Una trasmissione televisiva in diretta nel 1977 va terribilmente storta, scatenando il male nei salotti di tutto il paese.Una trasmissione televisiva in diretta nel 1977 va terribilmente storta, scatenando il male nei salotti di tutto il paese.Una trasmissione televisiva in diretta nel 1977 va terribilmente storta, scatenando il male nei salotti di tutto il paese.
- Premi
- 6 vittorie e 26 candidature
Amelie Mendoza
- Christou's Assistant
- (as Amelie Mendosa)
Trama
Lo sapevi?
- QuizThe Carmichael character is very clearly based (including physically) on the real-life James Randi. Randi was a talented magician who became a famous psychic debunker and he started an institute that offered a large reward to anyone that could reproduce their supposed paranormal powers in controlled conditions. Over decades, nobody was able to win the money.
- BlooperRichie Brockelman, Private Eye (1978) is mentioned on the TV ratings list for the 1976-77 season. However, the series did not premiere until March 17, 1978.
- Citazioni
Lilly: [possessed, singing] Jack and June went up the hill to fuck each other's brains out! Jack and June went up the hill to fuck each other's-
[June slaps Lilly]
June Ross-Mitchell: THAT'S ENOUGH!
- Colonne sonoreForever My Queen
Written by Bobby Liebling (as Robert J. Liebling)
Performed by Pentagram
Published by Relapse Music
Licensed by The Orchard
Licensed courtesy of Relapse Records/Gaga Music Pty Ltd
Recensione in evidenza
There's a lot to like about Late Night with the Devil; the first being the absolutely fantastic performance of David Dasmalchian as Jack. He really nails the 1970s late night talk show host vibe perfectly and has a lot of wit and charisma, yet an underlying darkness that you know (or I guess hope) will come into play later on.
I also really loved the aesthetic for most of the film, with the grainy, multi camera look, excellent period costuming and hairstyling, and amazing aesthetic touches that drew me in immediately. The film makes great use of practical effects and while it may look a bit silly, I thought it had a charm that was appropriate for the era.
(Side note: The filmmakers opted to use AI for some of the transition cards in the film and it's caused a bit of a stir. To be honest, I don't think this is an application of the technology worth getting angry over. It's a low budget film, AI use is inevitable, and this was probably the least intrusive way to use it)
I also felt really compelled by the story and the structure of the film, which felt longer and meatier (at least for most of it) than it would seem. It moved at a quick pace and I was never bored.
However, I do think this movie wears its numerous flaws on its sleeve. The entire conceit - that this is an unaired episode - should've been stuck with. The movie confusingly switches between the gorgeous 70s talk show style to a baffling black-and-white handheld camera look, which I found necessary for the story, but ultimately confusing by the end of the film when it switches it up completely. Either this is supposed to be "found footage" or it isn't.
I also felt a lot of the performances were pretty subpar, especially the girl playing Lily (Ingrid Torelli) and the woman playing June (Laura Gordon). Torelli just...didn't have the screen presence necessary for the role and her line delivery was baffling. I couldn't make heads or tails of her character and maybe there was stuff left on the cutting room floor, because her character's "journey" through this film was utterly confusing and disappointing. Gordon just did not deliver her lines well. I just didn't buy her at all.
Then there's the ending...which...I can forgive to an extent for being "interpretable," but I can also totally understand feels incoherent. It's almost like when someone writes and essay and it's already 11 pages long so they rush the conclusion. There's no real satisfactory explanation for a lot of the questions you hope the film would answer, which made me wonder why they introduced some plot elements to begin with (i.e. Jack's backstory with the thinly veiled cult). It's not rocket science as to what happened; it's just not given the emotional weight it needs nor the explosive payoff you'd want.
I think this is a fine and fun movie that I'm happy I saw and I'd probably show other people. One question I have is...why on Earth was this released in March and not Halloween, when the film is set? It's bizarre.
I also really loved the aesthetic for most of the film, with the grainy, multi camera look, excellent period costuming and hairstyling, and amazing aesthetic touches that drew me in immediately. The film makes great use of practical effects and while it may look a bit silly, I thought it had a charm that was appropriate for the era.
(Side note: The filmmakers opted to use AI for some of the transition cards in the film and it's caused a bit of a stir. To be honest, I don't think this is an application of the technology worth getting angry over. It's a low budget film, AI use is inevitable, and this was probably the least intrusive way to use it)
I also felt really compelled by the story and the structure of the film, which felt longer and meatier (at least for most of it) than it would seem. It moved at a quick pace and I was never bored.
However, I do think this movie wears its numerous flaws on its sleeve. The entire conceit - that this is an unaired episode - should've been stuck with. The movie confusingly switches between the gorgeous 70s talk show style to a baffling black-and-white handheld camera look, which I found necessary for the story, but ultimately confusing by the end of the film when it switches it up completely. Either this is supposed to be "found footage" or it isn't.
I also felt a lot of the performances were pretty subpar, especially the girl playing Lily (Ingrid Torelli) and the woman playing June (Laura Gordon). Torelli just...didn't have the screen presence necessary for the role and her line delivery was baffling. I couldn't make heads or tails of her character and maybe there was stuff left on the cutting room floor, because her character's "journey" through this film was utterly confusing and disappointing. Gordon just did not deliver her lines well. I just didn't buy her at all.
Then there's the ending...which...I can forgive to an extent for being "interpretable," but I can also totally understand feels incoherent. It's almost like when someone writes and essay and it's already 11 pages long so they rush the conclusion. There's no real satisfactory explanation for a lot of the questions you hope the film would answer, which made me wonder why they introduced some plot elements to begin with (i.e. Jack's backstory with the thinly veiled cult). It's not rocket science as to what happened; it's just not given the emotional weight it needs nor the explosive payoff you'd want.
I think this is a fine and fun movie that I'm happy I saw and I'd probably show other people. One question I have is...why on Earth was this released in March and not Halloween, when the film is set? It's bizarre.
- ryanpersaud-59415
- 29 apr 2024
- Permalink
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is Late Night with the Devil?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paesi di origine
- Siti ufficiali
- Lingua
- Celebre anche come
- De noche con el diablo
- Luoghi delle riprese
- Aziende produttrici
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Lordo Stati Uniti e Canada
- 10.001.000 USD
- Fine settimana di apertura Stati Uniti e Canada
- 2.834.867 USD
- 24 mar 2024
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 15.453.763 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione1 ora 33 minuti
- Colore
- Proporzioni
- 2.35 : 1
- 4:3
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti
Divario superiore
What was the official certification given to Late Night with the Devil (2023) in India?
Rispondi