ÉVALUATION IMDb
7,0/10
3,2 k
MA NOTE
Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueIn a drab police state, an author of children's books is interrogated by a sadistic, secret policeman because she's under suspicion of embedding anti-government messages in her stories.In a drab police state, an author of children's books is interrogated by a sadistic, secret policeman because she's under suspicion of embedding anti-government messages in her stories.In a drab police state, an author of children's books is interrogated by a sadistic, secret policeman because she's under suspicion of embedding anti-government messages in her stories.
- Réalisation
- Scénariste
- Vedettes
- Prix
- 1 victoire et 1 nomination au total
7,03.2K
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Avis en vedette
"It's the suspense, not the pain, that will drive you mad".
This two-character drama is extremely well-acted and has a valid message and some TRULY shocking moments (shocking not because they are graphic, but because you're not prepared for them when they come). But eventually it does become oppressive, just like the somewhat similar "A Pure Formality" did. Still, Alan Rickman should have gotten an Oscar nomination for his multi-dimensional performance, no doubt about it. (**1/2)
10wyrder
Everyone who likes freedom should experience this film
"Closet Land" tells a powerful story and has many different subtle elements. You could read lots of stuff about the movie's plot before hand, but you don't really need to. All you need to know is that the movie is all about an interrogation. Along the way, we learn lots of things about the interrogator and the person being interrogated. We also learn that the world can be a dark and scary place. Especially when you have absolutely no control over it.
In the end, the movie amounts to a warning (really though, the movie has several different aspects to it) about what happens to people's freedoms when they "look the other way" and ignore injustices happening to those around them.
If you've got about an hour and a half and know where you can rent this, I strongly recommend that you do so.
In the end, the movie amounts to a warning (really though, the movie has several different aspects to it) about what happens to people's freedoms when they "look the other way" and ignore injustices happening to those around them.
If you've got about an hour and a half and know where you can rent this, I strongly recommend that you do so.
A definite thinking film
I saw this movie only a few days ago at a convention, and was moved to think about a side of torture tactics that I had never examined. The power of mental abuse can surely override any physical abuse, and that is shown through Madeline Stowe's wondrous acting in this movie. Likewise, Alan Rickman brings to the screen a marvelous portrayal of a ruthless government interrogator. It is interesting, though, even while he tortures Stowe's character, how you see a bit of himself shine through his terrorist personality. It grabbed me, in the scene where she is blindfolded, and he is pretending to be someone else, how he lets the mask fall from his face even as his voice continues his work.
The basis of the plot is this: A children's book writer (Stowe) is arrested on the premise that her books hold subversive political ideas, trying to get children to go against the government. The writer continues to deny these allegations, even as she is questioned and eventually abused physically and mentally by a government agent (Rickman). The showing of these torture techniques is disturbing, and probably should not be watched by those who are squeamish about such things.
The film was made in partnership with Amnesty International in the early 90's. On the surface of this movie, I would have to agree with all their policies, but as with any movie of this sort, a viewer should not support the organization purely on the face of the movie screen, but it should spur the viewer to outside research. I believe that is what this movie does for many of us.
The upshot of this: I would say I enjoyed the movie, but 'enjoy' is not quite the right word. I would watch this movie again if the opportunity arose, and would also recommend it to anyone who has a taste for realistically disturbing movies.
4 stars out of 5.
The basis of the plot is this: A children's book writer (Stowe) is arrested on the premise that her books hold subversive political ideas, trying to get children to go against the government. The writer continues to deny these allegations, even as she is questioned and eventually abused physically and mentally by a government agent (Rickman). The showing of these torture techniques is disturbing, and probably should not be watched by those who are squeamish about such things.
The film was made in partnership with Amnesty International in the early 90's. On the surface of this movie, I would have to agree with all their policies, but as with any movie of this sort, a viewer should not support the organization purely on the face of the movie screen, but it should spur the viewer to outside research. I believe that is what this movie does for many of us.
The upshot of this: I would say I enjoyed the movie, but 'enjoy' is not quite the right word. I would watch this movie again if the opportunity arose, and would also recommend it to anyone who has a taste for realistically disturbing movies.
4 stars out of 5.
What makes a great movie?
Acting, of course! Think about it, Closet Land could easily have turned out so horribly - an entire movie filmed in one room with only two people, they better have some damned interesting things to chat about.
But it didn't turn out horribly. On the contrary, thanks to incredible portrayals by both Stowe and Rickman, Closet Land is a masterpiece in its own right.
That's not to say it is for everyone. Persons who have had their attention spans decreased through glitzy sex scenes and random gun fire may have trouble digesting Closet Land. However, those who can appreciate good story telling without explosions should give it a look (no matter how many video stores you have to call to find someone who has it in stock).
But it didn't turn out horribly. On the contrary, thanks to incredible portrayals by both Stowe and Rickman, Closet Land is a masterpiece in its own right.
That's not to say it is for everyone. Persons who have had their attention spans decreased through glitzy sex scenes and random gun fire may have trouble digesting Closet Land. However, those who can appreciate good story telling without explosions should give it a look (no matter how many video stores you have to call to find someone who has it in stock).
Two of the best performances I've ever seen
This movie continues to provide endless fascination with each new viewing. Alan Rickman has never been better than in this haunting and haunted role, and Madeline Stowe is excellent as well. The interplay of the two characters is like darkly beautiful ballet. In short, if you're looking for escapist fare, go elsewhere; if you want to be challenged and see the finest acting this side of great theater, this is your film.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesThe director originally had Peter O'Toole, Ian Holm, and Anthony Hopkins in mind for the role of the Interrogator before Alan Rickman was cast.
- GaffesAt least three times throughout the film, all in obvious ways.
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et surveiller les recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Closet Land?Propulsé par Alexa
Détails
Box-office
- Budget
- 4 000 000 $ US (estimation)
- Brut – États-Unis et Canada
- 259 012 $ US
- Fin de semaine d'ouverture – États-Unis et Canada
- 121 635 $ US
- 10 mars 1991
- Brut – à l'échelle mondiale
- 259 012 $ US
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant







