than it felt and for sure longer than it should have been. Although there were many funny actors there weren't many true jaja moments. For 2hrs all this made me do was chuckle a couple of times but really it was a bit boring... yet I didn't hate it. Kevin Hart needed a better skit or given rein to be his funny self. Brie and Pratt were their funny selves (love their version of such an iconic song:). They were the actual funny parts of the movie. Blunt and Jason were meh. Being the main actors they were definitely were miscast. Jason is a good actor when he has great supporting actors to let his comedy shine. Emily always show's potential to be funny but much like Jason requires supporting help. Overall it's a decent dry comedy.
Enjoyable funny movie that portrayed the modern day conflict of a couple with two careers. Who gives up what and why and how willing are they to accept the true full meaning of the compromise. Several good points are made and good analogies used.
Humor works for both guys and gals.
Without spoiling anything, the element used to mark time is somewhat dark.
Be familiar with the song 'Cu cu ru cu cu Palamo'. It is sung very well in Spanish early in the course of the movie with no translation but is tone setting for the movie. Used again in the credits.
At just over 2 hours, this movie seemed to drag at some points and several scenes could have been edited down a wee bit. Don't need to see something for 30 seconds or 2 minutes when the point is made and understood in considerably less time.
I don't see any academy nods for this one nor would I have expected any for this genre of movie but it was an enjoyable movie for an evening.
My wife and son were there and enjoyed it as well.
Humor works for both guys and gals.
Without spoiling anything, the element used to mark time is somewhat dark.
Be familiar with the song 'Cu cu ru cu cu Palamo'. It is sung very well in Spanish early in the course of the movie with no translation but is tone setting for the movie. Used again in the credits.
At just over 2 hours, this movie seemed to drag at some points and several scenes could have been edited down a wee bit. Don't need to see something for 30 seconds or 2 minutes when the point is made and understood in considerably less time.
I don't see any academy nods for this one nor would I have expected any for this genre of movie but it was an enjoyable movie for an evening.
My wife and son were there and enjoyed it as well.
There are risks when romantic comedy is injected with "truth." Too little, and it feels like a desperate attempt to give the film credibility. Too much and it starts to feel uncomfortable as the comedy is buried in what appear to be a string of life lessons. The Five-Year Engagement tries to find a balance between comedy and truth and after a bit over two hours, almost succeeds.
That's not to say the film is bad. It's far from it, especially compared to what usually passes for a romantic comedy these days. Its leads (Emily Blunt and Jason Segel) have a surprising, easy chemistry and director Nicholas Stoller (who co-wrote with Segel) uses the talented supporting cast to add new perspective and layers to what is a pretty straightforward story.
Violet (Blunt) is a post-doctorate student. Tom (Segel) is a rising star of a chef in San Francisco. They get engaged on their first anniversary and while most romantic comedies would end here, The Five-Year Engagement does something that romantic comedies fail to do - showing what happens after the "happy ending." In doing so, we get to see every crack, seam and bump in their relationship, from Tom's resentment at leaving his dream job behind to follow Violet after she receives a fellowship at the University of Michigan, to Violet's increasing frustration at how Tom changes during his relocation.
It's a credit to Segel and Stoller that the situations that arise do so organically and don't feel forced in for shock value, and when things start to deteroriate, we not only see it coming, we solemnly nod because it is inevitable.
The film has issues, though, and they almost capsize the film. The most glaring one is the running time. The film clocks in at a bit over two hours, and you feel every grueling minute of it. The pacing and editing are a near disaster and at times, watching feels more like a chore than a good time. This is partially because the film, while billed as a romantic comedy, is only funny in spurts. The serious 'truths' of being in a relationship take center stage, which is in itself not a bad thing, but in a comedy, it really drags the film down.
The ending is typical rom-com schmaltz, though, as if the filmmakers snapped out of their malaise, thought "hey, aren't we making a comedy?" and wisely ended the film on an acceptably quirky note.
In the end, The Five-Year Engagement is serviceable entertainment, but could have been a lot more had they been able to strike the delicate balance they were trying for.
Daniel FilmPulse.net
That's not to say the film is bad. It's far from it, especially compared to what usually passes for a romantic comedy these days. Its leads (Emily Blunt and Jason Segel) have a surprising, easy chemistry and director Nicholas Stoller (who co-wrote with Segel) uses the talented supporting cast to add new perspective and layers to what is a pretty straightforward story.
Violet (Blunt) is a post-doctorate student. Tom (Segel) is a rising star of a chef in San Francisco. They get engaged on their first anniversary and while most romantic comedies would end here, The Five-Year Engagement does something that romantic comedies fail to do - showing what happens after the "happy ending." In doing so, we get to see every crack, seam and bump in their relationship, from Tom's resentment at leaving his dream job behind to follow Violet after she receives a fellowship at the University of Michigan, to Violet's increasing frustration at how Tom changes during his relocation.
It's a credit to Segel and Stoller that the situations that arise do so organically and don't feel forced in for shock value, and when things start to deteroriate, we not only see it coming, we solemnly nod because it is inevitable.
The film has issues, though, and they almost capsize the film. The most glaring one is the running time. The film clocks in at a bit over two hours, and you feel every grueling minute of it. The pacing and editing are a near disaster and at times, watching feels more like a chore than a good time. This is partially because the film, while billed as a romantic comedy, is only funny in spurts. The serious 'truths' of being in a relationship take center stage, which is in itself not a bad thing, but in a comedy, it really drags the film down.
The ending is typical rom-com schmaltz, though, as if the filmmakers snapped out of their malaise, thought "hey, aren't we making a comedy?" and wisely ended the film on an acceptably quirky note.
In the end, The Five-Year Engagement is serviceable entertainment, but could have been a lot more had they been able to strike the delicate balance they were trying for.
Daniel FilmPulse.net
These are just in the first 30 minutes of this piece of crap.
1. There's the "this Korean, that Korean" in buddy's engagement party song 2. What's with the inexplicably mute father's Asian girlfriend? 3. Why does the Asian guy at Michigan have the phoniest accent? 4. There's the Indian guy at restaurant he's applying for, from 40 year old Virgin, who I guess is funny, because he says "fuck" with a Jamaican accent.
Stopped watching this crap after 30 minutes. This is why Hollywood sucks. There are too many white, Jewish guys who have their yarmulkes so far up their privileged Lilly asses, they don't know what the world is really like.
1. There's the "this Korean, that Korean" in buddy's engagement party song 2. What's with the inexplicably mute father's Asian girlfriend? 3. Why does the Asian guy at Michigan have the phoniest accent? 4. There's the Indian guy at restaurant he's applying for, from 40 year old Virgin, who I guess is funny, because he says "fuck" with a Jamaican accent.
Stopped watching this crap after 30 minutes. This is why Hollywood sucks. There are too many white, Jewish guys who have their yarmulkes so far up their privileged Lilly asses, they don't know what the world is really like.
I do not understand why there are so many bad reviews. The film is very good.
I was intrigued by Emily Blunt's presence in the film so I downloaded it and was very surprised because it turned out to be so much better than I expected. There is one noteable thing about it - almost all the situations that are supposed to make you laugh are at least 1/3 unfunny as they are. This is a very believable quality about the film - it makes you look at life from a distance and understand that all those stupid actions and decisions that people make are just funny as hell. And with a little love you can even come to a happy-end (I don't think it's a spoiler, this is obviously not Macbeth, you knew a happy end was there). But this is what makes this film an actual challenge for some people. It is NOT PLEASANT. It does not put you into a dreamy or giggly state. It is actually quite raw, sarcastic and real. I do believe that we live in times when real things are considered unnerving and even evil. Some people would very much rather have safe spaces built in every corner of the city and not deal with reality. Well, in true love there are no safe spaces. True love makes you stay with a person through all the ugly things and through the funny things and through the good things, obviously.
Acting is on the spot. Everyone knows that Emily Blunt is one of the most talented actresses. Jason Segel is handsome and compelling, support cast entertain you in every possible way. The dialogues are great. Everything sounds very natural.
7 our of 10 - because 10 is Fellini and Visconti. One of the best modern chick flicks I've ever seen.
I was intrigued by Emily Blunt's presence in the film so I downloaded it and was very surprised because it turned out to be so much better than I expected. There is one noteable thing about it - almost all the situations that are supposed to make you laugh are at least 1/3 unfunny as they are. This is a very believable quality about the film - it makes you look at life from a distance and understand that all those stupid actions and decisions that people make are just funny as hell. And with a little love you can even come to a happy-end (I don't think it's a spoiler, this is obviously not Macbeth, you knew a happy end was there). But this is what makes this film an actual challenge for some people. It is NOT PLEASANT. It does not put you into a dreamy or giggly state. It is actually quite raw, sarcastic and real. I do believe that we live in times when real things are considered unnerving and even evil. Some people would very much rather have safe spaces built in every corner of the city and not deal with reality. Well, in true love there are no safe spaces. True love makes you stay with a person through all the ugly things and through the funny things and through the good things, obviously.
Acting is on the spot. Everyone knows that Emily Blunt is one of the most talented actresses. Jason Segel is handsome and compelling, support cast entertain you in every possible way. The dialogues are great. Everything sounds very natural.
7 our of 10 - because 10 is Fellini and Visconti. One of the best modern chick flicks I've ever seen.
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaIn order to fine-tune her character Suzie's British accent, Alison Brie listened to recordings of readings provided by her British co-star Emily Blunt.
- ErroresThroughout the film, Violet and her colleagues refer to people taking part in their psychology experiments as "subjects". This term is no longer used in psychology (and has not been used for decades) as it is thought to be disrespectful and has unethical, dehumanising connotations. Rather, today psychologists use the term "participant" to refer to people who take part in an experiment.
- Citas
Alex Eilhauer: Seeing you chop onions is depressing. It's like watching Michael Jordan take a shit.
- Versiones alternativasAn Extended Version which runs 7 minutes longer than the Theatrical Version, at 131 minutes was released with the Blu-ray releases in 2012.
- ConexionesFeatured in The Tonight Show with Jay Leno: Episode #20.126 (2012)
- Bandas sonorasJackie Wilson Said (I'm In Heaven When You Smile)
Written by Van Morrison
Performed by Kevin Rowland & Dexys Midnight Runners
Courtesy of Mercury Records Limited
Under license from Universal Music Enterprises
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- Países de origen
- Idiomas
- También se conoce como
- The Five-Year Engagement
- Locaciones de filmación
- Productoras
- Ver más créditos de la compañía en IMDbPro
Taquilla
- Presupuesto
- USD 30,000,000 (estimado)
- Total en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 28,835,528
- Fin de semana de estreno en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 10,610,060
- 29 abr 2012
- Total a nivel mundial
- USD 54,169,363
- Tiempo de ejecución
- 2h 4min(124 min)
- Color
- Mezcla de sonido
- Relación de aspecto
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuir a esta página
Sugiere una edición o agrega el contenido que falta