IMDb RATING
5.5/10
4.5K
YOUR RATING
A young American journalist stranded in present-day Nicaragua falls for an enigmatic Englishman who seems like her best chance of escape. She soon realizes, however, that he may be in even g... Read allA young American journalist stranded in present-day Nicaragua falls for an enigmatic Englishman who seems like her best chance of escape. She soon realizes, however, that he may be in even greater danger than she is.A young American journalist stranded in present-day Nicaragua falls for an enigmatic Englishman who seems like her best chance of escape. She soon realizes, however, that he may be in even greater danger than she is.
- Awards
- 1 win & 5 nominations total
Featured reviews
Unlikeable characters and cast.
Possibly would have been better with different lead actors?
Script seemed poor, and situations unbelievable.
But hey, you may like it? But it wasn't for me.
Possibly would have been better with different lead actors?
Script seemed poor, and situations unbelievable.
But hey, you may like it? But it wasn't for me.
Seems most of the reviewers missed the point of this film. Or perhaps they've seen/ read the previous material it's based on and had some expectations. I came upon this film without any knowledge of prior material or expectations.
This little film is great as an exploration of how human attraction and bonding works.... when it's put into an accelerating circumstances of life threatening situation. And as a look at sudden intimacy, even codependency, between the "last two people on earth" (well not really, but there's that feel to it) it's actually achieves a lot of depth and freshness, probably because the director is a European woman.
However I can see how some could expect something else from it. The director almost completely disregarded a coherent explanation of what's really going on in the country that puts them in danger. Like yeah the main male character is doing something shady or that's what CIA wants you to think, during tough tumultuous times in a Central American country and gets in trouble for it, but that's practically it. Perhaps she felt it's not important because that's not what she's focusing on, and perhaps if she had focused more on that the film would be more of "casserole" lol and that would not necessarily work or help... But I must agree with some reviewers that the way it's presented now in the film it kind of does give off colonial or even white European/ American colonial vibe. Like, times have changed since the 80s when the original came out (or was it the book that came out then? Not sure), and Americans and Western Europeans are not necessarily seen as the nice guys anymore, and she kind of tried to present too, but it fell flat somehow. Not sure why though... was it the fault of the source material that came out in the 80s or is it the result of Western European sense of elitism, even superiority that they still have? I can't quite put my finger on it yet.
This little film is great as an exploration of how human attraction and bonding works.... when it's put into an accelerating circumstances of life threatening situation. And as a look at sudden intimacy, even codependency, between the "last two people on earth" (well not really, but there's that feel to it) it's actually achieves a lot of depth and freshness, probably because the director is a European woman.
However I can see how some could expect something else from it. The director almost completely disregarded a coherent explanation of what's really going on in the country that puts them in danger. Like yeah the main male character is doing something shady or that's what CIA wants you to think, during tough tumultuous times in a Central American country and gets in trouble for it, but that's practically it. Perhaps she felt it's not important because that's not what she's focusing on, and perhaps if she had focused more on that the film would be more of "casserole" lol and that would not necessarily work or help... But I must agree with some reviewers that the way it's presented now in the film it kind of does give off colonial or even white European/ American colonial vibe. Like, times have changed since the 80s when the original came out (or was it the book that came out then? Not sure), and Americans and Western Europeans are not necessarily seen as the nice guys anymore, and she kind of tried to present too, but it fell flat somehow. Not sure why though... was it the fault of the source material that came out in the 80s or is it the result of Western European sense of elitism, even superiority that they still have? I can't quite put my finger on it yet.
I get that Claire Denis may have meant well, socio-politically speaking, to have adapted this story, but I'm afraid her adaptation totally falls short of doing justice to the actual text. In my opinion, the author's intention was to portray a revolution taking place via the narrative of an affair between two characters (even unnamed, as they were that insignificant to the whole point of the book) While Denis's version recounts a tryst, with a revolution taking place in the farthest background. Despite Margaret Qualley's strong performance, the magnificent score written by Denis' long-time collaborator Tindersticks, as well as the somewhat documentary-style cinematography, the film failed at convincing me as an audience to care about either the characters or the nation acting as extras.
The talented Claire Denis fails to move the plot or character fast enough to maintain your interest in this languid tale of people thrown together during times of civil conflict in Nicaragua.
This may have worked if a Soderbergh or some suchlike would have gotten hold of the story but this just meanders along.
Why is there so much of Qualley naked? I get it that she is a 'hooker with a heart of gold' but why is an American prostitute in Nicaragua during a civil war?
The problem is the pacing which doesn't drive the story along considering its an actioner about a 2 'lovers' trying to flee a war zone even though US/Nicaraguan forces conspire to stop them.
This may have worked if a Soderbergh or some suchlike would have gotten hold of the story but this just meanders along.
Why is there so much of Qualley naked? I get it that she is a 'hooker with a heart of gold' but why is an American prostitute in Nicaragua during a civil war?
The problem is the pacing which doesn't drive the story along considering its an actioner about a 2 'lovers' trying to flee a war zone even though US/Nicaraguan forces conspire to stop them.
STARS AT NOON is a French romantic thriller that follows the story of an American journalist, Trish (Margaret Qualley), and a mysterious English businessman, Daniel (Joe Alwyn). Trapped in Nicaragua during the height of its civil war in the 1980s, they become embroiled in political conspiracies and must rely on each other to find a way out.
The film is a cat-and-mouse game where the stakes are high, and where tension is ever-present. The cinematography is stunning, with spectacular shots of Nicaragua's lush landscape and its turbulent political climate. Margaret Qualley and Joe Alwyn deliver powerful performances, convincingly capturing the desperation of their characters while still creating an intense and palpable chemistry.
STARS AT NOON is a slow burn - often too slow - that never quite reaches its potential. Though the story is compelling, the political intricacies of the era are not always clear, and the narrative fails to fully realize its themes.
Overall, STARS AT NOON is an ambitious and captivating thriller with moments of real beauty and insight. Though it could benefit from a more streamlined narrative and a faster pace, it's worth a watch for its gorgeous visuals and strong performances.
The film is a cat-and-mouse game where the stakes are high, and where tension is ever-present. The cinematography is stunning, with spectacular shots of Nicaragua's lush landscape and its turbulent political climate. Margaret Qualley and Joe Alwyn deliver powerful performances, convincingly capturing the desperation of their characters while still creating an intense and palpable chemistry.
STARS AT NOON is a slow burn - often too slow - that never quite reaches its potential. Though the story is compelling, the political intricacies of the era are not always clear, and the narrative fails to fully realize its themes.
Overall, STARS AT NOON is an ambitious and captivating thriller with moments of real beauty and insight. Though it could benefit from a more streamlined narrative and a faster pace, it's worth a watch for its gorgeous visuals and strong performances.
Did you know
- TriviaRobert Pattinson was originally cast alongside Margaret Qualley as the lead, but had to leave the project due to filming commitments for The Batman (2022) following delays of shooting due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Taron Egerton was cast as Pattinson's replacement, however he dropped out as well before filming started due to personal reasons and Joe Alwyn took the role.
- Quotes
Teen Travel Agent: Fuck is a good word. Fuck is the property of the whole world.
- How long is Stars at Noon?Powered by Alexa
Details
Box office
- Gross worldwide
- $225,509
- Runtime
- 2h 15m(135 min)
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 2.39 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content