Résumés(1)

Chuck Noland est un homme d’affaires qui consacre tout son temps à son entreprise. Le soir de Noël, l’avion dans lequel il se trouve est pris dans une terrible tempête et sombre dans le Pacifique. Seul Chuck survit au crash et parvient à ne pas se noyer en s’agrippant à une tôle de métal. Il finit par atterrir sur une île déserte. Pendant quatre ans, Chuck va s’efforcer de survivre dans ce milieu hostile. (LaCinetek)

(plus)

Critiques (7)

Lima 

Toutes les critiques de l’utilisateur·trice

anglais I totally agree with Tosim that we should realise what is and what is not important. Of course, the problem is that Zemeckis could have used the contrast “necessary for life vs. consumer life" to a much greater extent, but he did it in only a few scenes (Hanks at the table with crabs and a lighter). Instead, in the final quarter, he showered us with an emotional avalanche that may have made some cry, but annoyed the hell out of me. It's a pity, such an attractive premise could have been used much better, and the splendidly skinny Hanks with his gorgeous beard would have deserved it. ()

Marigold 

Toutes les critiques de l’utilisateur·trice

anglais A little bit of an overdone film. Tom Hanks is excellent, and his Robinsonade is pretty well sketched, but the script slid across the surface, and the highlight of his skid is a terrible and over-complicated ending that clearly shows how much Zemeckis didn't know what to do with Chuck Noland's character. His whole story eventually drowns in horrible phrases and stretched melodramatic schemes, which is really unfortunate. Especially since Hanks is persuasive and apt... The little that the script allows him to show from Noland's insides is demonstrated with passion and great suggestion. But he can't pull off an entire film that's so down-to-earth and literal that it got on my nerves towards the end. It’s too bad, because the theme and some partial technical categories (camera, design) are promising... But the result is unnecessarily sweeping, pathetic and overdone. Yet, thanks to Hanks, quite convincing. ()

novoten 

Toutes les critiques de l’utilisateur·trice

anglais Unlike the others, I needed this ending exactly. Without those final minutes, Chuck's adventures would have lacked the emotions and empty journeys back and forth (whether literal or metaphorical) that I've already seen enough of. Zemeckis truly knows how to skillfully create these gentle yet believable moods. ()

gudaulin 

Toutes les critiques de l’utilisateur·trice

anglais It's strange. Cast Away seemingly contains everything that predisposes it to triumphant success, namely an attractive subject matter, an excellent cast, a famous director, a decent script, a reasonably large budget, and so on. Nevertheless, in the end, something didn't quite click for me. I feel a certain unfulfillment of expectations and I don't want to give it a fourth star, even though the film is disadvantaged by the fact that I saw it on television. Perhaps on the big screen, I would lean towards giving it a fourth star. I pondered what was excessive or missing for me, which turned out to partly be a certain melodramatic aspect, but I still couldn't define the core of the problem. Cast Away is too literal, unnecessarily sprawling, pathetic, and overblown. Despite all the effort, it doesn't captivate, even though Hanks gives his all. Overall impression: 65%. ()

lamps 

Toutes les critiques de l’utilisateur·trice

anglais I don't need to go on and on about what an amazing actor Tom Hanks is, because we all know that already. What I should mention in my review, though, is that Hanks' performance is what makes Cast Away such a compelling, moving and thought-provoking adventure that I enjoy on each subsequent viewing as intensely as on the first... ()

Othello 

Toutes les critiques de l’utilisateur·trice

anglais I sat and didn't move until the last act. As a survivor of the first BioShock I felt right at home during the perfectly filmed plane crash sequence. The subsequent introduction of the island and the pudgy misfit Hanks makes you feel as happy as he does for the unfortunate guy’s every little accomplishment. It's got beautiful cinematography, great locations, and it works quite humorously with the "American way of life" of the time (even then a bit old-school), with the character quite understandably fetishizing the objects and brands (Wilson) that FedEx delivers. Incidentally, the way he comes out of it I wouldn't be surprised if they paid for the whole film. On the other hand, they did come up with some pretty funny advertising through the film. Unfortunately, my empathy strings snapped during the widely criticized conclusion. You couldn't ask for a more hopeless romantic, yet I just don't buy it when a half-crazed castaway having spent four years on a desert island returns home and the one thing that's on his mind is his last girlfriend. I know it's a strong theme, but from the little I've read about people who've been orphaned from civilization for even a fortnight and are still recovering from it mentally, the whole cavalier ending seems totally phoned in. ()

kaylin 

Toutes les critiques de l’utilisateur·trice

anglais A classic tale of Robinson Crusoe, brought to life in a captivating spectacle, with the main highlight of this Zemeckis film being the performances. The story itself isn't particularly innovative, it's just sometimes well-spiced - like with the toothache, for example. It’s one of those films where I felt it could have ended about twenty or thirty minutes earlier, but no, they had to tack on another three endings. ()