IMDb रेटिंग
5.2/10
11 हज़ार
आपकी रेटिंग
अपने पिट्यूटरी ग्रंथि में एक सौम्य ट्यूमर को सफलतापूर्वक हटाने के बाद, एक वयस्क व्यक्ति तीन सप्ताह की अवधि में यौवन के सभी परिवर्तनों और प्रभावों का अनुभव करता है.अपने पिट्यूटरी ग्रंथि में एक सौम्य ट्यूमर को सफलतापूर्वक हटाने के बाद, एक वयस्क व्यक्ति तीन सप्ताह की अवधि में यौवन के सभी परिवर्तनों और प्रभावों का अनुभव करता है.अपने पिट्यूटरी ग्रंथि में एक सौम्य ट्यूमर को सफलतापूर्वक हटाने के बाद, एक वयस्क व्यक्ति तीन सप्ताह की अवधि में यौवन के सभी परिवर्तनों और प्रभावों का अनुभव करता है.
- पुरस्कार
- कुल 2 जीत
Diana Lyubenova
- Marilyn
- (as Diana Lubenova)
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
The movie gives it to you straight. From the opening when there is quite a rude conversation (or rather horny one) you should know what to expect. The dialog is not safe for work - unless your job is to listen to those people telling you about their sex addiction and you have to help them. And he is cool as ice. The first scene alone some might question his non-reaction especially those in puberty but also others.
Other than that there is nudity and as already hinted at swearing. But there is also a sweet side. While the mixture is not always working the movie sort of works around those scenes. Not perfect by a long shot, but with an engaging cast and some funny dialog (if you are not offended easily of course) this can be entertaining to watch
Other than that there is nudity and as already hinted at swearing. But there is also a sweet side. While the mixture is not always working the movie sort of works around those scenes. Not perfect by a long shot, but with an engaging cast and some funny dialog (if you are not offended easily of course) this can be entertaining to watch
First of all I love "stupid" sort of funny stoner types of movies. I can appreciate raunchy sort of humor. The problem with this movie is it just doesn't deliver. I'm a Kevin Pollak fan... and I think he was going for some sort of "American Pie" type of humor here...but it just misses the mark. Lot's of potential and a pretty good premise but just failed to make me actually laugh. I thought the lead actor was sort of meh in it...he did an OK job but wasn't very likable.... and had they done a few things differently I think it could've been funny. Some people probably will say this movie would only be funny to a certain type of person...but I'm that type of person...and it literally didn't even induce a smile. It's not that it wasn't well acted...because it was (kinda)...but they just didn't push the envelope far enough with this one. This is one movie that could've really used some extra raunch to make it funny. The relationship between the main character and his friends doesn't have any chemistry...the guy who is supposed to be the comic relief is just...not funny.... there is nobody likable in this film and that's sort of a problem in a movie where you're supposed to be pulling for the lovable loser...he isn't lovable... he is most certainly a loser...but ...I dunno this movie had a cool enough premise to be funny...they just failed miserably at making it funny in the slightest. Waste of a good cast. :-/
First off, let me state that I don't like movies like this. The only reason I watched this movie was because I saw Brittany Snow was in it. And honestly, she killed it. I loved her character as Michelle. She was so sweet, and her performance, along with the great J.k. Simmons, really carried this film.
However, the rest of the film left a lot to be desired. The film's premise was interesting enough (And supposedly, the movie is loosely based on the life of Ken Baker. Baker told his son that a third was pure fiction, a third was partially true, and a third was straight out of his life). An adult going through puberty could be funny. But honestly, it felt like they forced all the sexual jokes, which is sad because I thought the start of the film was really sweet. Also, going through puberty doesn't make you a jerk. The main character is a straight jerk. But then again, all the men in this movie are selfish jerks.
I didn't have high hopes for this film going to end, and I left disappointed. But if you have nothing else to do, give it a watch if only for Brittany Snow.
However, the rest of the film left a lot to be desired. The film's premise was interesting enough (And supposedly, the movie is loosely based on the life of Ken Baker. Baker told his son that a third was pure fiction, a third was partially true, and a third was straight out of his life). An adult going through puberty could be funny. But honestly, it felt like they forced all the sexual jokes, which is sad because I thought the start of the film was really sweet. Also, going through puberty doesn't make you a jerk. The main character is a straight jerk. But then again, all the men in this movie are selfish jerks.
I didn't have high hopes for this film going to end, and I left disappointed. But if you have nothing else to do, give it a watch if only for Brittany Snow.
Okay, so here's the thing -- I watched this film over a week ago, and I'm still thinking about it. Why? Because I get riled up over films that are SO CLOSE to being good, but just... aren't.
The Late Bloomer definitely falls into this category. There are bits of dialogue and interactions between characters which are genuinely top-notch comedy, and the supporting cast put in one of the best ensemble performances I've seen in ages. Seriously. Kumail Nanjiani in particular is fantastic, and J.K. Simmons continues to be the best supporting actor in Hollywood right now.
Buuuuuut... there are six writing credits listed, and it's likely that therein lies the problem. The moments of brilliance are almost completely overshadowed by other bits of writing which are, at best, trite, and at worst completely cringe-worthy. The last twenty minutes or so of the film legitimately don't even make sense, and are among the worst I've seen all year. It really feels like something that was cobbled together from different people who had different ideas of what the film should be, and maybe some of those people were... incorrect.
So yeah, I wish this film was as good as it could have been. A lot of inspired performances and great dialogue that deserved better than what this ends up being.
The Late Bloomer definitely falls into this category. There are bits of dialogue and interactions between characters which are genuinely top-notch comedy, and the supporting cast put in one of the best ensemble performances I've seen in ages. Seriously. Kumail Nanjiani in particular is fantastic, and J.K. Simmons continues to be the best supporting actor in Hollywood right now.
Buuuuuut... there are six writing credits listed, and it's likely that therein lies the problem. The moments of brilliance are almost completely overshadowed by other bits of writing which are, at best, trite, and at worst completely cringe-worthy. The last twenty minutes or so of the film legitimately don't even make sense, and are among the worst I've seen all year. It really feels like something that was cobbled together from different people who had different ideas of what the film should be, and maybe some of those people were... incorrect.
So yeah, I wish this film was as good as it could have been. A lot of inspired performances and great dialogue that deserved better than what this ends up being.
I came on here before watching The Late Bloomer and came across mostly negative comments but went ahead and thought id watch the film as i thought it has comedy potential. I am glad i watched it as i did laugh a couple of times and thought the actors were very well played. the plot was interesting as its not something ordinary. In my opinion this is a funny, quirky film.
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाThe movie is loosely based of of the life of Ken Baker. Baker told his son that a third was pure fiction, a third was partially true, and a third was straight out of his life.
- गूफ़In the beginning of the movie, when Peter is talking to Michelle in her kitchen, his wine glass switches hands and then completely disappears from his hand.
- भाव
James Newmans: I think the biggest change we go through is discovering the difference between acting like a man and being a man.
- कनेक्शनReferences The Godfather (1972)
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
- How long is The Late Bloomer?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- बजट
- $35,00,000(अनुमानित)
- चलने की अवधि
- 1 घं 30 मि(90 min)
- रंग
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 1.85 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें