VALUTAZIONE IMDb
4,8/10
955
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
Aggiungi una trama nella tua linguaWhen a couple sets out to build their dream house, they enlist the services of an uncompromising modernist architect, who proceeds to build HIS dream house instead of theirs.When a couple sets out to build their dream house, they enlist the services of an uncompromising modernist architect, who proceeds to build HIS dream house instead of theirs.When a couple sets out to build their dream house, they enlist the services of an uncompromising modernist architect, who proceeds to build HIS dream house instead of theirs.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
- Premi
- 1 candidatura in totale
Recensioni in evidenza
This had got yo be one of the worst movies of the year. James Frain wasn't funny. He actually turned my stomach he was so bad. Granted, the role he was given was a ridiculously written character but he did absolutely nothing to try to bring the character to life in any way. There was do much more that could have been done with this film. As it stands it was a poor 21st century remake of "The Money Pit" but with no stars with any talent and little future based on this ridiculous farce. Bleck.
If you're an architect -and I am - this film trots out every negative stereotype you've ever battled in your life and pumps it up to full volume. The architect is the comic villain in this piece: a vain, imperious, pseudo-intellectual, budget-busting, turtleneck wearing wife stealer in the classic Frank Lloyd Wright mode. Of course old FLW also had world-class talent but in my humble opinion he has a lot to answer for with the reputation he saddled generations of future architects with. But I digress. I may have found this film more amusing than most because of the many sly digs at my chosen profession, but it's still a decent comedy.
This movie is a comedy in the sense that it's not a drama. There was a certain amount of satire, but for me it was pretty much devoid of humor. Not that I require side-splitting laughter from all comedies... but a slight chuckle once in a while is not too much to expect.
Toward the end, I had given up on finding real entertainment value in it for myself, and was more hoping that it would get better just for the sake of the people who made it, kind of like a cheerleader: "Come on, little movie, you can do it!" (It couldn't).
I have great respect for the creators and artists involved in making independent films, with all the constraints that come with it... I try to keep an open mind. But in the end, a poorly written script kept this movie from really going anywhere. Like, anywhere.
The two-sentence description/"blurb" of the movie, that convinced me to watch it was far more entertaining than the movie itself.
Toward the end, I had given up on finding real entertainment value in it for myself, and was more hoping that it would get better just for the sake of the people who made it, kind of like a cheerleader: "Come on, little movie, you can do it!" (It couldn't).
I have great respect for the creators and artists involved in making independent films, with all the constraints that come with it... I try to keep an open mind. But in the end, a poorly written script kept this movie from really going anywhere. Like, anywhere.
The two-sentence description/"blurb" of the movie, that convinced me to watch it was far more entertaining than the movie itself.
Any movie with Parker Posey in it deserves a chance. I gave this one a chance. Of all the movies I have seen with her in it, this is the worst. Her character is so typical; there is nothing unusual. The part could have been played by thousands of other actresses.
The movie is about the project of designing and building a home and the interaction among the husband, wife and architect. In the movie, the husband is a successful, logical, practical financial person. She is an artist. They are highly incompatible and constantly disagree. The architect is a typical artist; he claims to consider practicality to be important but that is actually at the bottom of his priorities. He and the project (the house design) amplify the incompatibility between the husband and wife. The architecture might be creative but that is the only creative part of this movie. There is very little romance; the story is not much more than three (or four if you include the builder) people arguing. Even when she announces she is ovulating, there is no romance.
The ending is logical and not a big surprise either; in other words, not creative. And yet, the ending is sudden, as if the writer knew that there was enough material and had to end it somehow.
The movie is about the project of designing and building a home and the interaction among the husband, wife and architect. In the movie, the husband is a successful, logical, practical financial person. She is an artist. They are highly incompatible and constantly disagree. The architect is a typical artist; he claims to consider practicality to be important but that is actually at the bottom of his priorities. He and the project (the house design) amplify the incompatibility between the husband and wife. The architecture might be creative but that is the only creative part of this movie. There is very little romance; the story is not much more than three (or four if you include the builder) people arguing. Even when she announces she is ovulating, there is no romance.
The ending is logical and not a big surprise either; in other words, not creative. And yet, the ending is sudden, as if the writer knew that there was enough material and had to end it somehow.
Poor quality DVD with no menu & no subtitles w/hollow sounding audio. It was like a cheaply made high school stage play.
Not quite sure of the purpose/plot/theme to this. A couple w/lots of money buy a rundown house w/a great quiet view near Seattle (used to be true 'till Amazon congested the place w/lemmings following the money) and hire an architect to turn it into their dream house. Lots of disagreement/arguing as to design. Eventually it's a design based on a half cut Nautilus shell (I have an almost identical one - very cool), but not too practical. Predictable.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizThe architect's office is actually an architectural studio used by students from the University of Washington School of Architecture. In the background is the historic College Inn guesthouse originally built for the 1909 Alaska-Yukon Exposition. An architectural landmark in itself.
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is The Architect?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
- Tempo di esecuzione1 ora 35 minuti
- Colore
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti

Divario superiore
By what name was La casa dei sogni (2016) officially released in India in English?
Rispondi